Sur un plan théorique (et donc sérieux) la plateforme d'intermédiation permet à des personnes de choisir une destination pour les vacances en s'informant auprès d'autres personnes, compétentes. Et peut-être même qu'après ce premier contact, les personnes voudront se retrouver sur le lieu de leurs vacances...

Demander leur avis à d'autres personnes est une nécessité fondamentale car, comme le démontrent les dernières recherches en matière de psychologie sociale, les individus sont incapables de juger correctement de leur bonheur futur par un seul effort d'imagination.

Les publicitaires abusent constament de cette déficience et les consommateurs commencent à s'en apperçevoir. Car ils se concertent... sur Internet.

Le concept à la base de Virtreal est que les personnes gagnent à se concerter pour faire des choix , y compris en matière de vacances. Ce concept simple est aujourd'hui démontré par les scientifiques étudiant la psychologie sociale. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychologie_sociale

Par exemple, le Professeur Daniel Gilbert.

DANIEL GILBERT is the Harvard College Professor of Psychology at Harvard University and Director of Harvard’s Hedonic Psychology Laboratory. He is generally considered the world's foremost authority in the fields of affective forecasting and the fundamental attribution error.

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/gilbert.htm

Extract:

Try this thought experiment: You're going to go on a vacation to a tropical island. It's offered at a very good price, and you have to decide whether you're willing to pay. You are offered one of two pieces of information to help you make your decision. Either you can have a brochure about the hotel and the recreational activities on the island, or you can find out how much a randomly selected traveler who recently spent time there liked his or her experience. Which would you prefer? In studies we've done that are modeled on this thought experiment, roughly 100% of the people prefer the kind of information contained in the brochure. After all, who the hell wants to hear from some random guy when they can look at the brochure and judge for themselves?

Nonetheless, if you actually give people one of these two pieces of information, they more accurately predict their own happiness when they see the random traveler's report then when they see the brochure. Why? Because the brochure enables you to simulate what the island might be like and how much you'd enjoy it, but as I've mentioned, these sorts of predictions are susceptible to a wide variety of errors.

On the other hand, another person's report enables you avoid these errors because it allows you to base your predictions on real experience rather than imaginary experience. If another person liked the island, the odds are that you will like it too. There's a delicious irony here, which is that the information we need to predict how we'll feel in the future is usually right in front of us in the form of other people. But because individuals believe so much in their own uniqueness—because we think we're so psychologically different from others—we refuse to use the information that's right before our eyes.

If you want to be a better affective forecaster, then, you would do well to base your forecasts on the actual experiences of real people who've been in the situations you are only imagining. The more similar to you the person is, the more informative their experience will be, of course. But what's amazing is that even the experience of a randomly selected person provides a better basis for forecasting than does your own imagination.

Full text: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/gilbert03/gilbert_index.html

PAGE PRECEDENTE

PAGE PRECEDENTE

PAGE PRECEDENTE

PAGE PRECEDENTE

PAGE PRECEDENTE

PAGE PRECEDENTE