From Stitcher and Duffner Productions, this is Freakonomics Radio, the podcast that explores the hidden side of everything. Here's your host, Stephen Duffner. Hey there, podcast listeners, and happy holidays. This time of year, we would usually put out a repeat, but instead, we've got something new for you, and something different.
This grew out of a friendship with Angela Duckworth, a psychology professor at the University of Pennsylvania. I first interviewed her a few years ago about a book she had just written called Grit. I define grit as passion and perseverance for especially long-term goals. She's also founder and CEO of Character Lab, which tries to harness the science of grit, or character development to help young people thrive in school and beyond.
Then she launched another, even more ambitious project called Behavior Change for Good, and we talked about that on the show as well. The problem with human beings is that they're human beings and that they repeatedly make decisions that undermine their own long-term well-being. Duckworth was always so interesting and fun that we had her join us as a co-host for a bunch of live shows. So is it true, then, that picky eaters and hypochondriacs are more likely to be politically conservative?
One thing Angela does really well is ask interesting questions, and I admire that trait, since that's what we try to do every week on the show. So I thought it might be fun to just sit down with her for a conversation armed with nothing more than a question to ask each other. This happens to be one of my favorite hobbies, a mutual question-asking society. You never know where a conversation like this will go.
More often than not, it leads to more questions, like Russian nesting dolls, and that is what you are about to hear, a little matryoshka of a conversation. We had so much fun making this up so that we are thinking about spinning this idea off into its own podcast, separate from Freakonomics Radio. You think that's a good idea? After you've listened, write to radio at freakonomics.com and let us know what you think.
All feedback welcome, whether you like it, hate it, or feel profound indifference. And thanks so much for all your interest and attention over this past year. Every month, nearly 4 million people around the world listen to at least one episode of our show. I'm glad you're one of them.
Okay, on to this special episode of Freakonomics Radio. Happy holidays. Angela Duckworth, question for you. All right, I'm ready.
Let's say that you, personally, are granted one genie wish, but it's multiple choice. You get to be in the top 1% globally in either grit, or wealth, or intellect. Grit, wealth, intellect. Now, let's say this is you are who you are, but not real.
I was just going to ask, like, you know, we're talking about then you're going to be, like, in the bottom one instead of the other one. No, no, no, it's not that. It's also, like, upgrade in one dimension. Yeah, let's say that.
Well, no, that's tricky, because you may already be, you may already consider yourself. Right. So, let's say no. Okay, let me rephrase the question.
Not you, Angela Duckworth. Rawls, I think. Really? Yeah, he's even a lot of Rawls.
It doesn't create that? I thought it was, like, Ring of Gyges. No, I think the Veiled Ignorance is, like, you know, within the last 200 years. So, let's say you put on the Veiled Ignorance, and you are a new entity, and I say, you, O Veiled One, get to be in the top 1% globally forever in either grittiness, intellect, or wealth.
Which do you choose and why? That's really why I want to know the why. Hmm. I mean, honest answer, but predictable answer.
I would choose grit. Because? Okay, so, first of all, for wealth, I mean, I really just don't have any desire to be in the top whatever percentile of wealth, and I'm sure you could do a lot of good with that wealth, but it's just, it's never been, you know, an appealing pursuit, so. Maybe not for its own sake, but then.
Instrumentally, though. I know you were saying, like, you could do great good. Right, or even, if not great good, whatever the stuff you could hope to get with the grit or the intellect, couldn't you get a lot easier with the wealth? You know, I think there's a huge difference, and my good friend, and you may know him, the psychologist Barry Schwartz, has a paradox of choice.
The paradox of choice guy. So, Barry Schwartz has something new that he's really obsessed about, and it is intrinsic motivation, and he would say, he calls it internal motivation, just to not be confused with, you know, what some people call intrinsic motivation. And basically, he says, you know, if you have a garden, and, you know, the garden is producing beautiful flowers, and beautiful fruits and vegetables, and you tend to the garden, there's a kind of worth, value, and satisfaction that is derived, that is different from if you, like, pay a gardener to, like, do your garden. And I think there is something about earning your accomplishments that only wealth, because wealth is kind of instrumental, like, oh, I could pay somebody to, you know, accomplish this great research.
It's different from doing yourself. Or, so, I can't say I don't agree with you, or I can't say that what you said doesn't resonate. Right, but on the other hand, I could argue, well, if I'm at the upper end in wealth, then I could afford to have 10 different gardens that I would tend myself, and have all different kinds of experiments and experience to figure out, let's say, I believe that the satisfaction that you just described, of producing yourself, let's say that that is the most valuable thing, well, I've just increased my ability to have even more of that. I have a portfolio of gardening investments.
Not just investments, but a portfolio of gardening opportunities. Oh, opportunities that you would then tend. Yeah. Although, you know, it's hard to tend gardens.
Well, how do you know? You haven't tried it. You're not wealthy enough to have 10 gardens. That's true.
I'm not even well-being of that. Okay, but you're knocking out wealth. You're knocking out wealth. But, you know, I'm not passing moral judgment on anybody who wants to do well.
Intellect, you're also knocking out wealth. Now, we should say, you're a pretty smart cookie, I have to say. Thank you. Okay, so here's what my husband would say, of me, right?
So, my husband thinks that the great irony is that I have spent my entire professional career studying everything other than IQ. In fact, my doctoral dissertation is called non-IQ predictors of success, right? It's got a hyphen in it, non-hyphen IQ. It should, because it's a compound adjective.
For our listeners out there, you should hyphenate your compound adjectives. Yes. So, if you have a high school teacher, it should be high-hoffin, high-hoffin. It should be high-hoffin school space teacher.
Otherwise, you have a high school teacher. Yes, exactly. Or, yes, that's true. The kind of person who might say hyphen instead of hyphen.
Yes, exactly. Right, so non-IQ. So, I study all these non-IQ things like grit and delay gratification and grit mindset. And so, the irony my husband thinks is that, really, I'm personally kind of obsessed with intelligence.
And I love it, and I wish I had more of it, and I really enjoy people who are just wicked smart. And you seek out and accord higher status to people who are wicked smart, even if they don't seem that high status in other realms? I really love talking to people who are fast. Fast?
Yeah, like their brain. And I know that's not the only way to be smart, but just that their brain moves really quickly, and you're like, oh, and then it doesn't take them that long to process the thought, and then move on to the next one. So, he's right about that. But I didn't pick it, you know, not just like being consistent with my brand, but I do think if you made a multiple choice, Stephen, I can't really, like, you know, say that I wouldn't want to be smarter, too.
But in the long, long run, yeah, I mean, there are a lot of really smart people who don't accomplish much, but in the long, long run, I don't think there are that many people who are just, you know, the epitome of passion and perseverance who don't, you know, do something. Are you sure? I mean, isn't the world full of people that we don't know about, despite the fact that they've been super gritty, and they've exercised as you just ticked off perseverance and passion, and yet didn't, quote, accomplish enough to become known? Well, this is the thing about multiple choices, right?
Oh, now you're blaming the test. Yeah, I'm blaming the test. I'm blaming the test maker. I'm blaming you, Stephen.
So, here's the thing, though, right? Because I think in a multiple choice where you're forced to pick one, you know, really on any of these, you can say, well, what if? Because I think actually what we want to be in life, you, me, and everyone else, is, you know, we probably want to be more than one thing. So, you're right, grit isn't the only thing you need, you know, to be happy and successful, but if you have grit and, you know, good judgment, or, you know, grit and humility, grit and a big heart.
So, you're right, it's not the only thing, but, you know, neither is intelligence the only thing, right? Sure, sure. Well, let me rephrase the question slightly, then. Think about the purpose, I guess, of life, and what you think is the highest purpose, but it doesn't have to be one thing, right?
What you believe to be kind of... My highest purpose, you mean? Right. So, let's say that in order to successfully reach or fulfill that purpose as best as you can, which of the following, then, would be most useful in pursuit of said purpose?
Grit, intellect, or money? Again, you're making me pick one, which I get it, right? Well, the first tell us, what do you see as the purpose of life? Oh, what's the purpose of my life?
I'm just going to use that big qualifier there, because I don't want, right? It's not for me to tell you about your life. I think the purpose of my life is to achieve something. In other words, I do not think that the purpose of my life is to do something like be the happiest person or have the most experiences.
You know, I remember distinctly the day I was taking a walk with my dad. I was young enough to still be, like, holding his hand and looking up, so I don't know how old I was, but I was a little girl. And I asked him, so I was old enough to ask him this question. I asked him if he was happy, and he stopped, because every time he had to answer a question, he'd just stop walking.
It was very annoying. We didn't get very far, very many days. And he said, why would I want to be happy? I want to be successful.
So I do think I inherited my father's sort of, like, life is about accomplishing something important. And for me, it's, you know, I want to help kids, like, a healthy life. But I don't really think, like, oh, I want to, you know, I haven't been to that country. Like, I want to see what that, you know, restaurant is like.
I just, I don't care that much about, like, that kind of happiness. And do you feel that you're driven toward that kind of accomplishment out of generosity and good-heartedness? Or because, look, you've accomplished a lot in your life. Your CV reads, like, a track record of a successful person, right?
Great institutions of learning, great accomplishments, da-da-da-da, you have a job, da-da, nice family, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Is it that you want to help other people, like I said, out of generosity, altruism, or because you derive great pleasure and even, dare I say, happiness from the feeling of accomplishment? So Kant, Emmanuel Kant, or Kant, depending on how you want to pronounce it, said, I think, that if you do something good because it brings you pleasure, right, because it feels good to do good, then it doesn't count, right? And I remember when I, like, learned this, I was taking justice, you know, moral reasoning.
It was, like, my freshman year in college. And I remember thinking, like, oh, what a guy thing to say. Like, I feel like it's, like, you know, sort of, like, oh, if it's not rational and it's not, like, you know, only because it's a moral principle. I actually think that a lot of our most benevolent and honorable motivations come from, like, a kind of visceral, like, it feels good.
So when you ask me the question, like, oh, why do I care about kids? Like, I really like them. I mean, I really, like, you know, give me a random kid. I just like them.
Give me a random adult. Like, I don't know. I often like them, but not as often as I like kids. Where do dogs lie on that scale?
Oh, dogs are below kids. I'm kind of not a dog person. But above adults? Yeah, well, let's see.
Yeah, dogs might be somewhere. No, I kind of like adults. I think I actually like adults more. You like dogs at least?
Cats, you didn't ask me about cats. Cats are, like, right there below kids. I'm kind of a big cat person. So I'm just asking you about the wrong animal.
Exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So you like cats more than adults? Yes, well, let it go on the record.
If an adult has a cat? Then I like them ten times more. Okay, yeah. Yeah, so I do get a lot of just, like, I don't know, selfish enjoyment from being with kids and, like, the idea that you can make some kids out there, like, happier.
So there's a, you know, I don't think it's a, you know, purely, you know, unemotional motive. I really appreciate that distinction you just made. And it makes me think, you know, back to the kind of grit theory of life, which is without a passion for something, then it becomes a little bit of a, you know, accomplishment for accomplishment's sake or success for success's sake, right? I mean, I think you can be a gritty person who's using all your grit for bad.
I mean, let me just be clear. Like, I don't want to say that. Hitler was gritty. Yes.
The canonical sort of, you know, everyone rolls out Hitler as the example of, like, oh, but then again, it was Hitler. But in this case, yes. Sorry if my example was a cliché. Stalin was also gritty.
Stalin, let's take Stalin for a little variety. But no, seriously, I think in general, one of the things that really motivates people to stay committed to something for a long time is feeling like you're part of something bigger than yourself. Now, again, you can be misguided, but very, very often it is a kind of like benevolent, you know, like, oh, this isn't just for me kind of motivation. That also, it's maybe not your only fuel, but it's also one of the things that motivates you.
So for me, like, yeah, I would pick grit because I feel like I would be able to achieve what I want to do with my life, which is to accomplish something for kids. Intelligence, I think, would also be awesome if you made it two choices. Of course, I'd pick intelligence probably as my second choice. But, you know, why don't I just be the gritty person who gets all the smart people to work on this project?
That's what is basically my strategy in life. Coming up after the break, Angela Duckworth has a question for me. This is the question I could have studied in graduate school for psychology, but took another path. Which inevitably leads to more questions.
Like how many Prince Charleses can I be in the room, right? You are listening to this special experimental question-asking episode of Freakonomics Radio with Angela Duckworth. We'll be right back. Steven, I have a question.
Hit me. This is the question I could have studied in graduate school for psychology, but took another path. And here it is. Charisma.
The other day, I was talking to my younger daughter, Lucy, and she said something about how you can't teach charisma. Some people are naturally super charismatic, and some people nobody wants to be with, and you can't get from one end to the other. Do you think that charisma can be taught in, like, I don't know, you've interviewed a lot of people. Who's the most charismatic person you've ever met?
So I like the question. I could answer the most charismatic people part. That's easy. But let me go back to the nature of the question.
So the nature of the question is charisma, learned or inherent, correct? Yeah, nature, nurture, charisma. Okay, so in order to answer that, I would want to turn it around and ask you, how are we defining charisma? Because I have a definition in my head, but I want to know what it is.
All right, so I'll go first, and then you come to yours, okay? So I think charisma is kind of almost like a magnetic force that draws people's attention in a very positive way. So when you think of somebody who is, like, really charismatic, it's like you can't take your eyes off them, and they're the star. They sort of, like, you know, it's not like you can't take your eyes off them, and it's terrible.
It's more like it's a very admiring, and also, I think, kind of, like, almost an affectionate kind of attention. Yeah, I think that was a very good definition, better than I could do, because I was about to think that you were describing someone who could also be terrible, but then you say that at the end by bringing in affection, right? It has to be positive, right? I mean, I think we all know people who are charismatic who have bad intentions.
I think Donald Trump is charismatic. Oh, gosh, I mean, I think... Do you agree? I think even the people who hate him the very most would agree.
Yeah, okay, so that's what I mean, so I'm not saying that I... Gotcha, gotcha. Right, yeah, so, yeah. So, I like your definition much better than mine.
Mine would be something like charisma as the quality, someone having the quality that makes me want to do what they do or believe what they believe. Oh, so you want to emulate them. It makes me want to emulate them in some way. So it's a little bit different than inspiration, but it makes...
I define charisma as somebody who embodies or articulates a, whatever, an idea, a worldview. Yeah, that strikes me as, like, yeah, that is... So they're persuasive, they're, like, maximally persuasive? Well, not necessarily, because, look, there are a lot of people who hate Trump as a president who describe him as charismatic, and plainly, they're not being persuaded.
They're not persuaded, right, that would be me. Like, I don't think he's... Yeah, he hasn't persuaded me very much. So, okay, so other than Trump, let's just name some people that we think are super charismatic.
So, first of all, I'm really bad at fill-in-the-blank. I'm bad at multiple choice. But you asked me who have interviewed that I think is charismatic, so I'll name a few, okay? Wynton Marsalis, the musician.
Now, I happen to like his music, and I happen to like him as a person, and I happen to like He has a way of dealing with bad things that people said are done, too, that is very, like, yeah, that was a crap thing, and that's not my problem. I'm going to figure out how to, you know, how to do my thing well. And I love that. You know, Bill Clinton, I have an interview, but I've interacted with him a few times.
He has. Oh, you Google it, because I have. I Googled it. I didn't do a PhD, and I Googled it.
Yeah, well, you're like, who is super charismatic or, like, charismatic role models? Or if you go on YouTube, and you look for, like, charisma videos, so you usually get, like, Will Smith, Bill Clinton. Actually, interestingly, they're mostly men. When I was thinking through just now, I was coming up with men, and I had to, like, actively turn on the search engine over.
So I did think of a couple. Well, let me finish my list, because Clinton, whatever. But I think a lot of politicians, I mean, that's how they're successful. It's like Eric Orsetti, the mayor of Los Angeles.
that you and I both know about. Super charismatic. Also the mayor of London who we had on the show recently, super charismatic. Again, I think there's a strong overlap between charisma and electability.
Here's something I found super charismatic even though he's not vibrant necessarily, Steven Spielberg. Oh, really? I don't know him. I found him, this was a long time ago, but I spent about a week with him writing a piece about him, and I found him really remarkable in this sort of combination of, this is probably not quite right, but it felt like a combination of confidence and humility that made him appealing.
So effective, so appealing. Super attractive. But now I feel like our definition is getting too big, right? Except for you.
No, but I don't think you get much mileage in academia by having charisma. Well, that's probably not true. I mean, you get a little bit, right? But here's the thing, here's a narrower definition, because I don't want it to just be like, oh, people we like, or likability.
I think that when most people think of charisma, they're thinking about a public speaking, like TED or some other venue where it's not just like, oh, you and Marsalis just happen to be at a coffee shop and he happens to be really... I mean, I know we use that word charisma also to describe those people, but in that case, then the question is like, what makes somebody who's in a kind of public role... Why did Hillary Clinton? I think Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are a really good example, because if you Google Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton...
Do you think Hillary did a charisma transplant in her sleep and stole her? Well, okay, so you're saying the same thing that everyone says, which is that he was naturally charismatic and she was the opposite. I didn't say naturally, by the way, but... Yeah, I did put that word.
Do you want to say it? It's multiple choice. I have no idea. I mean, I've read a fair amount about him.
My sense is that he realized from a very early age what he wanted to do and figured out how to do it, and part of that was being charming. The first time I met him, like I said, I've interacted with him a few times in a... Playing golf or something? No, we actually...
I warmed up for him as a speaker several times. We had the same... I think we had the same lecture agent. Maybe he still do.
And he was out speaking a lot and I was out speaking a lot and sometimes we'd be part of the same... Yeah, you'd be on the docket together. And the first time I met him, I came up... This is an example of his charisma.
I just finished speaking. I came backstage and he was standing there and he was nice and kind and chatty, whatever. And then, check this out, he goes out to start his talk. And how does he start it?
By complimenting me, the former speaker. He said something like, how about that Freakonomics? You've read the book, now you've seen the movie. It was even better.
Like, totally gratuitous. It was warm, it was generous. It was super generous. So anyway, to me, that is like...
That's the fine line between charisma and what's right before or after. Because charisma, I just looked up the etymology. I don't know how accurate this is. The English term charisma is from the Greek, which means favor, freely given, or gift of grace.
Oh, that's interesting. Which implies a sort of benevolence. Divinity, too. Also, it implies a kind of...
Because if you imagine somebody who's lower status than you being charismatic, it doesn't feel right. It was the Monica Lewinsky summer. What do you mean you believe it was? You know it was.
Okay, I know it was. I know it. I felt like a politician. Like, well, it may or may not have been the summer of Monica Lewinsky.
And how much did you interact with President Clinton? Well, I was in the speech writing office, and so I penned a few of his very short remarks, including the address to the land-grant colleges. It was like an anniversary, and I did get to meet him once. Can you give us a phrase from one of your speeches?
I cannot recall verbatim, but I believe that he expressed his steadfast commitment to this great American tradition. Wow, that's juicy. Thanks for saying that. I was like 20-something.
I didn't know what I was doing. So you met him once? I met him even then, because now I feel like in some ways his reputation as the go-to charismatic role model has even become greater than it was during his presidency. And even then, everybody said, oh gosh, all you have to do is be in the same room as Bill Clinton for a minute, and you'll fall in love.
So one thing that people say about him and many other people who are quote charismatic is that when you're talking to them, they make you feel as if you're the only person in the room. Yes, and I think he did have that kind of rapt attention, and so I will say that when I met him, it was something like all of 12 seconds, right? Like, he thanked me, you know, he shook my hand, he took both hands in his hand, like, he used both of his hands to shake my hand. Did he kiss you on the lips?
I was not his favorite intern, I guess, but he does look you in the eye, and he did do something. Now, I may be conflating this with YouTube videos that I was constantly watching on how to be charismatic, because like I said, I find this just interesting as a scientist. He, you know, he kind of like, you make eye contact, right? And it feels like he just wants to keep looking at you and that you look away, right?
Like, he can't take his eyes. And his eyes are so intense that you just can't stay locked on because you're afraid you'll melt? I can't say, but I tried this out, so I'm like watching these YouTube videos. Now, this is fast-forwarding, you know, like many years, like a couple decades later.
I was actually doing my book tour, and I was, you know, sort of like both interested in charisma, but also I was like, oh, when you're signing books for a line of people where you only interact with people for like six or seven seconds, like, what advice do you have? So I'm Googling charisma, and here's something that I found on YouTube. Again, this is not validated scientific, you know, fact, but it said, for example, when you're in a receiving line, you know, don't look away. Like, you know, they're eventually going to look away, but don't be the first one to look away.
And I do think that's all about signaling to somebody, like, I want to be here, you're the object of my fascination, there's nothing else I want to do, but listen to what you're going to say next. So did you learn to sign their book while looking at them? No, but I did try to actually not look away because I thought, well, first of all, I just want to try it and see. And I do feel like it was one of those nonverbal cues of respect, right?
Like, okay, think about the opposite. Like, you know how people, I remember this when I was in college, like, wait, not the power posit. How do you influence people? So the Dale Carnegie effect where you say someone's name, Stephen, right?
Do I do that? Well, you know, I think Dale Carnegie was right about a lot of things and I think he's right about this one, which again, all you're doing is you're giving somebody a cue that they matter, right? And I think a lot of charisma is like, this person really thinks that you matter, but it's only half of the equation, right? I think you also have to signal that you're high status.
So, you know, it's kind of like, I like you and the world likes me. So what do you do if you're not high status? Well, I remember figuring this out in third grade a little bit for myself because we moved. So we moved from like one side of town to the other, you know, my dad got promoted and I actually think there were railroad tracks and maybe it's like the wrong side of tracks to the right side of the tracks and it was January and, you know, it's middle school years I had to make friends and this new kind of posh, posher neighborhood where the kids were wearing designer jeans.
I was just like, well, how do I actually have that problem, right? Because I had these frugal parents. I wasn't wearing designer jeans. I was a new kid.
There wasn't anything especially awesome about me. I wasn't very athletic. So I remember like explicitly thinking out loud, I think even maybe wrote it in my diary, like to make friends, you just need to communicate two things. I like you and I like me.
Maybe things like posture help, but I think the most effective way to do it is for somebody else to signal that you're high status or that the world likes you. So you pay people to treat you as if you're better than you are? Is that what you're saying? That would be one way.
I didn't have a lot of pocket money when I was in third grade. How did you signal as a third grader that you liked yourself? I mean, the thing is, first, I did. I was like, you know, pretty happy.
So you just put the humility out there. I was just like, you know, like letting it all hang out. And I think I was like happy. I mean, I think that the people who like walk around the world and they do signal those two things, and I'm not saying it's a recipe to follow, but I do think like if you just notice the people that are attractive, it is so often that they make you feel like you're great.
And they also seem to have like a healthy, you know, they have healthy self-esteem. Let me ask you one last thing on the topic of charisma. Is charisma a not finite, but limited resource in that again, well, no, no, not quite. But is it not quite a zero sum issue?
But like if there's a group of 20 people, how many people can, everybody's charismatic, then nobody's charismatic? Yeah, I do think there is something about, you know, when people are like, oh, they stole the show. I think that we use that language because there is a kind of exclusivity about charisma. And that's why I say, there's something about status.
Like, you know, I met the prince, well, Prince Charles. I was very young, I was in my 20s. And I think for him to be charismatic, you know, he already had the high status part, right? So he had half the equation, like, you know, just by birth and by everyone else treating him the way they were treating him.
All he needed to do is the second part of the equation, which is like when he's with you, to be completely wrapped, to be just totally fascinated by what you're going to say. And he pulled it off, I will say. He was genuinely charismatic. So I think there is a kind of like, how many Prince Charleses is going to be in the room, right?
Like, you know, the moment a king walks in, he's no longer, you know, the highest ranking person. That's so interesting. And I never thought of like, stealing the show in that way, right? Because if you gain, somebody loses.
So it is maybe not zero sum, but so if people listening to this want to have more charisma, is the easiest way to just surround yourself with people with really low charisma? The contrast effect? I don't know, because you're also trying to signal that the world loves you, right? So like, I like you and the world likes me.
Those are the two parts of the equation. This is my little proto theory. So if you really were someone that the world liked, like, why would you be hanging out with losers, right? I like how they went from So, do you think we should do this more often as its own separate podcast?
Let us know by writing to radio at freaknomics.com Meanwhile, coming up next time on Freakonomics Radio, there is strong evidence that exercise is wildly beneficial. There is even stronger evidence that most people hate to exercise. So, if a pill could mimic the effects of exercise, why wouldn't you want to take it? When we gave it to sedentary mice, the drug progressively activated the genetic program that is normally activated by exercise.
The zero-minute workout just in time for your New Year's resolution. That's next time on Freakonomics Radio. Freakonomics Radio is produced by Stitcher and Dubner Productions. This episode was produced by Alison Craiglow.
Our staff also includes Greg Rippin, Zach Lipinski, Matt Hickey, Daphne Chen, Harry Huggins, and Corinne Wallace. We had help this week from James Foster. Our theme song is Mr. Fortune by The Hitchhikers.
All the other music was composed by Lee Scarra. You can subscribe to Freakonomics Radio on any podcast app. Our entire archive is available exclusively on the Stitcher app or at freaknomics.com where we also publish show notes and transcripts and we can sign up for our email newsletter. We can also be found on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
Freakonomics Radio also plays on many NPR stations, so check your local station for details. And thanks for listening.