Who should read *You May Also Like*?

This book is ideal for readers interested in psychology, marketing, or cultural studies. It appeals to curious minds exploring how social dynamics, memory, and even randomness shape everyday choices. Professionals in UX design, advertising, or content curation will find actionable insights into consumer behavior.

Is *You May Also Like* worth reading?

Yes, critics praise its engaging mix of erudition and accessibility. Vanderbilt’s deep research into topics like “the paradox of choice” and “the science of liking” offers fresh perspectives on decision fatigue and cultural trends. The *Wall Street Journal* called it “a joyous intellectual journey” for its balance of wit and rigor.

Who is Tom Vanderbilt?

Tom Vanderbilt is a journalist and bestselling author known for dissecting everyday phenomena like traffic (*Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do*) and lifelong learning (*Beginners*). His work often combines anthropology, design, and behavioral science. A contributor to *Wired* and *The New York Times*, he lives in Brooklyn with writer Jancee Dunn.

How does *You May Also Like* explain why we like certain things?

The book argues that preferences stem from a mix of biology, social pressure, and exposure. For example, we often gravitate toward familiar patterns (neuroaesthetics) or choices validated by peers (social proof). Vanderbilt also debunks the myth of “authentic taste,” showing how marketing and memory distort self-perception.

What role does social influence play in shaping taste?

Vanderbilt highlights how social networks and algorithms create feedback loops that amplify trends. People often adopt preferences to signal identity or belonging, a concept called “conspicuous consumption.” Experiments reveal that ratings and reviews disproportionately sway choices, even among experts.

What are key takeaways from the “field guide to liking”?

The guide includes principles like: - **Liking is learned**: Exposure and context shape preferences. - **Dislikes are stronger**: Negative reactions are more visceral and memorable. - **Novelty vs. familiarity**: Balance drives lasting appeal. - **Categorization matters**: We prefer things that fit mental frameworks.

How does the book compare expert vs. layperson tastes?

Experts often prioritize complexity and nuance (e.g., wine connoisseurs), while laypeople prefer simplicity and emotional resonance. Vanderbilt notes that “taste gaps” emerge from training, not innate superiority—a point illustrated by studies on music, art, and food.

「好き」の設計図

Q: What is *You May Also Like: Taste in an Age of Endless Choice* about?

*You May Also Like* explores how human preferences are shaped by psychology, neuroscience, and social influences. Tom Vanderbilt investigates why we like certain things, how taste evolves, and the role of algorithms and culture in decision-making. The book blends research on consumer behavior, art, and technology to reveal why preferences are rarely as personal as we assume.

トム・ヴァンダービルト

3.29(1196 Reviews)

『「好き」の設計図』の概要

なぜあなたはそれを好きなのか？ヴァンダービルトによるニューヨーク・タイムズのベストセラーである本書は、2016年のカーカス・ベストブックに選ばれ、私たちの好みの背後に隠された心理を解き明かします。「ヒップスター効果」の正体や、なぜアルゴリズムがあなた自身よりもあなたの好みを熟知しているのかを探求しましょう。

語り方を選ぶ

1冊の本。さまざまな聴き方。

「好き」の設計図の同じアイデアを、あなたに合う声・深さ・ペースで学べます。いつでも切り替えられます。

第1章

The Invisible Algorithms Behind Our Preferences

Why do we like what we like? This seemingly simple question haunts our daily lives, from the mundane (choosing a breakfast cereal) to the profound (selecting a life partner). You May Also Like by Tom Vanderbilt has become something of a cult classic among behavioral economists and tech industry insiders, with figures like Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom citing it as essential reading. The book's exploration of preference formation has influenced recommendation systems at companies like Netflix and Spotify, while its insights into the malleability of taste have sparked debates among cultural critics. What makes this work particularly compelling is how it transforms our understanding of choice - revealing that our preferences are less authentic expressions of our true selves than complex constructions shaped by forces we rarely acknowledge. In a world increasingly mediated by algorithms telling us what we might enjoy next, Vanderbilt's investigation feels more relevant than ever.

第2章

The Illusion of Authentic Taste

Our tastes appear deceptively simple yet prove maddeningly complex upon examination. They're categorical (I like blue, but not for cars), contextual (red pants acceptable in Madrid but not in New York), constructed (we often create reasons after making choices), and comparative (even infants prefer those who share their tastes). Rarely are they truly congenital - children seldom match parental preferences despite sharing genetics. Consider the curious case of an older man with frontotemporal dementia who suddenly began enjoying Italian pop music he once dismissed as "mere noise." His neurological condition had altered his aesthetic preferences, raising fascinating questions about how malleable our tastes truly are. How much do we actually know about our own preferences? Experiments reveal surprising blindspots - bottle-fed Germans preferred ketchup with vanillin (found in infant formula) while breast-fed Germans preferred regular ketchup, with neither group conscious of why. We labor under an illusion of authenticity, believing we understand our preferences when often we're strangers to our own tastes. Expert violinists, when tested blindly, typically prefer new instruments to the supposedly superior Stradivarius violins. As psychologist Timothy Wilson argues, much of our preference behavior occurs in the "adaptive unconscious," yet we construct post-hoc explanations for feelings that seem authentically ours. This gap between what we think we like and what we actually enjoy plays out dramatically in Netflix's recommendation system. Initially obsessed with perfecting star-based ratings, Netflix discovered that watching patterns were far more revealing than explicit ratings. Todd Yellin, Netflix's VP of product innovation, explains they "deemphasized ratings predictions" despite having "gotten more people to hit stars than anyone in the universe." People rate documentaries like "An Inconvenient Truth" highly but leave them unwatched as "cup holders," while giving superhero films lower ratings despite watching them repeatedly. As Yellin notes, "People want to feel good about themselves" or are "self-delusional" about their tastes. This self-deception has deep roots. Sociologists like Erving Goffman describe our self-presentation as a "dramaturgical act" where we maintain a "proper performance" - like Woody Allen's character arranging intellectual books on his coffee table before a date. Anthropologist Robert Trivers suggests self-deception evolved as "an offensive strategy for deceiving others" - we convince ourselves first to better convince others.

聴きながら、すべての言葉を目で追えます

『「好き」の設計図』の一語一語が音声に合わせてリアルタイムでハイライトされ、自然に読み進められます。

第3章

The Sensory Symphony of Food Preferences

A restaurant meal represents our most concentrated exercise in choice and pleasure. Unlike other sensory experiences, food engages all our senses simultaneously - we like not only taste but smell, texture, appearance, and even sound, as research shows that amplifying the "crispiness" sounds of potato chips makes them seem more appealing. Our sensory inputs can dramatically alter perception - deeper-colored fruit juice tastes better despite identical flavor, while a bluish light can turn a delicious steak nauseating. The term "taste" itself is significant - we use it for both food preferences and aesthetic judgments. Historically, philosophers didn't distinguish between bodily pleasures and artistic appreciation until the 18th century, when Immanuel Kant separated "low" physical pleasures from "disinterested" aesthetic contemplation. When choosing from a menu, we're not experiencing actual liking but anticipating it. Language functions as a mental appetizer - words like "warm," "soft," and "heritage" prepare our brains. The mere ability to choose increases our liking for all available options. We "prefeel" potential choices, mentally simulating future experiences, though these simulations rely on memories. The pleasure of eating exists primarily in anticipation and memory rather than the fleeting present moment. Unfortunately, neither memories nor anticipations reliably predict our actual enjoyment. We crave more variety when choosing than we actually want later, and our memories of meals can be manipulated through selective rehearsal of enjoyable aspects. Our expectations dramatically shape our food preferences. When expectations are violated, our enjoyment plummets - as in the infamous salmon ice cream experiment where participants described it as "disgusting" when labeled "ice cream" but enjoyed it when called "frozen savory mousse." This explains why menus now explicitly announce salt in desserts, allowing diners to appreciate the contrast rather than perceive something "wrong." What we like something "as" profoundly affects our enjoyment. In military food research, subjects preferred actual soup served in a bowl over a dental liquid diet in a bowl, but when the glass contained "dental liquid diet" rather than "soup," preferences reversed. This expectations dissonance explains polarized reactions to Brooklyn Brewery's cocktail-inspired Penicillin beer - those properly informed about its scotch-ginger-honey-lemon inspiration loved it; those expecting a conventional pale ale were repulsed.

第4章

The Mathematics of Measuring Pleasure

Quantifying taste preferences presents remarkable challenges. The nine-point hedonic scale, developed in 1944 at Chicago's Quartermaster Food and Container Institute for military rations, has become the industry standard for measuring food liking. Yet this seemingly simple tool has profound limitations. People rarely use the extreme values (1 or 9), effectively reducing it to a seven-point scale. Subjects hedge their ratings, reluctant to give maximum scores in case something better appears in the next sample. Our own taste perceptions confound measurement efforts. When asked to rate favorite and least favorite foods before and after consumption, people consistently mark favorites lower and disliked foods higher after eating them - a "regression to the mean" effect suggesting "the bad is never as bad as we think it is, the good never as good." Military food research at Natick offers unique insights because it tests pure liking uncorrupted by price, advertising or choice. Their research on food monotony determined soldiers could subsist on MREs for 21 days without significant body mass loss, though preferences remain crucial for maintaining consumption and morale. Broad appeal matters more than niche excellence - even beloved foods like New England clam chowder failed military testing when unfamiliar to many soldiers. Paradoxically, the most-liked items in initial taste tests often become least-liked after repeated exposure. We protect our enjoyment of favorite foods by deliberately choosing variety - what Howard Moskowitz calls avoiding "death by hamburger." Yet economist Tyler Cowen questions why we resist eating the same cuisine repeatedly when people in those countries do exactly that. Bland foods actually induce less fatigue than flavorful ones, possibly because they fade from memory more quickly ("variety amnesia"). Context dramatically affects food enjoyment. The same MREs rated "acceptable" by both soldiers in Hawaii and MIT students were consumed in greater quantities by students, demonstrating environment's impact on appetite. Similarly, restaurant decor, music, group size, tableware weight, plate color, and wait times all influence our enjoyment. Like Miles drinking fine wine from a Styrofoam cup in Sideways, context can undermine even exceptional food experiences.

『「好き」の設計図』をもっと深く楽しむ

毎日の新しい気づきを10万件以上のレッスンから
言葉をハイライトして音声と同期
ライブラリを保存して、どの端末からでも利用

第5章

The Social Choreography of Taste

Detecting fake reviews has become a science. Cornell researchers created algorithms that identify deception patterns with 90% accuracy - better than humans who suffer from "truth bias." Fabricated reviews typically contain fewer contextual details, more superlatives, and are shorter since lying requires mental effort. Liars use more verbs than nouns (easier to describe actions than appearances) and fewer personal pronouns to distance themselves from deception - except in fake positive reviews where they overcompensate with self-references to appear credible. Beyond outright fakes, legitimate reviews suffer from numerous distortions. Only about 5% of customers write reviews, creating a biased sample. Reviews tend toward a "J-shaped distribution" or "brag and moan phenomenon" with clusters at extremes. Despite this, there's a strong "positivity bias" - Goodreads averages 3.8/5 stars, TripAdvisor 3.7/5, and ratings are even higher on platforms where reciprocal reviewing occurs. This led YouTube to abandon its five-star system for binary thumbs up/down. Social influence powerfully shapes opinions. MIT research showed that artificially seeding a positive first vote created a cascade of positivity that boosted overall scores by 25%. While we "herd on positive opinions," over time ratings often decline as later reviewers react against extreme ratings and try to stand out. Prize-winning books actually receive worse ratings after winning - the "paradox of publicity" - as expectations rise and less-matched readers are attracted, triggering polarization where negative reviews receive disproportionate "likes." The social dimension of taste extends beyond online reviews. Humans are fundamentally imitative creatures. As French sociologist Gabriel Tarde noted in 1890, "The social being, in the degree that he is social, is essentially imitative." This social learning capacity is what makes human culture uniquely adaptive and successful across diverse environments. Unlike other primates, humans have thrived in environments from the Arctic to deserts through cultural knowledge transmission rather than genetic adaptation. This imitative tendency creates the paradox of "conformist distinction" - we simultaneously want to belong to groups while maintaining individual identity. We select right-sized groups, demonstrate "superior conformity" within our chosen tribes, or even embrace "normcore" anti-fashion as a form of distinction. When Stanford researchers sold Livestrong wristbands to a "geeky" dorm, wearers in the "target" dorm abandoned them by 32% - not because they disliked the geeks, but because they weren't "like" them.

第6章

The Neural Pathways of Pleasure

Most of what we perceive as taste actually comes through our nose. This fundamental sensory fact becomes startlingly clear in the "jelly bean test" - when holding your nose, all jelly beans taste merely sweet, but releasing your nostrils floods your senses with distinct flavors. While our tongues detect only basic tastes (sweet, sour, bitter, salty, umami), all finer distinctions arrive "retronasally" through the nasal passage. Kent Berridge's groundbreaking experiments with rats demonstrate how deeply unpleasant tastes can be transformed into desired ones through neural conditioning. In one study, rats were conditioned to associate sounds with either pleasant sucrose or intensely unpleasant "Dead Sea salt" solutions. When researchers later altered the rats' brains to simulate salt craving, the rats immediately approached the salt-associated sound with pleasure expressions-before even tasting it. This reveals how neural circuits can dramatically transform disliking into wanting. Similar mechanisms operate in humans. When students were subliminally shown happy or sad faces before tasting a fruit beverage, those who saw happy faces rated the drink 50% more enjoyable. As Berridge explains, the "wanting" circuits activated by the happy faces remained undetected until finding an appropriate target in the sweet drink. Our brains actively construct our experiences of liking. In a classic study, people given identical smells rated them differently when told they were "cheese" versus "body odor." The cheese group showed more activation across brain regions, suggesting liking requires more neural processing than disliking. Even when given neutral smells but told what to expect, brain activity patterns changed in anticipation. With coffee, the bitter signal at the brain stem remains unchanged, but higher cognitive processes transform it into pleasure. "Whatever pleasure we are getting," Berridge notes, "is probably coming from the same basic pleasure circuits that sweetness has a special privilege tapping into." The brain effectively sweetens your coffee.

聴きながら、すべての言葉を目で追えます

『「好き」の設計図』の一語一語が音声に合わせてリアルタイムでハイライトされ、自然に読み進められます。

第7章

The Unpredictable Evolution of Preferences

In the forests of the Berkshires, researchers discovered that chestnut-sided warblers completely changed their repertoire of unaccented songs over just seven years. These changes weren't driven by innovation or prestige but simply by errors in imitation that accumulated over time. While mate-attracting songs remained consistent (where precision matters for reproduction), the territorial songs evolved through imperfect copying. This pattern reveals how randomness shapes cultural evolution - whether in birdsong, language, or human preferences. From guitar distortion emerging from equipment malfunctions to the seemingly random shifts in dog breed popularity, many taste changes follow what researchers call the "neutral model" - where popularity shifts not through inherent superiority but through random copying. Studies show popular dog breeds rarely correlate with positive breed characteristics, and even Westminster winners no longer boost registrations. Like Pantone's color forecasters who spot emerging trends, cultural change often follows nonlinear patterns where popularity suddenly surges from seemingly nowhere. Baby names exemplify how tastes evolve through random processes rather than rational selection. Researcher Stanley Lieberson found that names shifted from tradition-bound choices to fashion statements in the late nineteenth century. While external factors like famous people occasionally influence naming trends, more important are the "internal mechanisms" that drive taste changes even without external shifts. Through what Lieberson calls the "ratchet effect," small mutations (like changing Jenny to Jenna) gradually expand in a similar direction until reaching a point of ridiculousness - echoing Raymond Loewy's "most advanced, yet acceptable" principle of design evolution. The internet promised to democratize taste by making obscure cultural products as accessible as popular ones. Music critic Chris Molanphy explains that contrary to expectations, digital access has made popularity more concentrated, not less. "The big have gotten bigger" - hit songs now command an even larger share of the music market than before, creating "snowball smashes" with unprecedented staying power. This concentration reflects William McPhee's "double jeopardy" theory: less popular items are both less known and less chosen by those who know them. When people can see others' choices, popularity becomes more unpredictable and unequal - social influence creates steeper hierarchies.

第8章

The Expert's Eye: How Judges Judge

To understand how people make more deliberate quality judgments, we must examine how experts evaluate quality in competitive settings. At the Salon International du Chat in Paris, Dutch psychology professor Peter Moormann combines his psychology expertise with his cat judging experience. As owners present their cats - which display an almost French waiter-like haughtiness - Moormann examines them methodically, feeling for skull deformations, scanning for tail faults, and probing for physical attributes that match breed standards. For each breed, there are dozens of specific criteria to evaluate, from ear placement to coat texture to the subtle curve of the spine. Moormann describes two fundamental judging approaches: the "analytic style" where points are assigned to specific attributes (though no objective measuring device exists beyond the judge's brain), and the "holistic style" where judges compare cats to an ideal mental image, seeking that special "charismatic" quality that transcends individual features. The analytic approach breaks down evaluation into precise categories - 15 points for head type, 20 for body structure, 10 for coat quality, and so on. The holistic method requires years of experience to develop that internal ideal specimen against which all others are measured. Memory proves crucial for judges, who must compare each specimen against all others they've ever seen, sometimes spanning decades of experience and thousands of animals. Yet judging remains susceptible to various cognitive biases and psychological effects. Language affinity can sway scores - judges tend to rate contestants who speak their native language more favorably. Order effects are particularly powerful, where later contestants typically score higher due to memory effects and cognitive processing. As researcher Wandi Bruine de Bruin demonstrated through extensive analysis of Eurovision Song Contest data, "Judges may base their final rating of a performance on how well they remember it." Later performances benefit from being more fresh in judges' minds. In figure skating championships, Bruine de Bruin discovered an upward linear pattern of scores even when appearance order was randomly drawn. This "direction of comparison effect" occurs because judges naturally compare later performances with earlier ones, not vice versa, creating an unconscious scoring bias. These comparison effects extend far beyond formal judging contexts into everyday perception. The "cheerleader effect" makes people appear more attractive in groups than alone, as our brains average out features in group settings. Even subliminal exposure to images can dramatically affect self-assessment - students rated their athletic abilities significantly lower after unconsciously viewing images of Michael Jordan for just milliseconds. What we compare things with fundamentally alters our perception, as does the way we make comparisons. When evaluating two options, focusing on unique positives versus unique negatives can completely reverse our preferences. This demonstrates how our judgment process is inherently relative rather than absolute, shaped by context and comparison more than we realize.

『「好き」の設計図』をもっと深く楽しむ

毎日の新しい気づきを10万件以上のレッスンから
言葉をハイライトして音声と同期
ライブラリを保存して、どの端末からでも利用

第9章

The Language of Sensation

Describing taste presents unique challenges that reveal fundamental limitations in human language and perception. Asked what a carrot tastes like, most people struggle to articulate it beyond "carroty." They might mention brightness (not a taste), crunchiness (texture), or orangeness (color), demonstrating how we often conflate different sensory experiences. Even expert sensory panels trained in carrot evaluation ultimately include "carroty" among their descriptors, though they add more nuanced terms like "piney," "earthy," "cloves," or "minerally." These experts might detect subtle variations between heritage varieties, noting that purple carrots often carry hints of pepper while white carrots tend toward parsnip-like qualities. This linguistic poverty troubled philosophers like John Locke, who noted our limited vocabulary for tastes: "Sweet, bitter, sour, harsh and salt are almost all of the epithets we have to denominate that numberless variety of relishes." This observation reflects a deeper historical context where taste was viewed primarily as a survival mechanism rather than a domain for refined understanding. Ancient Greek philosophers similarly struggled, with Aristotle proposing just seven basic tastes, showing how even great thinkers grappled with taste's complexity. The quest to articulate flavor has produced numerous sensory "wheels" and lexicons for everything from whiskey to cheddar cheese. Wine tasting wheels feature over 100 descriptors, ranging from "cat pee" in Sauvignon Blanc to "petroleum" in aged Riesling. Even seemingly simple items like maple syrup (with grades from "delicate" to "robust") and carbonation ("prickly" to "aggressive") have their own dedicated terminology systems. This echoes Locke's philosophical dilemma with the pineapple - the impossibility of truly conveying taste through language alone. How do you describe something someone has never experienced? Words inevitably fall short, as evidenced by "fresh pineapple" appearing in a cheddar cheese lexicon, or sommeliers describing wines using terms like "forest floor" or "wet stone." At McCormick, the global flavoring giant, this challenge is addressed daily through a sophisticated blend of science and sensory analysis. Their laboratories combine scientific precision with human evaluation, employing both gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and trained tasting panels. Their scientists can identify specific molecules that create flavors - like the thiazole that makes a swimming pool smell like tomato plants with just one drop - and produce gas chromatograms showing the "molecular fingerprints" of different oreganos from Turkey, Mexico, and Greece. Yet humans aren't machines; we bring our own interpretive mechanisms to taste. A touch of vanilla in low-fat milk makes it seem sweeter, creamier and thicker, though it changes none of these properties. Similarly, the color of food can dramatically affect perceived taste - white wine dyed red is often described using red wine terminology, demonstrating how visual cues influence our taste perception.

第10章

Finding Your Way Through the Taste Labyrinth

The picture of taste I've presented is hardly reassuring. We often don't know what we like or why we like what we do. Our preferences are riddled with unconscious biases, easily swayed by contextual and social influences. There's less chance than we think that we'll like tomorrow what we liked today and even less chance of remembering what led us to our previous likes. Even experts are hardly infallible guides. Yet through our explorations, small themes have emerged-signposts on a confusing path. We know what we like before we know why, in milliseconds. We should get beyond simple "like" and "dislike" labels, which often end more interesting conversations. Our likes may be unconsciously influenced by context or expectation rather than authentic preference. Talking about why we like something helps us remember and process the experience. We like things more when they can be categorized, and we should be wary of the "easy like" that provides immediate but fleeting pleasure. Our liking is shaped by what we expect to like and what we remember liking. Three tensions explain much of our taste: novelty versus familiarity, conformity versus distinction, and simplicity versus complexity. Dislikes register more powerfully than likes-our facial muscles work harder to express food dislike, and negative reviews carry more weight than positive ones. The more interesting question isn't what we like, but why we like it. Perhaps the most profound insight from Vanderbilt's exploration is that taste isn't a fixed quality residing within us, but an ongoing negotiation between our biology, psychology, social context, and cultural environment. When someone asks what your favorite beer is, perhaps the wisest answer is the one given by beer judge Brad Kraus: "I don't have a favorite beer. I usually say it's the one in my hand." In that simple statement lies a profound truth - that our preferences exist not as abstract ideals but as lived experiences, constantly shifting with context and time, forever elusive yet endlessly fascinating.

★★★★★

『「好き」の設計図』を最後まで読み終えました

100万人以上の学習者に愛用されています

“23日間、毎日使い続けています。今では日課の一部です。”

jayallen

『「好き」の設計図』の主要テーマ

preference formation
aesthetic judgment
recommendation algorithms
sensory perception
consumer choice psychology

『「好き」の設計図』の名言

We labor under an illusion of authenticity.
People want to feel good about themselves.
Language functions as a mental appetizer.
The pleasure of eating exists primarily in anticipation and memory.
Our expectations dramatically shape our food preferences.

『「好き」の設計図』の登場人物

Tom VanderbiltAuthor and investigator of preference formation
Todd YellinNetflix VP of product innovation
Timothy WilsonPsychologist who studies the adaptive unconscious
Erving GoffmanSociologist who studied self-presentation
Robert TriversAnthropologist who studied self-deception

著者について

トム・ヴァンダービルトは、ベストセラー『You May Also Like: Taste in an Age of Endless Choice（邦題：好きになる理由：終わりなき選択肢の時代の「好み」の科学）』の著者であり、デザイン、テクノロジー、人間の行動を専門とする著名なジャーナリストです。『ウォール・ストリート・ジャーナル』、『WIRED』、『スレート』などの主要メディアに頻繁に寄稿しており、緻密なリサーチと親しみやすい語り口を融合させ、文化的な嗜好や消費者の選択がいかに現代生活を形作っているかを探求しています。交通パターンからアルゴリズムによるレコメンデーションまで、日常のシステムを読み解く彼の専門知識が、この「好みの科学」への深い洞察を支えています。

ヴァンダービルトの他の著作には、20カ国語に翻訳された『ニューヨーク・タイムズ』ベストセラー『Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us)（邦題：トラフィック：なぜ私たちはこのように運転するのか）』や、スキル習得の認知的メリットを考察した『Beginners: The Joy and Transformative Power of Lifelong Learning（邦題：人生、一生、勉強：大人のための「初心者」入門）』があります。ニューヨーク大学ルーディン交通政策・管理センターの客員研究員も務めており、都市デザインや生涯学習に関するTEDトークにも登壇しています。

『You May Also Like』は、行動心理学、データ分析、文化批評を融合させたヴァンダービルトの学際的なアプローチから生まれた一冊です。本書は主要メディアで引用され続けており、消費者文化やデジタル・インフルエンスを議論する上での定番の資料となっています。

「好き」の設計図の要約をダウンロード

「好き」の設計図の要約をPDFまたはEPUBで無料でダウンロード。印刷やオフラインでいつでもお読みいただけます。

他のユーザーのお気に入り

Tom Vanderbilt

Adam Alter

Sheena Iyengar

Derek Thompson

Paco Underhill

Thinking, fast and slow

Daniel Kahneman

Framers

Kenneth Cukier

Buy-Ology

Martin Lindstrom

この本に関するよくある質問

この学習プランの一部

学習プラン

Teach me something about wine degustation.

3 h 59 m•4 エピソード

学習プラン

The Architecture of Choice

Understanding the hidden mechanics of decision-making is essential for anyone navigating complex social and professional landscapes. This plan is ideal for leaders, marketers, and curious minds looking to master the psychological triggers that drive human choice and collective action.

3 h 4 m•4 セクション

学習プラン

The Psychology of Hidden Motives

In a world where true intentions are often masked, understanding the underlying mechanics of human behavior is a critical competitive advantage. This plan is ideal for leaders, negotiators, and anyone looking to master social dynamics by reading between the lines of every interaction.

25 m•3 セクション

学習プラン

Synthesize top research on why humans love

This learning plan bridges biology and psychology to provide a comprehensive view of human intimacy. It is ideal for anyone curious about the science of attraction, from students of psychology to individuals seeking to understand their own relationship patterns.

5 h 18 m•4 セクション

学習プラン

Surviving the Algorithmic Age

In an era where algorithms dictate our reality, understanding the mechanics of digital influence is essential for mental autonomy. This plan is designed for students, professionals, and daily internet users who want to move beyond passive scrolling and master their information environment.

1 h 30 m•3 セクション

学習プラン

understanding the human brain and love

This plan bridges the gap between neuroscience and emotional intelligence, offering a scientific lens on why we love and connect. It is ideal for individuals seeking to improve their relationships by understanding the biological and psychological roots of human behavior.

5 h 28 m•4 セクション

学習プラン

Understand & influence human decision-making

In an era of information overload, understanding the hidden mechanics of the mind is a critical competitive advantage. This plan is ideal for leaders, marketers, and designers looking to leverage behavioral science to drive better results and ethical engagement.

4 h 40 m•4 セクション

学習プラン

The Laws of Human Nature

In an era of constant social interaction, understanding the hidden forces that drive human behavior is a vital competitive advantage. This plan is designed for leaders, negotiators, and anyone seeking to improve their interpersonal dynamics and self-mastery.

1 h 30 m•3 セクション

学習プラン

The Art of Seductive Connection

In a world of digital noise, the ability to create genuine, magnetic chemistry is a rare and valuable skill. This plan is designed for individuals looking to move beyond superficial dating habits and master the nuanced psychology of attraction and emotional depth.

1 h 30 m•3 セクション

コロンビア大学卒業生がサンフランシスコで開発

LOVED BY

1,000,000+ curious minds.

4.7

avg rating

1M+ learners

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

BeFreedがウェブ上でどのように話題になっているかをもっと見る

コロンビア大学卒業生がサンフランシスコで開発

LOVED BY

1,000,000+ curious minds.

4.7

avg rating

1M+ learners

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

BeFreedがウェブ上でどのように話題になっているかをもっと見る

今すぐ学習の旅を始めよう

第8章

「好き」の設計図

概要『「好き」の設計図』の概要

1冊の本。さまざまな聴き方。

The Invisible Algorithms Behind Our Preferences

The Illusion of Authentic Taste

聴きながら、すべての言葉を目で追えます

The Sensory Symphony of Food Preferences

The Mathematics of Measuring Pleasure

『「好き」の設計図』をもっと深く楽しむ

The Social Choreography of Taste

The Neural Pathways of Pleasure

聴きながら、すべての言葉を目で追えます

The Unpredictable Evolution of Preferences

The Expert's Eye: How Judges Judge

『「好き」の設計図』をもっと深く楽しむ

The Language of Sensation

Finding Your Way Through the Taste Labyrinth

『「好き」の設計図』を最後まで読み終えました

『「好き」の設計図』の主要テーマ

『「好き」の設計図』の名言

『「好き」の設計図』の登場人物

著者について

「好き」の設計図の要約をダウンロード

他のユーザーのお気に入り

この本に関するよくある質問

What is You May Also Like: Taste in an Age of Endless Choice about?

Who should read You May Also Like?

Is You May Also Like worth reading?

Who is Tom Vanderbilt?

この学習プランの一部

Teach me something about wine degustation.

もっと見る

1,000,000+ curious minds.

1,000,000+ curious minds.

1冊の本。さまざまな聴き方。

The Invisible Algorithms Behind Our Preferences

The Illusion of Authentic Taste

聴きながら、すべての言葉を目で追えます

The Sensory Symphony of Food Preferences

The Mathematics of Measuring Pleasure

『「好き」の設計図』をもっと深く楽しむ

The Social Choreography of Taste

The Neural Pathways of Pleasure

聴きながら、すべての言葉を目で追えます

The Unpredictable Evolution of Preferences

The Expert's Eye: How Judges Judge

『「好き」の設計図』をもっと深く楽しむ

The Language of Sensation

Finding Your Way Through the Taste Labyrinth

『「好き」の設計図』を最後まで読み終えました

他のユーザーのお気に入り

この学習プランの一部

Teach me something about wine degustation.

もっと見る

『「好き」の設計図』の概要