Psychology Bull Shit

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

http://www.piercepioneer.com/the-ne...-as-strong-as-we-had-originally-thought/45610

I ran into the bull shit in grad school. 60% of the research isn't real. What I found was, the statistics were wrong. That is, the perfessers fudged the numbers to make the results significant.

 

[LouCfer]

when I started College, some Prof paid students to help with research

My job was to do phone interviews with a few hundred people to get info on project X

I was to be paid a lump sum, when I was done

I did about 12 interviews and I saw mostly same responses, so I faked the rest, got out early, fucked a few girls and got paid

RESEARCH INTO CUNT STARTED

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

when I started College, some Prof paid students to help with research

My job was to do phone interviews with a few hundred people to get info on project X

I was to be paid a lump sum, when I was done

I did about 12 interviews and I saw mostly same responses, so I faked the rest, got out early, fucked a few girls and got paid

RESEARCH INTO CUNT STARTED

So you've been a lying scumbag for a long time huh?

No surprise.

 

[LouCfer]

Without research

We know

You are a LOON

 

[hashtag45]

Pavel Podolyak original take on Brystol-Meyers/Social sciences

http://www.piercepioneer.com/the-ne...-as-strong-as-we-had-originally-thought/45610

I ran into the bull shit in grad school. 60% of the research isn't real. What I found was, the statistics were wrong. That is, the perfessers fudged the numbers to make the results significant.

I agree. On a related note, almost everything (and not only in psychology) has become about quantifications and stats and nombers. It's like we've all become a bunch of hoarders instead of interpreters

BTW:
As someone with limitted baseline 'real-life skills', who felt flat on her face after entering the real world (work, etc.) years ago,
I became interested in social sciences/psychology readings, in my spare time.
I recently came across this author, and he filled me with awe - his articles explain some things that I witnessed or experienced.
What do you think of his ideas? (although I'm also aware that his L and you are Rwing)

A few examples:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Myers-Briggs-Personality-Pluralism&id=3698746

http://pavelpodolyak.blogspot.co.nz/2009/10/myers-briggs-personality-type-and.html

http://pavelpodolyak.blogspot.co.nz/2010/01/political-ponerology-by-andrew-m.html

 

[hashtag45]

when I started College, some Prof paid students to help with research

My job was to do phone interviews with a few hundred people to get info on project X

I was to be paid a lump sum, when I was done

I did about 12 interviews and I saw mostly same responses, so I faked the rest, got out early, fucked a few girls and got paid

Good on you!
If I were as smart then, I would have saved myself a lot of time and grief

So I got out early, fucked a few girls and got paid

Of course you had to mention that

 

[Que]

Psychology is a soft science for this very reason. If you can't reproduce results it isn't science.. The first problem is researchers regularly reveal their biases in how they form the questions and in tone of their voice whilst asking them. Their subjects are no better because the people that they query do not very often know themselves well enough to accurately answer the questions.

 

[hashtag45]

The first problem is researchers regularly reveal their biases in how they form the questions and in tone of their voice whilst asking them. Their subjects are no better because the people that they query do not very often know themselves well enough to accurately answer the questions.

You are right re the bias.

And it can even become dangerous if those who are in higher positions/or, who are conducting research, have psychopathic traits:
- Their research ends up showing that Psychopathic Behaviors/Reactions are the norm (aka them),
- and that those who don't display them or show some emotions (most of us), are abnormal.
Just like the corporate world that we live in.

(I'm just blabbing here, don't take me word for word).

Psychology is a soft science for this very reason. If you can't reproduce results it isn't science...

I agree only with some aspects of this one.

I think psychology is meant to be a combination of 'hard' and humanistic sciences.
- But the problem is, those who enter it's field have different affinities (some have the mind of an engineer, and others - of a writer/poet).
- But instead of collaborating and valuing each others' strengths in order to 'make a better world', a lot of them are driven by their ego. So they want to turn it into something where they can shine or stand out.

Or perhaps, given that College entry criteria favors the ones with a more pragmatic brain (PS - I don't know exactly how things are , but I suspect that) … Psychology has now turned out to be a babylony of graphs and collections of graphs and data

 

[Que]

Numbers are not often a strength of those that pursue that field. Its uses in industrial psychology and marketing are usually fairly valid. One can predict fairly well the behavior of groups of people it's just really hard to predict the behavior of one.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I agree. On a related note, almost everything (and not only in psychology) has become about quantifications and stats and nombers. It's like we've all become a bunch of hoarders instead of interpreters

BTW:
As someone with limitted baseline 'real-life skills', who felt flat on her face after entering the real world (work, etc.) years ago,
I became interested in social sciences/psychology readings, in my spare time.
I recently came across this author, and he filled me with awe - his articles explain some things that I witnessed or experienced.
What do you think of his ideas? (although I'm also aware that his L and you are Rwing)

A few examples:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Myers-Briggs-Personality-Pluralism&id=3698746

http://pavelpodolyak.blogspot.co.nz/2009/10/myers-briggs-personality-type-and.html

http://pavelpodolyak.blogspot.co.nz/2010/01/political-ponerology-by-andrew-m.html

Pavelpodolyak re-discovered breeds.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Numbers are not often a strength of those that pursue that field. Its uses in industrial psychology and marketing are usually fairly valid. One can predict fairly well the behavior of groups of people it's just really hard to predict the behavior of one.

I simply assume the individual is self-absorbed, ignorant, indolent, timid, and a thief, and I'm almost always correct.

 

[Lancecastor]

A new study says many studies reach conclusions unsupported by the data.