Study: Apple logo stimulates the brain

Study: Apple logo stimulates the brain

Summary: A new study from Duke University shows that being exposed to the Apple logo can make you more creative. The premise is that people that were exposed to the Apple logo scored higher on a creativity test than those that were exposed to an IBM logo because they were mirroring the traits that they associated with those logos.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Apple
48

apple-logo-history.gif

A new study from Duke University shows that being exposed to the Apple logo can make you more creative. The premise is that people that were exposed to the Apple logo scored higher on a creativity test than those that were exposed to an IBM logo because they were mirroring the traits that they associated with those logos.

Listen to a short 3-minute interview from NPR for the story.

Bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Topic: Apple

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

48 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • People Exposed To Windows Logo, However

    Are still drooling on their keyboards and uttering incoherently.
    itanalyst2@...
    • I rather

      Be expose to the windows logo then the toxic fumes that a runing Mac emits
      Mectron
    • You're right!

      While our servers and desktops are making us millions of dollars a year processing our goods and services. We do have alot of time to drool and act incoherently around hear because our Windows servers "just work" as they say in the Apple camp. I will say I get bored sometimes working in a Windows shop, but hey the money is great and I get alot of vacations and sleep. Well back to more web surfing and drooling. LOL.
      OhTheHumanity
    • So you admit you are a Windows user?

      the symptoms appear to fit... ;)
      GuidingLight
      • I find...

        that staring at any computer screen has the same affect on me.
        ShadowGIATL
    • Study Details...

      By "study" of course, we mean the 3 Apple Zealots who were at the time trying to figure out the water cooler's workings. They were sexually aroused by the Apple logo and when shown the Windows logo, they panicked and ran screaming from the cooler to gather cowering by another mysterious mechanism called a "door". Meanwhile, Apple and PC users breathed a sigh of relief to be rid of the zealots in the "study". In the next study we try to calculate how many zealots have "it" and "anal" in their names...
      Chippolus
  • Might stimulate the stomach...but the brain?

    ;-)
    Mark-Twain
    • I feel the same way.

      Apple's logo just makes me hungry. So I go get an apple out of the fridge and smile as my "Circle of friends" logo makes me happy sitting by my "Applications" menu.
      b.bob
  • What was the creativity test?

    If the test was: create your own watery looking logo, then, it may be true...
    Roque Mocan
  • RE: Study: Apple logo stimulates the brain

    This could be my best response --ever! First, let me run
    around to the other side of the screen and stare a bit.

    Semi-seriously, now, my first reaction was skepticism, in
    that as my recreational computer was an Apple from 1984-
    1996 and has been an Apple since 2001, I suspect the
    half-chewed orb's mojo isn't as voodoo-licious as it used
    to be, if it ever was.

    Then, I thought about how I would drive if a friend
    (foolishly) let me pilot their Porsche. I know I would jump
    off the greens. I would shift with macho flare. I would be
    lucky not to wrap the car around a pole as I act out the
    fantasy, suggested by the racy logo as the bell suggested
    food to Pavlov's puppies. So maybe there's something to
    the assertion.

    But rest assured, I've rediscovered one truth today. There's
    always a car analogy.
    DannyO_0x98
    • I love car analogies.

      I wonder if staring at a Lamborgini emblem will make my Ranger faster?
      ShadowGIATL
      • Putting the Bull and the Horse on a Yugo makes it go 200 MPH. =D <nt>

        [b]
        nix_hed
      • Jag

        No, but staring at a Jaguar emblem will make you look down your nose at your friends.
        Maybe there IS something to this logo staring.
        nelkins
  • Apple logo stimulates Duke with payoff...

    Seriously? The icon of narrowminded ingenuity stimulates people's minds more then the symbol of a company that revolutionized and standarized the PC as we know it today?

    I dislike IBM and would never personally own one. But this is beyond biased. Today even Apple owes it's existence to IBM as their new systems are based on IBM compatible architecture.

    Biased opinions I expect from Mac users in these comments, but not from the people responsible for teaching our future work force. They should dislodge their heads from their rear and look around in the real world for a change.

    Next thing they are going to tell me being exposed to a swastika makes people less racist. Peace symbols make us more hateful?

    It's an apple. It's food. It just makes me hungry. I have a feeling they'd still feel this way if it had been a picture of a dodo bird. I have a symbol for them... wonder how smart it makes them feel...

    The Shadow
    Knowledge is Power.
    Anymore questions?
    ShadowGIATL
    • erm

      modern EFI system architecture is anything but IBM-PC compatible. The only similarity is that 20-30% of the CPU instructions are the same. And they use the same bit order.
      isulzer
      • EFI

        EFI only replaces the BIOS, and not the CPU. Therefore 100% of the CPU functions are still in place. Macs and PCs use the same chipsets and CPUs and Vista can install on an EFI machine. Show me evidence that there is a difference. I'd be interested in seeing it.

        And if you say the TPM chip that lets OSX install... PCs had TPM first. TPMs can be programmed in different ways and were origianlly for security and asset tracking if i recall. The only difference between Mac and PC hardware is the firmware on the TPM. You can wipe Mac off and load Windows on a Mac.
        ShadowGIATL
        • lol

          Youre reading into my comment that Macs are different than pcs. They aren't really. hardware wise. But IBM-PCs are completely different from modern computers. Please read only what I say and don't invent extra comments you expect to see from a a mac zealot. Kinda makes me inclined to think you are a Windows bigot.

          FYI. till Apple adopted intels technology, they had a completely different developed system architecture after which they were joined by IBM and motorola to make the PPC chip. etc. No, they do not owe their existence to the IBM-PC, neither does any other company, other than as a stepping stone, and a list of mistakes not to repeat.

          go read some on EFI and the difference in CPUs then to now.

          hint: look for the differences in iterations as the x86 CISC processors. For example the bloat-the-chip string manipulations instructions that got dropped. and new XML string instructions. etc. ad infinitum.

          EFI was developed by intel to replace BIOS, MBR(with GPT) and old device management systems. For example. You can have programs directly access the CPU or GPU via the EFI, instead of using a OS driver to do this. However there is backwards compatibility.

          Still makes it a completely different beast than an IBM-PC.
          isulzer
          • Interesting...

            So your telling me that using IBM as the "stepping stone" has little bearing on computers?

            Technology evolves as time goes on. To say that DOS has nothing to do with Windows would suggest Windows was never based on DOS. Even though Windows is no longer DOS based, it got its start from DOS, and therefore owes its existence to DOS. That said, Micosoft also owes its existence to IBM as it got a huge push into the OS market by producing PC-DOS for IBM that they would later call MS-DOS and start their on line.

            My intent is not to point fingers at what part of any process is a "mistake" as you call it, but without mistakes there is nothing to guide you on the right path. We learn from mistakes. Mistake or not, IBM helped shape what computers are today, and the fudamental archatechture of PCs has evolved from IBM-compatible hardware. Seeing how IBM has contributed to those advancement while Apple rode out its own platform until they couldn't anymore, I'd say it appears Apple is the one that made the mistake.

            Now Apple jumps on the Intel bandwagon and adopts Intels EFI faster then other OEMs and the Mac fanboys think that makes the Mac if different hardware wise. I just hope that this will squeeze others into adopting it fully as well and close the arguement completely.

            Oh... and thanks for the history lesson on Apple, but I'm well aware of their part in the industry and the hardware they developed. They have made some strong systems in the past and continue to build good ssytems today. I just don't feel they are superior to all other systems simply because they are a Mac. And they are pricer then I feel they need to be. My opinions.

            Be inclined to feel I'm a "Windows bigot" as you call me if you want. But seeing that your arguement against me was about Apple-Intel and IBM-Intel archatechture, I fail to see were Windows plays into that. Making you sound like the Mac zealot you claim your not.

            For the record... here is my official opinion of different systems.

            OS
            Linux - Strong OS for power users, cheap or free depending on distro. Lacks organization amongst distros making it confusing for average users. Installing apps not always straightforward. Unconventional naming schemes furthers confusion for average users.

            Mac OSX - Solid OS for all users. Cheap to upgrade to newer version compared to Win OSes, but higher initial costs. Hardware locked limits end users options. Benefits from access to more mainstream apps then Linux.

            Windows Vista - Despite the negative reactions, very solid. More expensive then Linux initially and more expensive then Mac OSX to upgrade. Easy system for most average users. Largest selection of mainstream apps. Suffers from poorly designed user control security feature. Tends to use more resources.

            Hardware
            Apple - Expensive, even while based on same hardware as other OEMs. Tends to cater mostly to higher end buyers. Limited configurations. Despite their insistence they use only high quality, select components, suffers from same problems other OEMs do. Not a bad system, just over-hyped, and over priced.

            Other Intel - Wide range of prices and configurations. Quality varies between OEMs.

            I have used a wide variety of systems over the years. I never looked at them as though they were my best friend. I looked at them as a tool to work with. As far as I'm concerned they all need improvement, and all have pros and cons. I regularly talk down Windows and Linux during the day as the both have their issues. It's pretty common to hear me say, "typical Microsoft".

            FYI - I tri boot Vista, XP, and Linux. I also have used Macs. Personal opinion here, but I see no reason to buy one until they come down in price. That is my opinion, and you can never change that. I don't care if they plate the case in gold and send a guy out to polish it every week. It's just not worth it to me.
            ShadowGIATL
          • Mac pricing

            Please allow me to interject my opinion on Mac pricing.

            First I admit that I like Macs and have used them, as well as Windows PCs, for many
            years.

            I had to get a new computer. Being budget conscious I considered everything
            carefully before buying. So I figured out the machine I wanted and did a "build to
            order"/"build your own" (what ever they are called) of similar machines Mac & Dell.

            With similar processors, memory, hard drive, connections, etc. The Dell actually
            came out to be more expensive than the Mac.

            I have done the same test a few times afterwards and found that Macs were either
            the same price or even cheaper than the PCs.

            I know there is the misconception out there that Macs are more expensive. And this
            was true for a long time, but no longer.

            Since you seem to be a reasonable person (as illustrated by your views on the
            different OSes) I invite you to do some comparison on current models.
            spotvin
          • I will...

            take you up on that offer. I admit it's been about 2 years since I last priced a Mac.

            However I will not use Dell. If there is one system that I feel is more overhyped and overpriced then anything else, it's Dell. Their systems fail more often and their support suffers greatly. Dell gets no reaspect from me. Their "cheap" models are exactly that.

            I will use several different OEMs and OS configs.
            I will post my results as soon as I get them, most likely sometime tomorrow.
            If you have any suggestions on PC companies to compare, feel free to reply and let me know.
            ShadowGIATL