The Psychology Thread

Who is that man, anyway? One of your NCOs?

By the way, are there any psychological effects shown in this clip?

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

Plenty. You're looking at a lot of initial conflict avoidance behaviours (badly hidden — which defeats the purpose), for example, thanks to the perceived overwhelming threat and number disadvantage.

All that waffle while they hang around the entrance and trying to decide what to do? Neither member of the duos that do that wants to bite the bullet and just sit.

Hmmm... I also can't be bothered to count up the number of stress reaction cues in both body language and behaviour which might point to other shades of reactions. <_<

The best thing: note the ages and other demographic segments of those who do sit... Interesting, no? (Hint: mixing as a minority most of your life or with other minorities will make you more likely to sit... you know better than to judge people by covers alone. Otherwise known as a complex socialisation process prior to the incident.)

edited 15th May '13 7:45:59 AM by Euodiachloris

So, anyone here heard of Durkheim, especially his theory on suicide being caused by the society? Is that theory still valid today?

I had to do a lecture on that for this week, and it was interesting, to say the least.

@Euo - Conflict avoidance behaviors...stress reaction cues...I never heard of either of those. Also, you do point out the interesting parts that I didn't actually notice. It is indeed fascinating.

@Marc - What do you do, teacher/professor of sociology or something?

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

Other way around, I'm a student.

I had to read stuff, not read it to someone.

Ah, I see. I thought you were an instructor or such because you said you had to do a lecture.

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

- googles "lecture" -

Oh ffs English, why are you using that word.

Lecture in french just means "something to read" or some such, should've checked that translation.

Ah, I see. Separated by a Common Language much?

That reminds me. Language Equals Thought for real life section is locked due to controversy. Hmm...I wonder how much of it is true. Does anyone know the technical term for the theory?

edited 15th May '13 7:58:44 AM by dRoy

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

There's a direct link on the page: "linguistic relativity". I've mainly approached it from a cognitive processing side, but... it's still holding water.

It's... also ballooned a bit and got interconnections with both sociological theories and visual processing: these things tend to. <_< Which parts, in particular are you interested in?

edited 15th May '13 8:07:27 AM by Euodiachloris

Derpity derp, should have actually looked at the page.

Uhm...I don't know, actually. I am guessing that sociological and cognitive perspective is vastly different? Is it something that can be viewed through behavioral perspective?

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

I wish departmentalising the various aspects of Psychology was that watertight. As stated: you start tugging the CogPsy angle for, e.g. how most dyslexics interpret sentence structure and what words (and parts of words) are emphasised for them as a means to work out the divergent processing involved and wind up hitting the behavioural responses in others exhibited to the precise word selection used in a sentence generally and how that impacts group behaviour in small and large groups (such as in propaganda, advertising etc.).

So... um... "vastly different"? Not so much. <_< Intesectionality and cross-pollination are a big part of Psychology. It's why you'll find specialists in several disciplines working together on the same project. Even if doing so makes no immediate sense (why is that famous neurologist suddenly playing with questionnaires and not biopsies? Because they're interested in what the results will point to to help narrow-down what to look for in the next batch of ECGs, that's why).

edited 15th May '13 8:30:44 AM by Euodiachloris

So, I got B+ in Psy 101. I am not really sure about next semester's psychology subjects. :/

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

So this article from The Economist has highlighted the various troubles with psychology and its dependency on what is basically an incomplete and rather strict tool. I am of course, talking about the American Psychiatric Asssociation's Diagnostics and Statistics Manual Version Five (DSM-5), which will be released for $199 on Thu 23 May.

Included in this is "disruptive mood dysregulation disorder”. Which means... errr... temper tantrums in toddlers.

The article suggests that while the DSM (and the ICD-11, released later this year) is a useful tool, using it as the be-all-and-end-all would stifle psychological diagnoses and evolution.

edited 19th May '13 3:55:07 PM by Inhopelessguy

Yup... it's a useful tool. It's the ultimate blunt instrument. (In more ways than size. ) Seriously: it suggests diagnosing normal human life-stages (such as grief and hormonal changes) as "conditions". <_< It's really annoying.

I'm all for correctly diagnosing abnormalities where you find them. That is.. "abnormalities": wasting time sticking labels on behaviour that makes sense in context rather than helping a person through the distress? Dumbass move.

edited 19th May '13 8:45:24 PM by Euodiachloris

Random question.

Is there a technical term for hating a person because it reminds you of someone that you hate?

I am writing a novel*

and main character really, really hates his T.A. because he looks like the bully that tormented him in elementary school. So much, that he actually tries to kill him.

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

It's a form of projection, though not in the classical Freudian style and leaning more towards attribution. However, in this case, it's a learned, unconscious emotional reaction triggered by similar visual or other cues, most like. <shrugs> Good old cognition to the rescue... or screw-up.

If he's well aware that what he's doing is screwy, but can't seem to stop himself, you might want to look into the various ways impulse control are inhibited and conscious processing loses out to unconsious. Here: CAPS: a good place to start.

edited 16th Jun '13 1:55:34 AM by Euodiachloris

Ooh, I heard of attribution, but never read further into it. It sounds interesting.

Also, CAPS, that looks very interesting too.

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

I have another question.

Is there any kind of psychological explanation for that sense of being watched?

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

Uh... off the top of my head: "paranoia"? It's a manifestation of self-consciousness and actually hard-wired into the brain at a deeply unconscious level (for a damned good reason: working out when you're being stalked is a life-skill). <shrugs> There is no specific term, as such. And, as it's on a deeply unconscious level, mapping it isn't easy, as it involves a lot of autonomic systems.

It's like we're all hard-wired to be wary of snakes and spiders after minimal exposure to them (or by watching other people's reactions to them). And, for the same reasons.

edited 19th Jun '13 1:01:39 PM by Euodiachloris

So I have a question. What's changed about the diagnosis of schizophrenia with the publication of the DSM-V?

I ask because I have a character that I'm trying to write that's schizophrenic and I based the diagnosis on the DSM-IV guidelines.

My understanding is that there aren't types of schizophrenia anymore?

@Euo - So there really isn't any explanation, other than it is an unconscious reaction that is a form of paranoia, huh? I see.

I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.

Don't have the latest one (well, I'm a Brit, so I don't have to), so don't know if the definition has changed according to it. (Besides which, I'm one of those who loathes that thing: it makes a great firestarter and, in my opinion, that's the best use for it. Recipe for over-diagnosis and medication of normal "problems" like grief, it is. <_<)

Uh... I were kidding about the paranoia bit, you know. <_< It can tipple into paranoia in the same way that a healthy wariness of spiders can become a phobia, though. Self-consciousness is the real phrase to keep tabs on, mate, for when it's a bit more than the self-awareness every individual needs.

I do have to agree with you on the overdiagnosing thing. Yes, let's diagnosis grief and temper tantrums. Those are obviously things that do not happen under normal circumstances.

I'm just a bit fearful of parents popping their kids all kinds of pills for ordinary problems. :/

Worse: by making it acceptable to automatically prescribe... just imagine how many problems are actively being misdiagnosed or only partially diagnosed. For years. <_< Kids, for example, aren't always able to fully describe what it is they're going through, so make an assumption at the wrong time and go running with it... <shudders>

edited 19th Jun '13 3:21:45 PM by Euodiachloris

I remember when I was a kid I had... something. OCD? Depression? Anxiety? They couldn't decide, I just threw huge temper tantrums, among other things. I was that kid in the supermarket that cried when they didn't get candy. In my case yeah, that was a problem that wasn't ordinary and went beyond requiring discipline.

What astounds me is the fact that I remember at some point in the first grade, a woman and her child, one of my classmates, talked to me about how the girl used to have problems like I did but then she started taking medication. And I was like "no" because Mom had heard horror stories about medication and the affects that it had on kids my age and we said we didn't want to do that. And then in the third grade the teachers and school administration had a meeting with my mom (my dad had died in the second grade so he wasn't present) and I think the basic gist was "have her talk to a psychiatrist or we're kicking her out of this school".

It did end up helping and I did get prescribed anti depressants (thankfully no bad side affects and I've weened off them since starting college) but like ... it just seems kind of fucked up to me that the school did that. It helped in my case, but I'm sure there are instances where it wouldn't have helped the kid. Or the school would be insisting on medication because it's the easiest way out.

Obviously psychiatrist and prescription medication can help and it's great! I do think that if people are having issues beyond what is normal that they absolutely should seek help and fuck the stigma against mental illnesses. But yeah just, apprehension about the subject.

(God this was a tangent. I am so sorry.)