Placeholder Content Image

Stage 3 stacks up: the rejigged tax cuts help fight bracket creep and boost middle and upper-middle households

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-phillips-98866">Ben Phillips</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a></em></p> <p>The winners and losers from the Albanese government’s <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-01/tax-cuts-government-fact-sheet.pdf">rejig</a> of this year’s Stage 3 tax cuts have already been well documented.</p> <p>From July 1 every taxpayer will get a tax cut. Most, the 11 million taxpayers earning up to A$146,486, will also pay less tax than they would have under the earlier version of Stage 3, some getting a tax cut <a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-tax-plan-will-give-average-earner-1500-tax-cut-more-than-double-morrisons-stage-3-221875">twice as big</a>.</p> <p>A much smaller number, 1.8 million, will get a smaller tax cut than they would have under the original scheme, although their cuts will still be big. The highest earners will get cuts of $4,529 instead of $9,075.</p> <p>But many of us live in households where income is shared and many households don’t pay tax because the people in them don’t earn enough or are on benefits.</p> <p>The Australian National University’s <a href="https://csrm.cass.anu.edu.au/research/policymod">PolicyMod</a> model is able to work out the impacts at the household level, including the impact on households in which members are on benefits or don’t earn enough to pay tax.</p> <h2>More winners than losers in every broad income group</h2> <p>We’ve divided Australian households into five equal-size groups ranked by income, from lowest to lower-middle to middle to upper-middle to high.</p> <p>Our modelling finds that, just as is the case for individuals, many more households will be better off with the changes to Stage 3 than would have been better off with Stage 3 as it was, although the difference isn’t as extreme.</p> <p>Overall, 58% of households will be better off with the reworked Stage 3 than they would have under the original and 11% will be worse off.</p> <p>Importantly, there remain 31% who will be neither better off nor worse off, because they don’t pay personal income tax.</p> <hr /> <p><iframe id="0CWXE" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0CWXE/4/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <hr /> <p>But it is different for different types of households.</p> <p>In the lowest-earning fifth of households, far more are better off (13.5%) than worse off (0.2%) with the overwhelming bulk neither better nor worse off (86.3%).</p> <hr /> <p><iframe id="KC5zy" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/KC5zy/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <hr /> <p>In the highest-earning fifth of households, while more than half are better off (54.4%), a very substantial proportion are worse off (42.3%).</p> <p>Very few (only 3.1%) are neither better nor worse off.</p> <hr /> <p><iframe id="WSkSL" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/WSkSL/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <hr /> <h2>But high-earning households go backwards on average</h2> <p>In dollar terms, the top-earning fifth of households loses money while every group gains. That’s because although there are more winners than losers among the highest-earning fifth of households, the losers lose more money.</p> <p>The biggest dollar gains go to middle and upper-middle income households with middle-income households ahead, on average, by $988 per year and upper-middle income households by $1,102. The highest-income households are worse off by an average of $837 per year.</p> <p>As a percentage of income, middle-income households gain the most with a 1% increase in disposable income. Lowest income households gain very little, while the highest-income households go backwards by 0.3%.</p> <hr /> <p><iframe id="kAPmC" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kAPmC/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <hr /> <h2>The rejig does a better job of fighting bracket creep</h2> <p>And we’ve found something else.</p> <p>The original version of the Stage 3 tax cuts was advertised as a measure to overcome <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-2-main-arguments-against-redesigning-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-are-wrong-heres-why-221975">bracket creep</a>, which is what happens when a greater proportion of taxpayers’ income gets pushed into higher tax brackets as incomes climb.</p> <p>We have found it wouldn’t have done it for most of the income groups, leaving all but the highest-earning group paying more tax after the change in mid-2024 than it used to in 2018.</p> <p>The rejigged version of Stage 3 should compensate for bracket creep better, leaving the top two groups paying less than they did in 2018 and compensating the bottom three better than the original Stage 3.</p> <hr /> <p><iframe id="YG0cT" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/YG0cT/1/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <hr /> <p>Not too much should be made of the increase in tax rates in the lowest income group between 2018 ad 2024 because some of it reflects stronger income growth.</p> <p>We find that overall, the redesigned Stage 3 does a better job of offsetting bracket creep than the original. It is also better targeted to middle and upper-middle income households.</p> <p>Having said that, the average benefit in dollar terms isn’t big. At about $1,000 per year for middle and upper-middle income households and costing the budget about what the original Stage 3 tax cuts would have cost, its inflationary impact compared to the original looks modest.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221851/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-phillips-98866"><em>Ben Phillips</em></a><em>, Associate Professor, Centre for Social Research and Methods, Director, Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Shutterstock</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stage-3-stacks-up-the-rejigged-tax-cuts-help-fight-bracket-creep-and-boost-middle-and-upper-middle-households-221851">original article</a>.</em></p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

Why Kyle and Jackie O hung up on these absolute creeps

<p dir="ltr">Those who tuned into the<em> Kyle and Jackie O Show </em>on Friday morning found themselves listening to a fiery exchange between Jackie ‘O’ Henderson and two guests that ended with a cheering studio as Kyle Sandilands hung up on them on-air.</p> <p dir="ltr">The radio duo were chatting with guests Myron Gaines and Walter Weekes, the US-based men behind the <em>Fresh &amp; Fit</em> podcast, when Gaines and Weekes claimed men and women aren’t equal.</p> <p dir="ltr">Henderson called the pair “misogynistic and egotistical” when they said women in relationships shouldn’t have Instagram accounts, but that it was okay for men to have them.</p> <p dir="ltr">Weekes and Gaines justified their opinions by claiming that women thrive on attention and receive more attention from men when they post on the platform. </p> <p><span id="docs-internal-guid-9a366ec2-7fff-1533-87b4-ffe374c57805"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">To drive their point home, the pair drew a parallel between a woman’s Instagram account and owning a car, asking Henderson to take part in their analogy by asking what her dream car was.</p> <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/Cc6f10TrNsP/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/Cc6f10TrNsP/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Kyle and Jackie O (@kyleandjackieo)</a></p> </div> </blockquote> <p dir="ltr">After she hesitantly responded with, “A range rover”, they asked her to imagine buying a brand new one from a dealership.</p> <p dir="ltr">“You shake hands with the car dealer, sign the paperwork … drive it off the lot … take it back to your house,” they continued, before asking how she would feel if the dealer came back a few weeks later asking to put the ‘For Sale’ sign back on and let a few people test-drive it.</p> <p dir="ltr">Telling them she understood the analogy, Henderson hit back with: “I own that car, I don’t own my partner in a relationship though.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“Answer the question. How would that make you feel?” they pressed.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Obviously I wouldn’t be okay with it,” she replied.</p> <p dir="ltr">Running with her answer, the podcasters said that is “exactly how men feel” when women post photos on Instagram to “advertise” themselves to other men.</p> <p dir="ltr">“You don’t own us in a relationship so we can post what we want,” Henderson shot back.</p> <p dir="ltr">“If you have an insecurity with that, then that’s on you.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-a17a2fb9-7fff-3553-dd8d-185cbd3440b6"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">“Men don’t want to be with women who other men have been with. Or they don’t want a girl that is high mileage,” the men said.</p> <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cc6gy2Br65X/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cc6gy2Br65X/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Kyle and Jackie O (@kyleandjackieo)</a></p> </div> </blockquote> <p dir="ltr">The debate quickly intensified, with Kyle stepping in, telling Gaines and Weekes to “grow up” when they said men could sleep with other women while in a closed relationship.</p> <p dir="ltr">“A man is capable of having sex with other women while still loving their girl the same, so it’s not that big a deal, but if your woman is out here fielding options that’s an option,” they said.</p> <p dir="ltr">Henderson shared her shock with the pair, questioning whether they genuinely believed women should be happy while their partners saw other people, to which Weekes and Gaines said, “exactly, closed on your end and open on my end”.</p> <p dir="ltr">Sandilands deemed their argument “ridiculous” before yelling, “See ya fellas” and hanging up.</p> <p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-2be98216-7fff-49d7-a933-ed6867700666"></span></p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image: @kyleandjackieo (Instagram)</em></p>

Music

Placeholder Content Image

The psychology behind why clowns creep us out

<p>Hollywood<span> </span><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095444/?ref_=nv_sr_1">has</a><span> </span><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1156398/?ref_=nv_sr_1">long</a><span> </span><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2900624/?ref_=fn_al_tt_4">exploited</a><span> </span>our deep ambivalence about clowns, and this fall’s film lineup is no different.</p> <p>Stephen King’s evil clown,<span> </span><a href="https://ramirezmedia.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/wpid-clown-pennywise.jpg">Pennywise</a>, will make his second screen appearance in two years in “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7349950/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1">It Chapter Two</a>,” while Batman’s demented nemesis The Joker, played by Joaquin Phoenix, will appear as the antihero of his origin story, “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7286456/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1">Joker</a>.”</p> <p>How did a mainstay of children’s birthday parties start to become an embodiment of pure evil?</p> <p>In fact,<span> </span><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7189401.stm">a 2008 study conducted in England</a><span> </span>revealed that very few children actually like clowns. It also concluded that the common practice of decorating children’s wards in hospitals with pictures of clowns may create the exact opposite of a nurturing environment. It’s no wonder<span> </span><a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/20/mcdonalds-ceo-to-food-police-the-clowns-going-nowhere/">so many people hate Ronald McDonald</a>.</p> <p>But as a psychologist, I’m not just interested in pointing out that clowns give us the creeps; I’m also interested in why we find them so disturbing. In 2016, I published a study entitled “<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732118X16300320">On the Nature of Creepiness</a>” with one of my students, Sara Koehnke, in the journal<span> </span><a href="http://www.journals.elsevier.com/new-ideas-in-psychology">New Ideas in Psychology</a>. While the study was not specifically looking at the creepiness of clowns, much of what we discovered can help explain this intriguing phenomenon.</p> <p><strong>The march of the clowns</strong></p> <p><a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-history-and-psychology-of-clowns-being-scary-20394516/?no-ist">Clown-like characters</a><span> </span>have been around for thousands of years. Historically, jesters and clowns have been a vehicle for satire and for poking fun at powerful people. They provided a safety valve for letting off steam and they were granted unique freedom of expression – as long as their value as entertainers outweighed the discomfort they caused the higher-ups.</p> <p>Jesters and others persons of ridicule go back at least to ancient Egypt, and the English word “clown” first appeared sometime in the 1500s, when Shakespeare used the term to describe foolish characters in several of his plays. The now familiar circus clown – with its painted face, wig and oversized clothing – arose in the 19th century and has changed only slightly over the past 150 years.</p> <p>Nor is the trope of the evil clown anything new. In 2016, writer<span> </span><a href="http://benjaminradford.com/">Benjamin Radford</a><span> </span>published “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Clowns-Benjamin-Radford/dp/0826356664">Bad Clowns</a>,” in which he traces the historical evolution of clowns into unpredictable, menacing creatures.</p> <p>The persona of the creepy clown really came into its own after serial killer<span> </span><a href="http://www.biography.com/people/john-wayne-gacy-10367544">John Wayne Gacy</a><span> </span>was captured. In the 1970s, Gacy appeared at children’s birthday parties as “Pogo the Clown” and also regularly painted pictures of clowns. When the authorities discovered that he had killed at least 33 people, burying most of them in the crawl space of his suburban Chicago home, the connection between clowns and dangerous psychopathic behavior became forever fixed in the collective unconscious of Americans.</p> <p>Then, for several months in 2016,<span> </span><a href="http://www.vocativ.com/356953/creepy-clown-sightings/">creepy clowns terrorized America</a>.</p> <p>Reports emerged from at least 10 different states. In Florida,<span> </span><a href="http://www.sun-sentinel.com/features/gone-viral/sfl-creepy-clowns-lurk-around-florida-as-part-of-dangerous-nationwide-trend-20160927-htmlstory.html">fiendish clowns were spotted lurking by the side of the road</a>. In South Carolina, clowns were reportedly trying to<span> </span><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/us/creepy-clown-sightings-in-south-carolina-cause-a-frenzy.html?_r=0">lure women and children into the woods</a>.</p> <p>It isn’t clear which of these incidents were tales of clowning around and which were truly menacing abduction attempts. Nonetheless, the perpetrators seem to be tapping into the primal dread that so many children – and more than a few adults – experience in the presence of clowns.</p> <p><strong>The nature of creepiness</strong></p> <p>Psychology can help explain why clowns – the supposed purveyors of jokes and pranks – often end up sending chills down our spines.</p> <p><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732118X16300320">My research</a><span> </span>was the first empirical study of creepiness, and I had a hunch that feeling creeped out might have something to do with ambiguity – about not really being sure how to react to a person or situation.</p> <p>We recruited 1,341 volunteers ranging in age from 18 to 77 to fill out an online survey. In the first section of the survey, our participants rated the likelihood that a hypothetical “creepy person” would exhibit 44 different behaviors, such as unusual patterns of eye contact or physical characteristics like visible tattoos. In the second section of the survey, participants rated the creepiness of 21 different occupations, and in the third section they simply listed two hobbies that they thought were creepy. In the final section, participants noted how much they agreed with 15 statements about the nature of creepy people.</p> <p><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/out-the-ooze/201505/how-we-decide-whos-creepy">The results</a><span> </span>indicated that people we perceive as creepy are much more likely to be males than females, that unpredictability is an important component of creepiness and that unusual patterns of eye contact and other nonverbal behaviors set off our creepiness detectors big time.</p> <p>Unusual or strange physical characteristics such as bulging eyes, a peculiar smile or inordinately long fingers did not, in and of themselves, cause us to perceive someone as creepy. But the presence of weird physical traits can amplify any other creepy tendencies that the person might be exhibiting, such as persistently steering conversations toward peculiar sexual topics or failing to understand the policy about bringing reptiles into the office.</p> <p>When we asked people to rate the creepiness of different occupations, the one that rose to the top of the creep list was – you guessed it – clowns.</p> <p>The results were consistent with my theory that getting “creeped out” is a response to the ambiguity of threat and that it is only when we are confronted with uncertainty about threat that we get the chills.</p> <p>For example, it would be considered rude and strange to run away in the middle of a conversation with someone who is sending out a creepy vibe but is actually harmless; at the same time, it could be perilous to ignore your intuition and engage with that individual if he is, in fact, a threat. The ambivalence leaves you frozen in place, wallowing in discomfort.</p> <p>This reaction could be adaptive, something humans have evolved to feel, with being “creeped out” a way to maintain vigilance during a situation that could be dangerous.</p> <p><strong>Why clowns set off our creep alert</strong></p> <p>In light of our study’s results, it is not at all surprising that we find them to be creepy.</p> <p><a href="http://www.raminader.com/">Rami Nader</a><span> </span>is a Canadian psychologist who studies coulrophobia, the irrational fear of clowns. Nader believes that clown phobias are fueled by the fact that clowns wear makeup and disguises that hide their true identities and feelings.</p> <p>This is perfectly consistent with my hypothesis that it is the inherent ambiguity surrounding clowns that make them creepy. They seem to be happy, but are they really? And they’re mischievous, which puts people constantly on guard. People interacting with a clown during one of his routines never know if they are about to get a pie in the face or be the victim of some other humiliating prank. The highly unusual physical characteristics of the clown – the wig, the red nose, the makeup, the odd clothing – only magnify the uncertainty of what the clown might do next.</p> <p>There are certainly other types of people who creep us out; taxidermists and undertakers made a good showing on the creepy occupation spectrum. But they have their work cut out for them if they aspire to the level of creepiness that we automatically attribute to clowns.</p> <p>In other words, they have big shoes to fill.</p> <p><em>This is an updated version of an article originally published on Sep. 28, 2016</em>. <em>Written by Frank T. McAndrew. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-psychology-behind-why-clowns-creep-us-out-65936">The Conversation.</a></em></p>

Mind

Our Partners