# Question
Title: Does suppressing a desire make it more powerful?
Based on my minimal knowledge of old Freudian Psychoanalysis, if our drives and urges are not met they become more powerful, even overwhelming, for the individual, perhaps causing them psychological difficulties or even causing them to then project the restriction on others. This sentiment has been echoed many times in different contexts since then and it seems to me that the modern generation operates under the assumption that trying too hard to suppress a desire is unhealthy (sexual liberation, free expression etc). It is often used, for example, as a criticism of religion that attempts to impose rules and boundaries which result in the suppression of urges and even further curiosity simply because it is forbidden. I also see many pop psychology articles about this idea.

My question is: **what empirical evidence exists to support the notion that repressed desires will make them stronger?** Other relevant question that may be of interest: Is it a result of human's natural curiosity? Is it intrinsic to human drive? Is it a form of obsessive-compulsive behavior? What criticism has been leveled against this theory in the Freudian version or any modern interpretations?

# Answer
First of all, your question title asks about suppression, and your question in the main text asks

> what empirical evidence exists to support the notion that **repressed desires** will make them stronger?

What you need to be careful about here is that repression is different from suppression.

**Repression is unconscious/subconscious, whereas suppression is completely conscious**

> repression is the term for unintentional, unconscious forgetting, and suppression \[is\] intentional, conscious removal of a thought from subsequent conscious attention. Suppression is almost never studied, whereas a wide literature has formed around the concept of repression.....

....Although repression and suppression processes are by no means mutually exclusive or contradictory, the interest value of repression has tended to exclude suppression from scientific study. It is in this sense that Freud was responsible for what we do not know about suppression. (Wegner, 1992)

## Short Answer

Wegner, in the above referenced journal article, points out a lot of evidence to back the thought that any attempt to suppress thoughts or desires will be in vain as they will rebound. Whether or not they become stronger is open to interpretation, as it is concluded that

> When the Rolling Stones sang “You can’t always get what you want,” they provided a bit of relief by adding “but if you try some time, you just might find, you get what you need.” Regrettably, their refrain rings a false note in the world of thought suppression. The research to date suggests that you can’t always think what you want, and that even if you need ever so dearly to stop thinking of something, you still may not get what you need.

## Long Answer

As I said in my answer to a previous question,

> With Sigmund Freud, a lot of people get hung up on the sexual elements of his theories when really, Freud’s theories centre on his motivation and drive theory, and they centre on all sorts of pleasure. We are motivated towards whatever brings pleasure and are motivated away from pain, difficulty, destruction, confusion, etc.

When looking for empirical evidence, Freud's work itself is derived from empirical evidence.

> His theories are clinically derived - i.e. based on what his patients told him during therapy. (McLeod, 2007)

Repression is described by Freud by saying

> the essence of repression lies simply in turning something away, and keeping it at a distance, from the conscious. This view of repression would be made more complete by assuming that, before the mental organization reaches this stage, the task of fending off instinctual impulses is dealt with by the other vicissitudes which instincts may undergo - e.g. reversal into the opposite or turning round upon the subject’s own self. (Freud, 1915/1957)

There are 2 parts to repression,

### Primal Repression

> a first phase of repression, which consists in the psychical (ideational) representative of the instinct being denied entrance into the conscious. With this fixation is established; the representative in question persists unaltered from then onwards and the instinct remains attached to it. (Freud, 1915/1957)

### Repression Proper

> second stage of repression, repression proper, affects mental derivatives of the repressed representative, or such trains of thought as, originating elsewhere, have come into associative connection with it. On account of this association, these ideas experience the same fate as what was primally repressed. *Repression proper*, therefore, is actually an *after-pressure* \[Nachdrängen\]. (Freud, 1915/1957)

*You Can't Always Think What You Want: Problems in the Suppression of Unwanted Thoughts* (Wegner, 1992) is an article covering articles, etc. from Freud onwards.

What you need to be careful about here is that repression is different from suppression.

**Repression is unconscious/subconscious, whereas suppression is completely conscious**

> repression is the term for unintentional, unconscious forgetting, and suppression \[is\] intentional, conscious removal of a thought from subsequent conscious attention. Suppression is almost never studied, whereas a wide literature has formed around the concept of repression.....

....Although repression and suppression processes are by no means mutually exclusive or contradictory, the interest value of repression has tended to exclude suppression from scientific study. It is in this sense that Freud was responsible for what we do not know about suppression. (Wegner, 1992)

Now, think about suppression in a quote provided by Wegner in the above article.

> Try to pose for yourself this task: not to think of a polar bear, and you will see that the cursed thing will come to mind every minute. (Fyodor Dostoevsky, Winter Notes on Summer Impressions)

Conscious efforts to suppress unwanted thoughts are reported by healthy individuals (Rachman & de Silva, 1978), as well as by those suffering from problems such as

* depression (Turner, Beidel, & Nathan, 1985),
* anxiety and worry (Borkovec, Robinson, Pruzinsky, & DePree, 1983),
* obsessions and compulsions (Rachman & Hodgson, 1980; Reed, 1985),
* addiction (Marlatt & Parks, 1982),
* obesity (Polivy, 1990), and
* posttraumatic stress (Ellis, 1983; Horowitz, 1975; Pennebaker, 1988; Tait & Silver, 1989)

and is employed for the purposes of **action inhibition** (behavioural self-control), **communication inhibition** (e.g. keeping secrets), and **emotional inhibition** (e.g. to remain calm in stressful situations) (Wegner, 1992).

### The suppression cycle

The exercise of continuous thought suppression is reminiscent of the task of Sisyphus, the figure of Greek myth who was condemned forever to push a stone up a mountain only to have it roll back down. As a rule, people asked to suppress a thought (e.g., of a white bear) while they deliver verbal reports of their thinking show a cyclic sequence of activities with precisely this up-and-down character (Wegner et al., 1987). Suppression begins with a plan to self-distract (e.g., “Okay, I’ll think of something else”), continues with the choice of a distracter (e.g., “I’ll think about the telephone”) and a period of concentration on distracter-relevant thoughts (e.g., “This phone is a portable, etc.”), and is completed with an intrusive return of the suppressed thought (e.g., “There’s the white bear again”). The cycle then repeats with a return to the plan to self-distract (i.e., “Okay, I’ll think of something else”).

Interestingly, according to Wegner (1992), Knutson (1990) found, that people asked to shut their eyes and report their thinking during suppression indicate more frequent occurrences of the unwanted thought than those allowed to keep their eyes open.

### Automatic Target Search

This is the operation of an automatic search for the unwanted thought during suppression. For example,

> an undergraduate student I asked to think aloud while she tried not to think of the Statue of Liberty began talking about the books on the wall of the room and in a matter of moments mentioned that one was just the greenish tint of the Statue (Wegner, 1992).

All of the above information points to the fact that any attempt to suppress thoughts or desires will be in vain as they will rebound.

> Suppression is a street battle raging in the forefront of the mind, not a few random muggings hidden deep in its alleyways (Wegner, 1992).

## References

Borkovec, T. D., Robinson, E., Pruzinsky, T., & DePree, J. A. (1983). Preliminary exploration of worry: Some characteristics and processes. *Behaviour Research and Therapy*, 21: pp. 9—16.
PMID: 6830571

Ellis, E. M. (1983). A review of empirical rape research: Victim reactions and response to treatment. *Clinical Psychology Review*. 3: pp. 473—490.
DOI: 10.1016/0272-7358(83)90025-9

Freud, S. (1957). Repression. In: J. Stachey (Ed.), *The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 14, pp. 146—158)* London: Hogarth. (Original work published 1915)

Horowitz, M. (1975). Intrusive and repetitive thoughts after experimental stress. *Archives of General Psychiatry*, 32: pp. 1457—1463.
DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1975.01760290125015

Knutson, B. (1990). *Thought suppression and access to distraction*. Unpublished research data, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Available by emailing: knutson'at'stanford.edu

Marlatt, G. P., & Parks, G. A. (1982). Self-management of addictive behaviors. In: P. Karoly & F. H. Kanfer (Eds.), *Self-management and behavior change* (pp. 443—488). New York: Pergamon.

McLeod, S. (2007). Psychodynamic Approach. *Simply Psychology* \[Online\]
Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/psychodynamic.html

Pennebaker, J. W. (1988). Confession, inhibition, and disease. In: L. Berkowitz (Ed.), *Advances in experimental social psychology* (Vol. 22). San Diego: Academic Press.

Polivy, J. (1990). Inhibition of internally-cued behavior. In: E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), *Handbook of motivation and cognition* (Vol. 2, pp. 131—147). New York: Guilford.

Rachman, S., & de Silva, P. (1978). Abnormal and normal obessions. *Behaviour Research and Therapy*, 16: pp. 233—248
DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(78)90022-0

Rachman, S., & Hodgson, R. J. (1980). *Obsessions and compulsions*. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Reed, G. F. (1985). *Obsessional experience and compulsive behavior*. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Tait, R., & Silver, R. C. (1989). Coming to terms with major negative life events. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), *Unintended thought* (pp. 351—382). New York: Guilford.

Turner, S . M., Beidel, D. C., & Nathan, R. S . (1985). Biological factors in obsessive-compulsive disorders. *Psychological Bulletin*, 97: pp. 430—450.
DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.97.3.430

Wegner, D. M., Schneider, D. J., Carter, S., 111, & White, L. (1987). Paradoxical effects of thought suppression. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, 53: pp. 5—13.
DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.5

Wegner, D. M. (1992). *You Can't Always Think What You Want: Problems in the Suppression of Unwanted Thoughts*. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25: pp. 193—225
DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60284-1
> 4 votes

---
Tags: motivation, behavior
---


# Question
Title: Is there a (evolutionary) purpose of self-pity?
I stumbled across the quote from Charlie Munger;

> Generally speaking, envy, resentment, revenge and self-pity are disastrous modes of thought, self-pity gets pretty close to paranoia, and paranoia is one of the very hardest things to reverse, you do not want to drift into self-pity.

And while there seems to be a basic agreement that emotions in general have an evolutionary advantage to *"anticipate and solve problems and avoid potential pitfalls"*, I was wondering which positive effects the *"disastrous modes of thought"* might have.

The discussion on envy clearly shows that there is a envy-spectrum. And certain modes of envy do contain a positive effect.

And while revenge might not lead to peace and harmony I understand its connection from a the evolutionary point of view.

But what purpose does self-pity have? Why do we feel it?

# Answer
**Short answer**
Self-pity may not have any evolutionary benefit, but may instead be part of the social capabilities allowing to feel empathy. Empathy in turn is a crucial component in social interactions. The development of strong social skills in early Hominids is believed to have paved the way for evolution of *Homo sapiens*, arguably the most successful species to roam the world today.

**Background**
For a trait to be evolutionary beneficial, it should increase reproductive success. Indeed, self-pity may not have a lot of benefit in that regard, especially when depressive thoughts arise. Note that Mr. Munger, who claims that self-pity is disastrous and paranoid, is a business man and may associate such feelings more from the impact it can have on productive human capabilities rather than re-productive ones.

However, self-pity may be a\[n unwanted\] side-effect of being able to feel **compassion**, *i.e.*, the feeling of distress in connection with another person's suffering. In general, self-pity may be the collateral result of being able to allow man to feel **empathy**, *i.e.*, the experience of understanding another person's condition from their perspective.

The thing is, being a parent, that kids do not feel a lot of empathy. Especially young kids (\<2 years) lack the empathy we see in most adults (barred those with *e.g.* autism spectrum disorder). Kids do, however, feel a lot of self-pity :) Self-pity seems to be an inborn, relatively unsophisticated emotion. Later, when they grow up, they will develop these egocentric feelings into empathy, by projecting their own emotion (self-pity) onto other people (feeling sorry for someone else). These emotions have to be developed and nurtured through social interactions. Admittedly, I am not a psychologist or evolutionary biologist, but I do reckon that feelings of self-pity are a precursor for feelings of sympathy and compassion and, on a grander scale, for feelings of empathy.

Empathy is believed to be a critical factor in enabling humans and other primates to socially interact with each other (De Waal, 2012). In turn, the social behavior in humans is considered to have been a crucial trait that lead to the success of the human species (Byrne & Whiten, 1989). Social interactions likely helped our ancestors to form social groups, such as extended families and coalitions that promote higher rates of survival and reproduction. Enhanced social structures allowed for the sharing of knowledge across generations. The increasing size of such social groups in turn entailed further social brain development, ultimately giving rise to the present form of the highly social brain of humans (source: Huffington Post). **Frans de Waal** has written extensively about the mechanisms and benefits of empathy in primates.

<sub>**References**
**-** Machiavellian Intelligence, Oxford Science Publications (1989)
**-** De Waal, *Science* (2012); **336**(6083): 874-6</sub>
> 5 votes

---
Tags: emotion, evolution, self
---


# Question
Title: What is the name of the "Things are more visible once you learn about them" phenomenon?
(Excuse the horrible title of this question. I just can't find the proper (?) words. Please edit as pleased.)

It happens many times to me that when I learn about something (e.g. a word, a concept, etc), I suddenly start to see it in many places. This is not due to a change in external circumstances but to "the way you look at things".

For example, I recently learned the word "oftentimes". I was not aware it existed before. And yet, I suddenly started to see it in many places, so that it caughts my attention. Naturally, people did not suddenly started to use this word, so this was clearly a change in my **perception**, due to "conceptual learning".

My question is, **is there a word for this psychological phenomenon?** I hardly find the proper words to search for this, so my efforts at the moment have been pointless.

# Answer
> 7 votes
The scenario you describe is sometimes called the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon.

> Baader-Meinhof is the phenomenon where one stumbles upon some obscure piece of information—often an unfamiliar word or name—and soon afterwards encounters the same subject again, often repeatedly.

The more scientifically accepted name for this cognitive bias seems to be **'frequency illusion'**.

> The illusion in which a word, a name, or other thing that has recently come to one's attention suddenly seems to appear with improbable frequency shortly afterwards\[.\]

As to why it occurs, this article seems to state a combination of selective attention (or attentional control) and confirmation bias:

> One, your brain seems to be excited by the fact that you've learned something new, and selective attention occurs. Your brain subconsciously thinks, "Hey, that's awesome! I'm going to look for that thing without actually thinking about it." So now that you're looking for it, you find it. To make it all the more powerful, confirmation bias occurs after seeing it even once or twice. In other words, you start agreeing with yourself that, yup, you're definitely seeing it more

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, learning, terminology, language
---


title: Relative distance

text:
# Question
Title: Relative distance
Humans have an intuition of when two objects or places are close or far away from each other which is seems to be relative rather than absolute. One might say that Germany is close to France, my house is close to the supermarket, etc., and then say that two plants in the backyard are far from each other.

Even when this is subjective, based on what do we classify two objects as being far, close, or somewhere in-between? Is it just the the size of the objects? what about objects of very different sizes like a house and a pen?

What about the distance from us to the objects? Would we consider two trees to be close when we are very far away, but then consider them far away when we are close to them?

What are the parameters that we base this decision on?

How would a computer classify two objects in such a way that it "mimics" the human decision.

# Answer
Long comment, so writing as an answer... I have to agree with @StevenJeuris: use context.

For example, you could establish some magnitude scale for a comparison (this is your context), then compare the distance between objects as a percentage of the magnitude.

Which magnitude to use? This is *entirely* subjective. In human behavior, individuals certainly can and do disagree on whether objects are close or not (depending on the context they are considering). An astrophysicist may consider any object on a single planet "close" to each other, while a microbiologist may consider any separation that can be seen with the naked eye to be "far".

To answer "what parameters do you base the decision on," consider the question "close as compared to what?" For the example of trees above, you may consider it as "close/far, as compared to my distance from the tree," but again, there are more complex pieces (personal history, etc) that also come into play. You *could* program that (for the astrophysicist, keep the default comparative distance as an interplanetary or interstellar distance), but you'd have to make an active decision regarding the purpose of your program.

Perhaps one other thing to remember: there is no "normal", necessarily. Everyone can look at comparative distance differently, and there isn't much of an objective standard to dictate someones comparison as "right" or "wrong", there is simply what they are comparing to (and then we may be able to get into "correct" and "incorrect" comparative distances).
> 2 votes

# Answer
If understood your question well you are looking for depth perception:

> Depth perception is the visual ability to perceive the world in three dimensions (3D) and the distance of an object.

The depth perception is achieved by specific cues in our environment :

> **Perspective**
>
> The property of parallel lines converging in the distance, at infinity, allows us to reconstruct the relative distance of two parts of an object, or of landscape features. An example would be standing on a straight road, looking down the road, and noticing the road narrows as it goes off in the distance.
>
> **Relative size**
>
> If two objects are known to be the same size (e.g., two trees) but their absolute size is unknown, relative size cues can provide information about the relative depth of the two objects. If one subtends a larger visual angle on the retina than the other, the object which subtends the larger visual angle appears closer.
>
> **Aerial perspective**
>
> Due to light scattering by the atmosphere, objects that are a great distance away have lower luminance contrast and lower color saturation.
>
> **Occultation**
>
> Occultation (also referred to as interposition) happens when near surfaces overlap far surfaces. If one object partially blocks the view of another object, humans perceive it as closer.
>
> **Elevation**
>
> When an object is visible relative to the horizon, we tend to perceive objects which are closer to the horizon as being farther away from us, and objects which are farther from the horizon as being closer to us

see the complete list of cues at wiki.

For furter reading see Visual Thinking: for Design By Colin Ware
> 2 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, perception
---


# Question
Title: Name or theory for a particular phenomenon pertaining to ideological possession
Is there a name or a theory for when someone alters a truth to strengthen their point(delusion)?

For instance, remember when President Trump carried out his plan to deport "illegal" immigrants and the lefties painted a different picture by their "Day without immigrant" story to portray the administrators as cold mean bullies, as opposed to saying "Day without ILLEGAL immigrants"?

It is a phenomenon where individuals will consciously alter something, not intentionally to lie malevolently, but strengthen their (obviously) weak point(something to do with ideological possession).

Is there an official name or theory for this, like, "So-and-so's theory of such and such" or is there rather a study with conclusive data/research on the phenomenon?

# Answer
There is a fallacy in thinking called "confirmation bias" in which one only looks at or perceives "facts" in light of, or to support, their pre-conceived notions. Here is the definition of *confirmation bias*:

> The tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.

See confirmation bias definition.
Of interest see also article in Psychology Today
> 1 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Does neuroplasticity cancel the notion of "aptitudes" as a natural gift?
Considering the definition of neuroplasticity as the capability of our brain to rewire itself by forming new neural connections throughout the life, it seems to me that our brain is like a programmable computer and all we have to do is to input new codes and debug/delete/re-program what we have internalized from our parents and the environment.

Having that in mind, this notion that people are being born by some special gifts called "aptitudes" loses its credibility. According to what aptitude pros say: "Aptitudes are natural talents born differently in every individual and they are special abilities for doing, or learning to do, certain kinds of things which is unique in every person."

It seems to me that what we have in our unconscious "to some extent" can be controlled by what we consciously decide to do and therefore, neuroplasticity seems more true to me than being born by special gifts called "aptitudes". Am I correct? or, there is still more to know about the relationship between "neuroplasticity" and "aptitudes"?

# Answer
To elaborate upon @Rooirokbokkie's comment, neuroplasticity is not exactly like changing computer code, because the brain is not a computer. The brain performs computations, but thinking of it as analogical to consumer CPUs and their Von-Neumann architecture is limiting. For more information on this idea, see "Moving Beyond Metaphors: Understanding The Mind For What It Is" by Chris Eliasmith.

The most important difference is that not everything in your brain is re-wireable. Related questions that explore this are:
> 2 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, cognitive-neuroscience, personality
---


title: How to use a QUEST staircase in 2-AFC?

text:
# Question
Title: How to use a QUEST staircase in 2-AFC?
Firstly, I need to declare that I am not psychologyst, however I am currently working on visual recognition research. To be precise, I working on **face recognition deficits** in Autism Spectrum Disorder. I am in charge of doing an experiment but I feel I come to a dead end even though I didn't even start with it.

As I mentioned above, I investigate face recognition deficits in ASD. I will use faces and objects. For this task I will use **2-AFC match-to-sample task**. I need to morph faces and objects and for this purpose I need to use **a QUEST staircase** for measure morph distance at which participants could discriminate between items with 75% accuracy.

Here is the problem: **I don't know how to use a QUEST staircase**. Or better say, I don't know how can I decide how many trials should I have, which morph distance should I use between items, how should I know which morph distracter should I use, should I use in the beginning easy test pairs and what exactly does it means, is 85%-morph distracter is an easy pair, etc.? As you can see I don't know to do an experiment, it is almost completely new field for me.

I am trying to find my answers in: Psychophysics: A Practical Introduction by Kingdom & Prins; Experimental Design by Cunningham & Wallraven; Visual Psychophysics by Lu & Dosher just to mention a few. However, I wish to find some book or article where I can see an example step by step how to make a similar experiment, i.e. AFC. I know there is bunch of information but I am just overwhelmed and lost.

**What literature/ web sites/ blogs etc. can you suggest to me? How/ where to start?**

# Answer
There is a lot going on in your question. QUEST, as well as many other adaptive procedures, is well suited for a task like estimating morph distance in a 2-AFC paradigm. There are, however, a couple of points in your question, that make me think QUEST is not a good paradigm.

The QUEST paradigm is designed around setting the signal level to find the the "sweet point" of the psychometric function (something like the signal level that maximizes the Fisher Information). I am not aware of any psychometric function that has a sweet point of 75% correct (most are 90+ percent correct).

The second issue, is you mention a fixed number of trials. Typically, QUEST is used with a stopping rule that specifies the expected variance of the estimate (i.e., you run enough trials until the CI on the estimated threshold is small enough).

The easiest way to run these types of experiments is to use software written by someone else (that you trust). Pelli was involved in the early development of both the QUEST procedure and the Psych Toolbox for MATLAB/Octave. The Python based PsychoPy also provides the QUEST procedure and is commonly used.
> 7 votes

# Answer
Start here: Adaptive Psychophysical Procedures (Treutwein, 1995) \[PDF\]

If you want to get fancy, I suggest a more contemporary approach for the staircase called *accelerated stochastic approximation*. You just need to figure out how to implement the equation and how to compute the scores, *d*-prime, etc.

Another classic, more general (ask a librarian): https://www.amazon.com/Signal-Detection-Theory-Psychophysics-Marvin/dp/0932146236
> 4 votes

# Answer
There are numerous studies that reveal contradictory data about face-to-face in autism. Continues the research paradigm that contrasts faces and objects. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174902/

I think the best text I've found to get started is: this:https://psych.nyu.edu/pelli/pubs/watson1983quest.pdf

Software: http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~ndjw1/bookmarks/Stats/Software-Statistical\_computing/Bayesian\_software/index.html (Some links do not work but you can find this software by google)

Differing sources indicate that differences or difficulties in looking at the face in autism are to a greater extent related to **communication processes**.

Frith, Uta. (1989). Autism: Explaining the enigma. New York: Blackwell. Page 199 et seq.

(Essential book which I recommend starting a task about autism.)

This can constitute a powerful critic to this type of investigations today.

In relation to the above it is considered that the investigation of these factors should be considered in a **communication context** that on the other hand is not incompatible with research on basic processes.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: experimental-psychology, vision, psychophysics
---


# Question
Title: Is there any update on the hypothesis on primary emotions corresponding on "love"?
Fisher (2000) hypothesized that sex drive, attraction and attachment are the three primary emotions correspond to mating, reproduction and parenting behaviors; those are three discrete constellations of brain circuits, and triggered (and therefore measured and experimented) by a vast of hormones. However, the paper was published 17 years ago, contains a number of hypotheses and self-citations, and its methods mostly come from demography, not cognitive science or evolutionary.

Do you know any update on this hypothesis?

<sub>**Source:** Helen Fisher (2000), Lust, Attraction, Attachment: Biology and Evolution of the Three Primary Emotion Systems for Mating, Reproduction, and Parenting, Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 25:1, 96-104</sub>

# Answer
> 5 votes
This hypothesis relies on a number of ideas that are difficult to defend in light of the past decade of emotion research.

Most notably, there is almost no evidence of modular "emotion systems" in the brain that coordinate some sort of stereotyped emotional response (   ).

Moreover, rigidity in responding is often related to *reduced* evolutionary fitness. High fitness species have behavioral and genetic flexibility (see the evo-bio literature on degeneracy and variability).

Moreover, there's strong evidence that the brain is predictive, not reactive (for a starting point on this idea, see ), which rejects the traditional stimulus-response paradigm (e.g., "triggering" a circuit).

The theory also relies on an outdated understanding of neurotransmitter functions (e.g.,  ).

**Overall**, this theory needs to be heavily revised in order to account for contemporary findings.

---
Tags: motivation, physical-attraction, attraction
---


# Question
Title: Double blindedness in a fully remote trial
We are planning to do a *fully remote clinical trial* to test an online intervention for *depression*. We will be using a self-rated PHQ-9 at base-line, post intervention, and 90 days follow-up to test the efficacy of the intervention.

The participants wouldn't know if they are assigned to the experimental or the control group (so it is definitely single-blind). Since there is no investigator who will be assessing the depression severity, there is no source of any human bias there (since double-blind trials are designed to eliminate investigator bias).

I was wondering if this can be called a *double-blind study*. I have seen other fully remote trials with a similar design but they haven't mentioned the term double-blind anywhere. Considering the fact that it is the gold standard, I am surprised that investigators did not mention it in their paper. That is the source of my confusion.

Any thoughts are welcome. Thanks in advance.

# Answer
Double blind basically consists when the patient does not know to which condition it belongs (control, treatment A, treatment B) and the professional does not know to which group he/she is administering the treatment (control, treatment A, treatment B).

The double-blind designation is not based on the fact that the initial level of depression is not assessed. (I guess you know it and it has been erroneously specified in the question).

In online studies this denomination is not usually used although of course it is not incompatible. (The issue is that this denomination is not usually used because the trial is not common either).

In short I do not see problem with the double blind designation.

On the other hand, it would be necessary to pay close attention to the clinical level and the characteristics of the intervention (you do not specify, is the intervention also remote?).

In any case sounds very interesting.
> 5 votes

# Answer
If the investigator knows what group the subject is in and then has any interaction with the subject, it is not double blind since the investigator can, potentially unintentionally, influence the subject. The fact that the measures are objective is irrelevant.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: clinical-psychology, bias
---


# Question
Title: Success rates or reviews of Brain Working Recursive Therapy (BWRT), and number of sessions needed on average
Brain Working Recursive Therapy (BWRT), introduced by hypnotherapist Terrence Watts in 2011, is a brand new form of therapy. Hence, my internet search doesn't seem to give me any idea of how successful it really is. Here's a link to the official page of BWRT: https://www.bwrt.org/. It hasn't got a wikipidea page yet.

How many sessions of BWRT does one need in general to cure one specific problem?

If you could cite any links or even your personal experience, I'd greatly appreciate it!

# Answer
Looking at the client testimonials on the website you provided it looks like it varies from 1 session to a few more. Like any other therapy it seems to depend on the client and problem being dealt with.

You could ask the therapist how many sessions you are likely to need for your problem in order to find out whether you would like to go ahead or not.

I am really interested in this and I am going to look at this therapy in some detail as it is interesting to me considering it is supposedly not a remodel of NLP, EFT, TFT, WSN, SD, EMDR, Hypnosis, Reiki, Meridian/Energy therapies, Noesiology, Chinosis or any other style of therapy according to the home page.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-neuroscience, brain, hypnosis
---


# Question
Title: What Ethical and Legal Provisions Release One from "Mandatory Reporting"?
# Question

What provisions exist that can be applied to provide assurance to a client or patient that they can talk, "off the record", "without repercussions", and that nothing will be documented?

# Context

A client is experiencing considerable difficulties navigating the distinctions between ideation and intent, (thoughts regarding suicide, retaliation, harming others, etc).

However, they feel they cannot be open about these issues, because of the extremity of the reactions that are possible, (hospitalization, etc).

# Answer
You would need to seek the professional advice of someone in the legal profession for this but as far as I am aware there are no provisions releasing anyone from legal duties under mandatory reporting requirements.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, clinical-psychology, ideation, confidence, ethics
---


# Question
Title: Ambiguity in self-evaluating Likert-scale questions
I am concerned that when Likert-scale type questions are used in self-evaluation questions, the results are ambiguous and would like to know if it's possible to address this ambiguity.

# Interpersonal Reactivity Index

Although I have seen this in multiple questionnaires, in this question, I would like to focus on it's use in the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), which is used to measure empathy. The index is a set of questions that must be answered according to a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from "Does Not Describe Me Well" to "Describes Very Well".

# Ambiguity Concerns

Consider this question from the IRI:

> 1. I daydream and fantasize, with some regularity, about things that might happen to me.

In this case, my concern is the temporal descriptor "with some regularity". How is someone filling this survey supposed to determine what the population mean of "regular" means? Is it once a week? Once a month?

I have similar concerns about the following question:

> 2. I often have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me.

What is "often"? What depth/duration do the "tender, concerned feelings" require to qualify for this question?

# How to Address Ambiguity

How is this ambiguity of language, in regards to personal assessment, addressed in these types of surveys? It seems like a better designed survey would first try to establish the person's view of the general population in terms of range of feelings it's trying to describe, as well as the duration and frequency. Consequently, the person's assessment of the general population could be taken into account for their own personal assessment.

Have concerns similar to this been addressed before in other contexts?

# Answer
I believe that in the first part there is some confusion of empathy and self-concept ("Does Not Describe Me Well" to "Describes Very Well"), although the basic statement refers to empathy that question is made to measure self-concept of empathy. The vast majority of tests (which do not measure performance) measure self-concept dimensions. Of course you can not measure empathy by a test, what you measure are dimensions of self-concept in relation to empathy. Empathy could be measured through behavioral registers (see attachment studies).

With regard to the second part:

* Ideally the test should not be ambiguous in any item (although it is common for people to comment in this regard).
* Given the impossibility in most of the tests to request frequencies of behavior are usually asked similar questions.
* It must be taken into account that these questions are made in test format likert, it would be a serious mistake to ask similar questions in dichotomous format.
* If there is ambiguity in the test this has to be reflected psychometrically as a **low correlation and error variance**, provided that questions are asked that correlate with the reference question, that is to say, that usually several questions of this type are made and their Relationships when designing the test (you can also study it on your own for a class work).
* The administration of the test must be performed under conditions that allow questions to be asked and the professional (or student who must know the test in detail) should clarify any doubts to the person to whom the test is administered, therefore in some countries, someone who has not studied psychology can not administer or correct (legally or validly) a psychological test.

Personally, when I require empathy measurements I always use the TECA (acronym in Spanish) https://web.teaediciones.com/TECA--TEST-DE-EMPATIA-COGNITIVA-Y-AFECTIVA.aspx It allows to measure cognitive and affective components (essential in the present moment): adoption of perspectives, emotional compression, empathic stress and empathic joy. Try to translate.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, measurement, empathy
---


# Question
Title: Will some people ever be able to make our dreams visible on a screen?
There are many SF-films in which dreams of people can be seen by others on a TV-screen. Don't you have to put so many information gathering devices in a person's brain for this to accomplish, that dream can't enter your brain anymore?

# Answer
As @AaronWeinberg stated in the comments, just like many other technologies within Science Fiction, the Science Fiction of viewing dreams on screen has started to become Science Fact.

Rebecca Morelle, a science reporter for the BBC World Service wrote an article about researchers in Japan who used MRI scans to reveal the images that people were seeing as they entered into an early stage of sleep.

From the articles I have seen, it looks like the research has been led by Professor Yukiyasu Kamitani, from the ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories, in Kyoto. It seems that the research started in 2005 with an article titled *Decoding the visual and subjective contents of the human brain* (Kamitani & Tong, 2005) followed by the article *Neural Code Converter for Visual Image Representation* (Yamada, et al. 2011), follwed then by *Decoding visual experience from the human brain* (Kamitani, 2012) and then the source of the first linked article *Neural Decoding of Visual Imagery During Sleep* (Horikawa, et al. 2013)

The results of the first study within the 2005 article demonstrated that

> fMRI activity patterns in early visual areas, including primary visual cortex (V1), contain detailed orientation information that can reliably predict subjective perception.

The 2011 article says

> \[T\]he neural code converter may provide a basis for brain-to-brain communication of visual images.

The 2012 article says

> Despite the wide-spread use of human neuroimaging, its potential to read out, or "decode", mental contents from brain activity has not been fully explored. In this talk, I present methods for decoding visual representations from fMRI activity patterns based on machine learning techniques.

and the final article in 2013 says

> Our findings demonstrate that specific visual experience during sleep is represented by brain activity patterns shared by stimulus perception, providing a means to uncover subjective contents of dreaming using objective neural measurement.

## References

Horikawa, T., et al. (2013) *Neural Decoding of Visual Imagery During Sleep*. Science 340(6132): pp. 639—642
DOI: 10.1126/science.1234330

Kamitani, Y. & Tong, F. (2005) *Decoding the visual and subjective contents of the human brain*. Nature Neuroscience 8(5): pp. 679—685
DOI: 10.1038/nn1444

Kamitani, Y. (2012) *Decoding visual experience from the human brain*. Proceeding MM '12 (Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on Multimedia). New York:Association for Computing Machinery pp. 5—6
DOI: 10.1145/2393347.2393353

Yamada, K., et al. (2011) *Neural Code Converter for Visual Image Representation*. 2011 International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in NeuroImaging: pp. 37—40
DOI: 10.1109/PRNI.2011.13
> 2 votes

---
Tags: dreams
---


# Question
Title: Where do spatial dimensions enter in single compartment neuronal models?
I am trying to understand how the length and diameter of a compartment are specified. For example, in the Hodgkin–Huxley model, we only have conductances specified in $\rm mS/cm^2$. How do you specify that a compartment is say $100 \mu\rm m$ long?

# Answer
In a single-compartment model, you do not have spatial dimensions. Sometimes this is not a problem, for example in the stomatogastric ganglion of *C. borealis*, in which the neurons have a mechanism to scale the signal with distance by modifying the "effective reversal potential" (Otopalik et al., 2017). In the case of one of these models, it would be sensible to either make an approximation of the cell surface area (Liu et al., 1998 for example) or to use parameters which are normalized by the surface area, to whose explicit numerical value we remain agnostic. One would do this by using a membrane capacitance in microfarads per centimeter squared for instance (typically about unity) and then use maximal conductances in millisiemens per centimeter squared.

This way, the natural units for current divided by capacitance are mV * mS/cm^2 * cm^2/uF, or equivalent to mV/ms.

If you wanted to model multiple neurons with a decay factor, you could either use the cable equation and explicitly input the current into the descending neuron following that, or make a neuron with multiple compartments.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: measurement, theoretical-neuroscience
---


# Question
Title: How do the motor system and Central Pattern Generators interact?
Central Pattern Generators are populations of neurons found in the spinal chord that assist in the creation of rhythmic movements. See "Human spinal locomotor control is based on flexibly organized burst generators" by Danner et al, for a recent publication on the topic. How does the brain-based motor system interact with these pattern generators? Do they operate mostly independently or is there some feedback being communicated? If there is feedback, what type of information is it transmitting?

# Answer
Descending inputs onto the central pattern generating circuit provide stimulus in the form of neuromodulatory chemicals and synaptic currents (Marder 2012). The leech heartbeat pacemaker and the stomatogastric ganglion in crustaceans are well-studied model systems that show descending input from higher functions.

Specifically, in humans, we are not sure. This type of question is best answered in invertebrates for the time being. In invertebrate electrophysiology, the circuit can be "decentralized," by chemically or physically destroying the inputs from the ascending ganglia. In the stomatogastric ganglion, this results in a less-stable but still very robust central pattern (Hamood et al., 2015).
> 4 votes

---
Tags: theoretical-neuroscience, motor
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible to increase/train your intelligence?
Is it possible to raise your IQ (best correlate for g I know of)? Does brain training help?

I have never taken a psychologist administered IQ test before, but I did take a reputable online IQ test and experienced a shift of 20+ IQ points over a two/three year period.
I didn't do the tests incessantly, did it once, then revisited the test a few years later, and I was testing 20+ points higher than my previous score.

# Answer
> 1 votes
Here is the first article that popped up on a Google search of your first question. It poses your questions to 5 "experts" (psychology professors).

The subtlety in their responses comes from the fact that an IQ measurement is an imperfect number meant to capture some sort of underlying construct (and that this underlying construct can constantly be under debate). So, when one raises one's score: did you get smarter, or just become a better test taker? I won't answer one way or the other, but I will quote one of the experts (discussing IQ training with children):

> ... what I would say, is we didn't make the children smarter, but we taught them how to use what they have more efficiently, and better.

**So yes, you can raise your IQ score**. Now what does that imply? That depends on whom you ask...

---
Tags: intelligence, iq
---


# Question
Title: Is speech perceived as set of phonemes by human?
I am currently trying to understand how speech is being perceived and understood. I am currently aware of the workings of inner ears and the basilar membrane and its frequency filtering, but going from an acoustic signal to something meaningful such as perceiving speech is still very unclear. I am working with implementing speech recognition software, and what we do is recognising basic speech units namely phonemes, but it this is how the auditory system perceives speech?.. is speech perceived as basic units, or just something man made? or is the perception of speech (very) different, and how different?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Phonemes are the smallest units of speech sound, usually about 20 to 60 in number, and different for each language (). They are what letter are to words, actually alphabetic writing systems are derived from phonemes (). A group of phonemes together form a chunk, that represent a word. These chunks are arbitrary and are created by culture, and are learned by humans from very early age. Furthermore these chunks point to specific concepts that are stored in our semantic memory.

> **Concepts** arise as abstractions or generalisations from experience; from the result of a transformation of existing ideas; or from innate properties. A concept is instantiated by all of its actual or potential instances, whether these are things in the real world or other ideas.
>
> **Semantic** memory refers to general world knowledge that we have accumulated throughout our lives. This general knowledge (facts, ideas, meaning and concepts) is intertwined in experience and dependent on **culture**.

---
Tags: perception, hearing, speech
---


# Question
Title: What is "intelligence" in "artificial intelligence"?
As far as Artificial Intelligence is concerned, what is "intelligence"? The definition I see on various sites like Wikipedia:

> Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including as one's capacity for logic, understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, planning, creativity, and problem solving

Merriam Webster:

> 1. The ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason.
> 2. The ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (such as tests).

etc seem to be a bit broad and nebulous, and not necessarily what I would be thinking of if I wanted to build an AI, or evaluate the intelligence of non human life-forms.

The definition I currently go with is:

> General problem solving ability.

However, I'm not sure if this is broad enough to encompass all we think of when we say "intelligence" in the context of AI, or what we would be looking for in "intelligent" life-forms. What's a useful definition of intelligence. Broad enough to encompass all the we consider when we think intelligence, yet narrow enough to exclude particular idiosyncrasies of specific intelligent agents? A universal definition of intelligence applicable to all intelligent agents.

# Answer
> 1 votes
This is a very broad and not well defined issue, but two theories that may help you to get a better understanding are the following :

**Triarchic theory of intelligence by Robert J. Sternberg**

> Sternberg's definition of human intelligence is "(a) mental activity directed toward purposive adaptation to, selection and shaping of, real-world environments relevant to one's life" (Sternberg, 1985, p. 45).

Sternberg divides intelligence into three major subtheories:

> **Componential – analytical subtheory**
>
> Analytical giftedness is influential in being able to take apart problems and being able to see solutions not often seen. Unfortunately, individuals with only this type are not as adept at creating unique ideas of their own.
>
> **Experiential – creative subtheory**
>
> Sternberg splits the role of experience into two parts: novelty and automation. A novel situation is one that you have never experienced before. People that are adept at managing a novel situation can take the task and find new ways of solving it that the majority of people would not notice (Sternberg, 1997). A process that has been automated has been performed multiple times and can now be done with little or no extra thought. Once a process is automatized, it can be run in parallel with the same or other processes.
>
> **Practical – contextual subtheory**
>
> Sternberg's third subtheory of intelligence, called practical or contextual, "deals with the mental activity involved in attaining fit to context" (Sternberg, 1985, p. 45). Through the three processes of adaptation, shaping, and selection, individuals create an ideal fit between themselves and their environment. This type of intelligence is often referred to as "street smarts." Adaptation occurs when one makes a change within oneself in order to better adjust to one's surroundings (Sternberg, 1985). For example, when the weather changes and temperatures drop, people adapt by wearing extra layers of clothing to remain warm.

**Theory of multiple intelligences by Howard Gardner**

> The theory of multiple intelligences differentiates intelligence into specific 'modalities', rather than seeing intelligence as dominated by a single general ability. Howard Gardner proposed this model in his 1983 book Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. According to Gardner, an intelligence must fulfill eight criteria: musical-rhythmic, visual-spatial, verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. He later suggested that existential and moral intelligence may also be worthy of inclusion.

# Answer
> 0 votes
In the domain of Artificial Intelligence, especially when considering the plausibility of "Superintelligence", the definition is of "intelligence" is under active debate. For an overview of some of these arguments, see the provocatively named "Superintelligence is a free lunch, and there are no free lunches" by Erik Hoel.

> But clearly rating a superintelligence using an IQ test is useless. We wouldn’t use Einstein as a metric for a real superintelligence of the variety Bostrom is worried about any more than we’d use the mouse as a metric for Einstein. So clearly the danger isn’t just from an AI with an exceptionally high IQ (since it’s not like high IQ people run the world anyways). Rather, the danger comes from the possibility of a runaway process of a learning algorithm that creates a god-like AI. To examine that we need a more abstract and highly generalizable notion of intelligence.
>
> A definition of intelligence is actually given by Legg and Hutter in their paper “Universal intelligence: a definition of machine intelligence.” Taking their point broadly, the intelligence of an agent is the sum of the performance of that agent on all possible problems, weighted by the simplicity of those problems (simple problems are worth more). A superintelligent entity would then be something that scores extremely high on this scale.
>
> So universal intelligence is at least somewhat describable. Interestingly, Einstein scores pretty low on this metric. In fact, every human would score pretty low on this metric. This is because the space of all problems include things that human beings are really bad at, like picking out the same two color pixels on a TV screen (and three pixels triads, and so on).
>
> We can also define intelligence broadly as: given a particular goal, the agent who needs to achieve that goal learns everything that’s necessary to achieve that goal with a high probability (which might mean achieving other goals en route to the main goal, etc).

---
Tags: intelligence, artificial-intelligence
---


# Question
Title: When a group of people laugh, people will instinctively look at the person they feel closest to in that group
Many people online seem to claim that:

> When a group of people laugh, people will instinctively look at the person they feel closest to in that group.

You can find the claim in **31 Psychological Life Hacks That You Can Exploit To Give Yourself An Advantage In Social Settings** by thoughtcatalog.com.

Thoughtcatalog.com wrote under the claim:

> Read: **wanna know who wants to bone who? Look at who they look at when everyone laughs.**

It seems they were referring to a book, but I couldn't find it online. The claim is also found by distracity in a post showing psychological life hacks that'll make you more successful.

The claim is widely and internationaly believed, a simple google query will show you.

Is it true? If so, I'm looking for a reference or some explanation for this.

# Answer
I suspect the claims were distorted versions of what was found in the study below. It supports a weaker form of the above claims: the idea that **a person would often look at someone they are socially close to when laughing in a group setting, but not necessarily at *the socially closest* person**.

From McAdams, et. al. (1984):

> \[High scores on\] intimacy motivation was positively associated with greater levels of laughter, smiling, and eye contact.
>
> Along with non verbal behaviors \[...\], looking, laughter, and smiling have been classified as cues of \[...\] "intimacy".
>
> Harper et al. (1978) conclude: "With some exceptions and qualifications, the research to date shows a direct relationship between looking and positive interpersonal sentiment" (p. 189)
>
> Rubin (1970) found that the amount of time in which the couple engaged in mutual eye contact during a laboratory session was positively correlated with their score on a questionnaire measure of love intensity.
>
> Observing adults interacting in dyads, Rosenfeld (1966) found that the frequency of smiling significantly differentiated between those subjects instructed to seek approval and those instructed to avoid approval from the other.

Anecdotally, it would seem very strange that in a group setting with multiple acquaintances (for example at a dinner table with friends/family), two people would only look at each other every time a joke is made. In settings where social closeness disparity is larger (e.g. at a comedy club show) it seems obvious that two people who went to the show together would look at each other when a joke is made.

The larger point is the usefulness of the laughter-eye-contact response. The response would be useful to gauge more general "who **knows** who" information, but would probably not be specific to any previous or desired sexual encounters.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology
---


title: Psychology of brand names

text:
# Question
Title: Psychology of brand names
Marketers use the fact that different letters are associated with different mental images and emotions when they create **brand names**.

> Studies show that letters and their combinations produce different connotations in terms of size, shape, brightness and overall impression of an object. The letters `<a>` and `<o>` symbolize depth and size, while `<i>` evokes the mental image of something small. Among consonants, soft, voiced sounds such as `<d>`, `<l>`, `<m>`, `<n>`, `<w>` can be distinguised from hard, voiceless sound such as `<f>`, `<k>`, `<r>`, `<t>`, `<p>`. The soft consonants evoke associations of harmony, softness, gentleness and femininity, while the hard cononants are connected to hardness, dynamism, vigor, strength and masculinty.
>
> (translated from http://comrecon.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/namen-sind-wegweiser-bei-konsumentscheidungen-naming-branding/)

On some other brand name blog I read that the letter `<b>` is associated with trustworthiness.

**What are those studies, and what else has been found regarding the psychology of letters (graphemes) and sounds (phonemes)?**

# Answer
What you are looking for is usually considered within **synesthesia**, specifically auditory-visual synesthesia.

Usually these topics are developed in "commercial or industrial psychology" in a general way and more specifically by psychologists incorporated in **marketing**, these last studies are often not published, are made for the best initial orientation of the product with a line of consumers.

Here is a general book: https://books.google.es/books?id=ESH7AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA812&lpg=PA812&dq=psychology+synesthesia&source=bl&ots=zC3KmJPT2h&sig=pGlZ9qPf1d14T7i96AL8OmMvVSo&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnYvRyanVAhUNfFAKHbX-CV84ChDoAQhWMAY#v=onepage&q&f=false

It seems that what ultimately interests most is why (cerebrally) and what repercussions (especially in clinical) has this phenomenon.

You will not find it difficult to find end-of-grade papers, there are also theses.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, behavioral-economics
---


title: Active Learning vs. Engaged Learning

text:
# Question
Title: Active Learning vs. Engaged Learning
I have seen both of these in different research publications, but after searching for a while, I was not able to find the difference. I'll appreciate it if you explain the difference and give me some references to learn more about the difference.

Some links to publications about Active learning:

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED449714

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED424243

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049

Some links to publications about engaged learning:

https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-827165091/engaged-learning-are-we-all-on-the-same-page

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ871317

https://search.proquest.com/openview/ee56bfc90cac37ad96a4f6be61918f02/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=29705

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3200/CTCH.55.1.5-18

# Answer
One of the publications on engaged learning that you provide (the "Engaged Learning: Are We All on the Same Page?" one) seems to answer your question (here is a fuller version of it). The quote that addresses your question is given below (bold added).

> Many of these concepts of engagement cover ground similar to that covered by initiatives in higher education known by other names:
>
> * **Engagement with the learning process is similar to *active learning*.**
> * Engagement with the object of study is similar to *experiential learning*.
> * Engagement with contexts generally is similar to *multidisciplinary learning*.
> * Engagement with social and civic contexts is similar to *service learning*.

Thus, the engagement seems to encompass active learning in that active learning is the piece of engagement related to the learning process.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, learning, educational-psychology, study-cognitive-sciences
---


# Question
Title: Can animals develop mental disorders that are unique or similar to our own?
I just had a discussion with someone about mental illnesses in people (specifically talking about Capgraw delusion, alien hand syndrome, and walking corpse syndrome) and how some people's lives can be ruined by mental disorders.

Then I had a thought: Do animals also get mental disorders? I don't think I've ever heard anybody suggest it before...we all just assume animals are just animals and do animal stuff. Some people might say, "Oh, that cat is crazy." but maybe it's actually suffering from a mental disorder?

I mean, we all know animals can suffer dramatic trauma and be psychologically scarred by it...but humans can seemingly develop mental disorders without previous physical trauma and we also develop very odd mental disorders (like Capgraw delusion).

So logically, I just have to wonder if animals can develop mental disorders that are unique or similar to our own.

# Answer
> 5 votes
In the case of animals it is not common to refer to mental disorders, there is more commonly talked about behavior problems, (it is not specified in the question what kind of animals) although **in essence animals can suffer the same as a human**, sometimes the variations are huge, depends on which type of animal we refer (it is not the same to speak of chimpanzee or bonobo than of mammals or other animals).

Here are some examples of psychology (about mammals) that may be of interest, are nowadays sensitive and may even surprise some (OCD, bipolar, dementia, autism, Alzheimer, etc.).

(Ethology is the science that is responsible for the study of animal behavior, although it is not the only science that studies it, for example, in the studies of psychology there are 2 subjects in relation to animal behavior: biology that sometimes It is administered by an ethologist, and comparative psychology, the latter can receive different denominations in different countries. Professionals in charge of therapy and / or training vary widely depending on the country, some are: ethologists, veterinarians, trainers but there are many more).

* MOTOR DISORDERS, STEREOTYPIES AND OCD:

In many cases animals are found with what some people classify as motor behavior disorders, other considerations can lead to obsessive compulsive disorders. These problems may consist of a bird that can no longer fly, a dog that stores objects of a certain characteristic (without food function); or a dog that usually turns and turns on itself. These problems can be caused by restrictions on movement, for example not letting a bird fly or not respecting the bird's flight practice (there are others that are produced by the way of life and hormones).

Examples of stereotypy at the beginning of the video, Chimpance raised with artificial mother without movement and children orphaned in institutions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6sKo-OKAuE

Other examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umKQxJ\_rlO0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seWlk8B-W6w

OCD: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195561691500413

* ANXIETY AND POSTTRAUMATIC STRESS:

It is well known that dogs can develop post-traumatic stress following environmental catastrophes, for example it is well known that after floods and earthquakes many times dogs experience anxiety and flashbacks.

Of course the animals can experience stress due to mistreatment.

Interesting links: https://www.cesarsway.com/dog-behavior/anxiety/post-traumatic-stress-disorder https://www.cesarsway.com/dog-behavior/anxiety/veteran-dogs-suffering-from-ptsd http://ivcjournal.com/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-in-dogs/

* SYSTEMATIZED PROBLEMS (DISORDES) DEVELOPDEP BY LEARNING, great variety.

Attachment and sociability: See **Harlow** experiments. Aggressiveness. **Today there is widespread debate about aggressive behavior resulting from mistreatment**. Depression / defenselessness learned. No doubt the animals have emotions, in their case not usually considered depression but learned helplessness, see **Seligman** experiments, also **Seligman and Maier**.

An article I have found about it and may be interesting as well as being related to the question, but many others may be found: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Isabelle\_Veissier/publication/230851712\_Animals'\_emotions\_Studies\_in\_sheep\_using\_appraisal\_theories/links/09e41505478be19677000000/Animals-emotions-Studies-in-sheep-using-appraisal-theories.pdf

**Of course**: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kc3CAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=animals+emotions&ots=s1J20NZ2u7&sig=Jc-MAGzmDwPMwb-WWVIlJ1z8TFo#v=onepage&q=animals%20emotions&f=false

* ORGANIC DISORDERS, an incredible broad field, some examples:

Patterson, P.H. (2009). Immune involvement in **schizophrenia** and **autism**: etiology, pathology and animal models. Behav. Brain Res. 204, 313–321.

Müller, M.B. & Holsboer, F. (2006). Mice with mutations in the HPA-system as models for symptoms of **depression**. Biol. Psychiatry 59, 1104–1115.

Götz, J. & Ittner, L.M. (2008) Animal models of **Alzheimer's disease** and **frontotemporal dementia**. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 9, 532–544.

Jamain, S. (2008). Reduced social interaction and ultrasonic communication in a mouse model of monogenic heritable **autism**. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 1710–1715. Moy, S.S. & Nadler, J.J. (2008). Advances in behavioral genetics: mouse models of autism. Mol. Psychiatry 13, 4–26.

Einat, H. & Manji, H.K. (2006). Cellular plasticity cascades: genes-to-behavior pathways in animal models of **bipolar disorder**. Biol. Psychiatry 59, 1160–1171

---
Tags: animal-cognition
---


# Question
Title: Thinking Fast and Slow: Similarity of Linda problem and Dinnerware case
While reading Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" I've been stuck on the claim that Linda case and Dinnerware case have the same structure.

**Linda problem:**

> Linda is thirty-one years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in antinuclear demonstrations."
>
> "Which alternative is more probable?
>
> * Linda is a bank teller.
> * Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement.

It is well-known that the majority of respondents chooses the second options (as most plausible, though the original question is about probability).

**The Dinnerware case:**

> Being presented two sets of dinnerware:
>
> Set A: 40 pieces / Set B: 24 pieces
>
> Dinner plates: 8, all in good condition / 8, all in good condition
> Soup/salad bowls: 8, all in good condition / 8, all in good condition
> Dessert plates: 8, all in good condition / 8, all in good condition
> Cups: 8, 2 of them broken / NONE
> Saucers: 8, 7 of them broken / NONE

It is known that respondents tend to select Set B, though it is more beneficial to select set A.

**Here is the question:**

The dinnerware case is explained via the notion of 'averaging'. That is, person's System 1 (Kahneman's terminology) performs some kind of averaging and goes to conclusion, that as Set B items are not broken and in average cost more, then the whole Set B shall be preferred.

> From the perspective of economic theory, this result is troubling: the economic value of a dinnerware set \[...\] is a sum-like variable." I.e. pure summation shall be performed where averaging and subsequent assessment is carried out.

Then,

> The Linda problem and the dinnerware problem **have exactly the same structure** (??). Probability, like economic value, is a sum-like variable, as illustrated by this example: probability (Linda is a teller) = probability (Linda is feminist teller) \+ probability (Linda is non-feminist teller)" "System 1 averages instead of adding, so when the non-feminist bank tellers are removed from the set, subjective probability increases.

Here is my difficulty: I do not see how the 'averaging' notion applies to the Linda problem. When I myself think about Linda question, I do not realize that try to average something, I just want to construct something that fits my stereotypes. Otherwise, when I think about dinnerware, I agree that subconsciously try to maximize the average price of item.

# Answer
## Question Restatement:

It seems that `"have exactly the same structure"` is actually a reference to whether the underlying syllogisms are similar - in both research designs.

***Another assumption:*** Given the absence of a quote from Daniel Kahneman's, "Thinking, Fast and Slow" - the question seems to be hoping for answers that will make an inference as to the goal of the questions/research. Otherwise, this would be moot as Kahneman probably explains in context.

---

## Possible Answer - Identifying Bias when Rational Responses aren't Possible:

Both research designs exhibit the same ***challenge to BOTH a respondent, and a researcher*** \-

> "What conclusions are they inclined to, ***(bias)*** \- when it is impossible to respond reasonably?" (E.G., like be faced with a false dilemma logical fallacy).

The first tests Respondent's behavior; the second tests Researcher's behavior.

---

## The Linda Problem - Measuring Respondents:

***In the first case***, the question speaks about a "philosopher", and an expectation that they would be "objective" in their role as a banker. Regardless, ***a rationally minded respondent*** would immediately notices the absence of ***an obvious third answer***, "None of the Above". Obviously, "Probability cannot be inferred."

***Note:*** *Because respondents feel a generous inclination to "help" the researchers - only a very small number of respondents are likely to protest the validity of the test.*

---

## The Dinnerware Case - Measuring Researchers:

***In the second case***, the question is framed computationally, seeking a rational answer. Regardless, ***a rationally minded researcher*** immediately notices the absence of ***an obvious third explanation***, "Set Theory" ... Obviously, "Cups" rings "dissonant" and does not have as strong a connection as the others do. So, the research design wrongfully disregards the primal valuation of "belonging" - which might have a higher valuation than "market value", and even "utility".

***Note:*** *Because researchers feel an obligation to make SOME inference - only a small portion might protest the validity of the test.*

---

## Conclusion:

In other-words, I feel that ***the similarity between the designs*** is not at all about "averaging" or "valuation" - but their similarity is due to the "dilemma" that both researchers AND respondents are faced with - when confronted with an irrationality:

1. How much does cognitive dissonance contribute to the even distribution of bias? (The "Data" in the question suggests an inverse effect.)
2. And, if there is no even distribution of bias - when a rational answer cannot reasonably be provided, (given the logical errors of the circumstance) - then what biases do people tend towards? (The "Data" in the question suggests a universal bias towards "belonging, association", rather than rationality, personal values, etc.)

It would be very interesting to see the full implementation of this instrument - as it might inform political campaigns, (IMHO).

If the data from the two questions here is actually correct - then it might be consistent with what we observe in politics, (and relationships, etc).
> 2 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, bias
---


# Question
Title: Psilocybin for treatment of anxiety disorder
Has psilocybin been used for treatment of anxiety disorder? I've mostly found it used in the treatment of depression in patients diagnosed with cancer (Nichols et al. 2017) and patients not diagnosed with anything at all (Griffiths et al. 2006). Alternatively, how legitimate is it to generalize the results of the cancer patients to a chronic anxiety disorder patient?

<sub>

Nichols, D. E., Johnson, M. W., & Nichols, C. D. (2017). Psychedelics as medicines: an emerging new paradigm. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 101(2), 209-219.

Griffiths, R. R., Richards, W. A., McCann, U., & Jesse, R. (2006). Psilocybin can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance. Psychopharmacology, 187(3), 268-283.

</sub>

# Answer
> 7 votes
There has been some preliminary research in the 1960's. From "The neurobiology of psychedelic drugs: implications for the treatment of mood disorders" by Vollenweider and Kometer:

> Psycholytic therapy was introduced by Ronald Sandison and applied in Europe at 18 treatment centres. In psycholytic therapy, low to moderate doses of LSD (50–100 μg), psilocybin (10–15 mg) or, sporadically, ketamine were used repeatedly as an adjunct in psychoanalytically oriented psychotherapy to accelerate the therapeutic process by facilitating regression and the recollection and release of emotionally loaded repressed memories, and by increasing the transference reaction. A review of 42 studies reported impressive improvement rates in (mostly treatment-resistant) patients with anxiety disorders (improvement in 70% of patients), depression (in 62% of patients), personality disorders (in 53–61% of patients), sexual dysfunction (in 50% of patients) and obsessive–compulsive disorders (in 42% of patients).
>
> Unfortunately, the majority of these studies had serious methodological flaws by contemporary standards. In particular, with the absence of adequate control groups and follow-up measurements and with vague criteria for therapeutic outcome, the studies did not clearly establish whether it was the drug or the therapeutic engagement that produced the reported beneficial effect. It was also difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding potential long-term efficacy. Nevertheless, the studies provide a conceptual framework for the application of psychedelics, with the data suggesting that the most promising indication for psychedelic use might be found in the treatment of depression and anxiety disorders.

---
Tags: psychopharmacology, anxiety
---


# Question
Title: Does schizophrenia cause a loss of intelligence?
Does having schizophrenia cause a loss of intelligence (as measured by IQ tests)? How does present research comment on this connection, if it exists?

Furthermore, is it possible to recover from this decline in IQ? If so, under what conditions?

# Answer
**Regarding schizophrenia and loss of IQ**:

I don't know how much we can say about the 'loss' of IQ in schizophrenia patients. If anything, it appears to me that a decrease in overall IQ is augmented by the cognitive deficits associated with schizophrenia. This isn't to say that you can't increase your IQ with certain interventions, which I will touch on briefly in a second.

But first, understand that IQ depends on a number of neuroanatomical factors. Among them is volume of grey and white matter in the brain, which is notably decreased at an accelerated pace in early-onset schizophrenic patients.

General intelligence (g) is also highly correlated with fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence generally correlates with measures of abstract reasoning and puzzle solving, whereas crystallized intelligence correlates with abilities that depend on knowledge and experience, such as vocabulary, general information, and analogies (see: Factor structure). Administered IQ tests, such as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) are particularly concerned with measuring fluid intelligence. For this reason, a deficit in one usually mandates a deficit in overall IQ.

Fluid intelligence is more susceptible to brain injury, and in particular appears to be affected by both frontal lobe damage and deficits in working memory. There is evidence that suggests that patients with schizophrenia have dysregulated prefrontal cortices among other frontal lobe abnormalities. Furthermore, schizophrenia patients often have abnormal deficits in working memory. For these reasons, schizophrenia may be associated with impairments in cognitive / executive functioning and fluid intelligence, thus lending towards a lower overall IQ.

That being said, there are studies that have not found conclusive evidence that suggests a direct link between schizophrenia and low IQ in adulthood (though there may be some link in childhood).

**Regarding the recovery of lost IQ**:

Medications used to treat cognitive deficits (such as those used to treat ADHD) have repeatedly shown an increase in overall IQ score after long-term use, so I am thinking that medication would be the best route for IQ recovery. ***Note that this effect does not apply to otherwise high-functioning individuals. In other words, those without cognitive impairment tend to react to psychostimulant medication in ways that are wholly negative and harmful.***

I also mentioned above that there is no clear link between adulthood schizophrenia and low IQ, though there is a 7-8 average point decrease found in children. This is similarly consistent with other neurodevelopmental disorders, and may be related to the malleability in the brain. In other words, time and dedication (possibly including brain training, though there is controversy surrounding its benefits) can help restore cognitive abilities that may be reduced or damaged due to schizophrenia.

On a related note, it is worth mentioning that there is a modern-day theory going around surrounding the topic of latent inhibition and schizophrenia. The assumption is that schizophrenia is linked to low latent inhibition (with LI referring to the ability to ignorant irrelevant sensory stimuli), and this persistent cognitive overload leads to psychosis, difficulty in focusing on cognitively-intensive tasks, and occasional creative genius. This effect appears to be reduced in patients who seek medical treatment for their schizophrenia.

> With human subjects, there is evidence that acute, non-medicated schizophrenics show reduced LI compared to chronic, medicated schizophrenics and to healthy subjects, while there is no difference in the amount of LI in the latter two groups. \[....\] In summary, the basic LI phenomenon represents some output of a selective attention process that results in learning to ignore irrelevant stimuli. It has become an important tool for understanding information processing in general, as well as attentional dysfunctions in schizophrenia, and it has implications for a variety of practical problems.
> 5 votes

# Answer
Just a note to add, or summarise, the above.

Of course, results vary from study to study, and more still patient to patient. The standard iq loss, or developmental deficit, is usually estimated at less than 10 points, which is clincally significant, but not necessarily life changing. Working memory is often effected. But of course the illness / disability is a complex enough entity to make drawing any conclusions on iq loss or cognitive impairment in adulthood, on an individual basis, moot.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, intelligence, iq, schizophrenia
---


# Question
Title: Does night-sleep-deprivation have any effect on cognitive performance?
Sleeping during the day might lead e.g. to vitamin D deficiency. But I am interested in what effects might night-sleep-deprivation have on cognitive faculties.

Does sleeping during the day and absolutely not getting night sleep have an effect on working memory, long-term memory, intelligence level, processing speed, etc.?

# Answer
> 4 votes
According to this article, yes it does have various symptoms including cognitive deficiencies that make us more prone to errors and less efficient :

> Circadian rhythms biologically program us to stay awake during daylight hours and sleep at night. Shift work goes directly against what our bodies desire to do, and those that struggle with this may suffer from shift work sleep disorder (SWSD).
>
> ... symptoms may include headaches, weight gain, gastrointestinal issues, fatigue, attention and concentration issues, work absenteeism, irritability and depression. ... Worst of all, shift workers are at a significantly greater risk for vehicular accidents and mistakes at work.
>
> The ideal situation is to maintain a steady sleep-wake schedule seven days a week, allowing for 7-8 hours of sleep. Although difficult to follow, it can be extremely helpful to help reset circadian rhythms. It can be especially tough on days off, when desires to socialize in the daytime and maintain more “normal” sleep periods kick in.

Additonal reference

---
Tags: cognitive-neuroscience, intelligence, sleep, working-memory, long-term-memory
---


title: Antonym for apophenia

text:
# Question
Title: Antonym for apophenia
I understand that **apophenia** is the standard term in psychology to describe the tendency to spot patterns where none exist (analogous to a Type I error - false positive).

Is there a standard term to describe the opposite phenomenon? The tendency to miss a pattern where one exists (analogous to a Type II error - false negative).

# Answer
I wouldn't call this reference authoritative, but after a bit of research the first article in this journal (originally published in the Journal of Parapsychology) introduces the term "randomania" as "attributing chance probability to (apparently) related phenomenon." Note that this term is specifically defined in contrast to apophenia.

As an aside, this blog post discusses the history of the term apophenia (and potential modern misapplications of its current definition).
> 1 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Can information in the media increase fear of something?
I'm working on an essay trying to link an increased fear of something with information received from the media about it and I'm trying to find out if there are any studies on the matter.

Let me give an example:

```
An african-american sees news about cops shooting other black men in the US.
Is he now more afraid of running into police?

```

Another:

```
A person sees news about a friend being arrested for his political opinions
Is she now more afraid of expressing her opinions?

```

To me it seems that both are true, but I'm looking for studies that could confirm it or deny it.

# Answer
Can information in the media increase fear of something? Yes of course, let's see what these learning processes are.

Common processes employed by psychology in order to explain the development of anxiety, fear and phobias are the **vicarious learning processes (modeling, observational learning and social learning)**.

Vicarious learning, although the terms observational learning and social learning are more commonly used:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarious

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational\_learning

These processes of learning have been well developed (**Albert Bandura**, a Canadian psychologist, is recognized as the professional who most impulse these learning processes, his investigations are often misinterpreted since one of the most famous ones also dealt with violence, his investigations are also misinterpreted in their objectives, it must be said that their research always had clinical objectives) and are commonly used for different purposes in learning, here we refer specifically to learning processes developed by a third person (such as a person who sees something on TV ) about situations and events that happen to other people.

In relation to frequency these learning processes are developed as commonly as classical conditioning or instrumental learning and are commonly employed in explanations of phobias, since many people with significant clinical problems with phobias have never experienced a situation (a person can develop a phobia to fly without having ever experienced any negative experience, or related incident, aboard an airplane), that is, these learning processes are based on information that the person has obtained from the story of other people's experiences.

Of course the increase or development of anxiety or fear (and others) is mediated by contructs or common causes in the study of psychology: estimates of possibility and frequency, locus of control, expectations (very specifically in phobia expectations about the control of object or phobic situation), and many others.

When searching databases, it may be more productive to use the term phobia than fear:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/?term=vicarious+phobia&cmd=DetailsSearch

About possible neuroanatomic related structures:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2555428/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4907690/

You may also be interested in social hypotheses and theories related to the media:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultivation\_theory
> 3 votes

---
Tags: fear
---


# Question
Title: Is there a limit on the rate at which incoming information can be comprehended?
I recently started a course on "Speed Reading", which aim is to read faster whilst holding the level of comprehension constant (so not to its detriment, but not aimed at improving comprehension either).

Now, for the case of reading, I imagine we can define a **rate at which information is been given to the brain**. So, the faster you read (holding comprehension constant), the higher such rate is. Clearly, the aim of such training programs like "speed reading" is to move that rate up.

**Is there an upper limit to such rate, perhaps because of biological reasons?** Does it depends on the person? Can we say, for example, that it is biologically impossible to comprehend a text reading faster than 1,000 words per minute? Is there any evidence of such limit? This information would be useful to understand the scope of improvement possible on this issue.

# Answer
I have tried speed reading myself in the past. From the research papers I have read back then, it seemed like there is no basis or evidence to the claim that with practice, reading speed can increase to more than 600-700 words per minute without any loss of comprehension (Some of the most bizarre claims include 25,000 words per minute. I would have been more impressed if the person claiming it wasn't selling online courses about speed reading for large sums of money).

I can't find the studies I found back then, but a meta-analysis by Keith Rayner†, Elizabeth R. Schotter, Michael E. J. Masson, Mary C. Potter, Rebecca Treiman (2016) seems to show that reading pace is highly determined by language skills and an extensive vocabulary. They show that generally there is a trade off between pace and comprehension, and some of the claims for a very high reading pace were based on prior knowledge of the texts. However, mild improvements can be achieved with practice. This article looks extremely fascinating and I wish I had the time to read all of it.

**Edit**: Only now do I realize how ironic my last remark was.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, learning, reading
---


# Question
Title: Question about perceived stubborn behavior patterns
Is there a relative diagnosis for someone who can't simply adapt to and/or use something that is already established? This type of personality would also need to have their own idea to validate their selection/alternative for peer acceptance. It could be either severe (I'm guessing this would be narcissistic personality disorder) or mild.

Is this common or categorized in some way? And are there ways of dealing with this type of personality/behavior?

# Answer
As noted, this is a duplicate and was asked due to the complexity of wording my search terms in a way that related to what I outlined.

## Confirmation Bias
> 0 votes

---
Tags: behavior
---


# Question
Title: Examples of interventions that yield large long term effect sizes in psychology
I was listening to a podcast entitled Very Bad Wizards, hosted by two university academics. One of the hosts, namely David Pizarro who is a psychologist at Cornell made the claim that most psychological mechanisms have small effects. I have heard this too mentioned by Daniel Lakens on the small likelihood of psychological effects being very large \> d =1.6. That made me curious. **What are examples of interventions in Psychology that reliably induce long and large changes (large effects that last longer than ~3 months)?** The only example that comes to mind are mood states like trait anxiety being changed nearly indefinitely through CBT with pretty big effects. A little background, I was a Psychology major and researcher in undergrad. Enjoy reading about meta research so I can go pretty technical.

# Answer
> 3 votes
**Skill acquisition:** If you take a novice on a task and get them to practice that task, performance will tend to improve. See the Power Law of Practice. In many cases that I've seen, the difference between between initial and final performance is similar to the standard deviation of individual differences at baseline. So I guess you could call that a d of around 1. Of course, the exact numbers will depend on the domain, but that is indicative.

Of course, you also get forgetting effects which in some sense reduce the effect of skill acquisition over time, but there is also an associated faster relearning effect. And the degree of forgetting is related to a range of factors. In particular, motor-learning seems to have less forgetting than learning related to declarative facts.

# Answer
> 1 votes
From my optional subject Treatment in phobias:

According to the meta-analyzes of Ruhmland and Margraf in 2001, the pre-post effects of behavioral treatment on specific phobic measures ranged from 1.42 to 2.06 for the different treatments applied.

* Effektivität psychologischer Therapien von spezifischer Phobie and Zwanggsstoerung: Meta Analyze auf Stoerungsebene (Efficacy of phychological treatments for specific phobia and obsessive compulsive disorsers). Verhaltenstherapie, 11, 14-26.

Powers and Emmelkamp found in 2008 an effect size of 1.05 for exposure techniques compared to waiting lists.

* Powers, M. and Emmelkamp, P. (2008). Virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety disorders: The meta-analysus. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 561-569.

Regarding anxiety and dental phobia, the effect size of behavioral treatment on control groups in self-reports of dental anxiety has been 1.79 and the size of the pre-post effect 2.25; The effects of cognitive therapy have been similar. As for dental care, the size of the effect has been 1.4; On average, 80% and 77% of the patients have made at least one visit to the dentist within 6 months and 4 years, respectively (anxiety and dental phobia) (Kvale, Berggren and Milgrom, 2004).

* Kvale, G., Berggren, U. and Milgrom, P. (2004). Dental fear in adults: A meta-analysis of behavioral interventions. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, 32, 250-264.

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, measurement, methodology, clinical-psychology, statistics
---


# Question
Title: How do laypeople form a judgment that another person is smart or intelligent?
I am curious: When do we label a person as being 'intelligent', 'smart' or 'clever'? This is subjective, and it seems unlikely that it is possible to reach a bulletproof definition. A high IQ has been used for some time, but it seems that taking IQ tests is a learnable skill as any other, see  (other sources contradict this fact, however, see ). But when do we say when somebody is 'smart'? It is not rare to hear people utter 'Wow, he's really smart!'. Does he have a high IQ score? Does he know all the capitals of all countries in the world? Does he play piano extremely well, have a Ph.D. in mathematics or paint incredibly beautiful paintings?

So the question is:

How do laypeople form a judgment that another person is smart or intelligent?

**References:**

1. http://io9.com/5959058/further-evidence-that-iq-does-not-measure-intelligence
2. http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/what-an-iq-test-measure

# Answer
> -2 votes
Okay here's the answer. What you are talking about doesn't have a name yet. There a many different types of intelligence and an IQ test only tests some of them. So you are right in the sense you can't really tell how "smart" someone is off of that. For the purposes of this discussion we will now refer to the word that doesn't really exist yet as "smart or smartness". How do you know if someone is "smarter" than you? That's subjective all on it's own. I think you meant to say, how are the "smartnesses"(i know oh god bad english but i had to say it that way) of any two people different and either what process is behind our ability to "tell" if someone is smart or you want to know how can someone who is less smart than someone can tell? Well, if there is a big enough difference in IQ, most people can tell just by talking to a person. A long time ago I heard that if there is a difference of 30 IQ points then it becomes difficult to understand a person because of the difference in known vocab and daily use of that vocab. But there are many different ways of seeing if someone is smart or not.

That's boring so let's talk about why everyone is wrong about intelligence. I think you are more after that then anything else. So know that the only reason we have an IQ test, is to test for the difference in the standard deviations between the "intelligence" of children to see if they need help or advancement. 2 SDs below or above makes you different from everyone else and you help special needs in some aspect. That's an extremely crude way of explaining that all, but it works for the purposes of what I am trying to explain now. (That's 30 IQ points up or down from 100 by the way). For the most part, IQ tests for adults don't really tell us what we are trying to find out, they were designed for children. If you want to see if someone is actually intelligent across all aspects of adult "smartnessess", you can't use an IQ test. Think of the IQ test being used for adults as a way of measuring how well they may do in school or a similar area. But if we want to really find out how "smart" adults are we do need all aspects of intelligence that we currently know. For example, ever heard of street smarts? Some people claim they have street smarts and they don't need a formal edu because of this and that's what makes them "smart" or smarter then everyone else. Street smarts can mean a million different things but lets assume it means skills that have been picked up only by "living" on the streets, AKA a low econ area with high crime or moderate crime in most cases. Not that you are self taught in all aspects of intelligence. So while "street smarts" could be an aspect of intelligence, not the full picture. Also someone with street smarts might just mean they are self taught in all aspect and they very well could be our definitions of smart. Remember that school is designed for the average person and it is not suited for people that stray too far from the average(in any aspect of "smartness" but in the case of school we can say IQ). A smart person will be smart regardless of a formal edu or not and so will a intellectually challenged or disabled person will always be that way(brain damage in their case doesn't go away). As long as the damage is physical and not psychological. Anyways, I personally don't think we have mapped out everything yet as far as our true intelligence goes because for the simple reason of we just haven't gotten to it yet. Unless you have an idea on how knowing your real adult IQ could help anyone besides helping find people with intellectual disabilities which need help(which the current test can already do), there is no application for it. Also it's been proven in the past that it's harmful for people to know how "smart" they really are.(look up army test alpha and beta i think, something like that), everyone overestimates their "smartness:. I personally think it would be harmful to the public if they had that info. In the US that is. I dunno about other countries but they are probably the same in first world countries. I doubt anyone who has to worry about survival, worries about how smart they are. Well I hope that answered your question. If you want sources, I am lazy and there is enough info for you to check any claim i've made on google. You wanted the answer anyways so you do the leg work if you don't believe me. There's also my opinion but i;ve stated which of this is my opinion. The rest is from about 7 years of college in psychology and another 3 years or so of personal research in the area of psych. So...I could be an expert just based on all the hours I've spent in the field of psych. So the opinion of an expert in his field is probably good for his word on some of his opinions yes? I mean no malicious in anything I say, I am just normally sarcastic, so no offense on anything if you have taken it that way. I meant none.

---
Tags: social-psychology, intelligence
---