# Question
Title: Is there a reasonable scientific backing for Carl Jung's type theories?
I have read a lot on how most psychologists reject the Myers Briggs Type Indicator for its lack of scientific backing, but I have yet to find much information on the acceptance of Carl Jung's theories, specifically his idea of cognitive functions. I'm nowhere near an expert in psychology, so I could be totally off base, but in my subjective experience, Jung's ideas of cognitive functions seem to have much more explanatory power than the MBTI E/I, N/S, T/F, J/P dichotomies, and framing the theory in those terms seems to cause much less inaccuracies in typing people differently over time -- one of the reasons I've heard most psychologists reject the MBTI.

Do Jung's theories have more backing than the MBTI, or are they essentially on the same scientific footing? I get that trait-based models like HEXANO may be better in actually predicting behaviour, but what interests me about Jung's idea of cognitive functions is that they better explain *motivation* and modes of thoughts, which I find very personally compelling. My only fear is that explaining motivations and modes of thought would be more difficult to scientifically pose as opposed to trait-based models of personality.

I would also be interested to know if Jung's theories do not have a solid scientific foundation, if there are similar "cognitive function" based theories that are more accepted in the psychological community.

# Answer
It appears that there is little scientific backing for Jung's theories. As these theories were first suggested at the start of the 20th century they have had a considerable amount of time to receive scientific support. If they were accepted by scientists it therefore seems like they would have been widely used and cited by scholars in the interim period.

However, if I do a search (in titles, abstracts and keywords) for related content on SCOPUS I get only 12 references (the details of which I have pasted below for you to consider). The low level of search results (and the fact that few of these appear relevant) provides strong evidence that there is little scientific support for Jung's work.

In terms of alternative theories to consider, if I were you I would have a look at the "big five" also known as OCEAN as there is a lot more support for this personality theory. For examples of some influential and interesting articles, please see the OCEAN references section below.

**References from the SCOPUS literature search:**

Search term: TITLE-ABS-KEY ( jung "cognitive functions" )

Novak M. Ideal types of law from the perspective of psychological typology \[Idealni tipi prava v lu?i psihološke tipologije\] 2013 Revus

Lo J.-J., Chan Y.-C. Design of adaptive web interfaces with respect to student cognitive styles 2011 Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing

Semetsky I. Jung and Tarot: A Theory-practice Nexus in Education and Counselling 2012 Jung and Educational Theory

Connolly A.M. Cognitive aesthetics of alchemical imagery 2013 Journal of Analytical Psychology

Naghavi H.R., Nyberg L. Integrative action in the fronto-parietal network: A cure for a scattered mind 2007 Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Sebastian A., Jung P., Krause-Utz A., Lieb K., Schmahl C., Tüscher O. Frontal dysfunctions of impulse control - A systematic review in borderline personality disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder 2014 Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Segall J.M., Allen E.A., Jung R.E., Erhardt E.B., Arja S.K., Kiehl K., Calhoun V.D. Correspondence between structure and function in the human brain at rest 2012 Frontiers in Neuroinformatics

Vieira A.G., Sperb T.M. Symbolic play and the narrative organization of the child's life experience \[O brincar simbólico e a organização narrativa da experiência de vida na criança\] 2007 Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica

Park H.-J., Lee S.Y., Shim H.S., Kim J.S., Kim K.S., Shim I. Chronic treatment with squid phosphatidylserine activates glucose uptake and ameliorates TMT-induced cognitive deficit in rats via activation of cholinergic systems 2012 Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Seo Y., Burns K., Fennell C., Kim J.-H., Gunstad J., Glickman E., McDaniel J. The Influence of Exercise on Cognitive Performance in Normobaric Hypoxia 2015 High Altitude Medicine and Biology

Kwon H.G., Choi B.Y., Kim S.H., Chang C.H., Jung Y.J., Lee H.D., Jang S.H. Injury of the cingulum in patients with putaminal hemorrhage: A diffusion tensor tractography study 2014 Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Lee J.H., Kim S.E., Park C.-H., Yoo J.H., Lee H.W. Gray and White Matter Volumes and Cognitive Dysfunction in Drug-Naïve Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Epilepsy 2015 BioMed Research International

**OCEAN sample references**

Roberts, Brent W., Kate E. Walton, and Wolfgang Viechtbauer. "Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies." Psychological bulletin 132.1 (2006): 1.

Hayes, Natalie, and Stephen Joseph. "Big 5 correlates of three measures of subjective well-being." Personality and Individual differences 34.4 (2003): 723-727.

Kotov, Roman, et al. "Linking “big” personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: a meta-analysis." Psychological bulletin 136.5 (2010): 768.
> 8 votes

# Answer
This is a more speculative than I usually post here, but here it goes:

* Based on his works, I'd describe Jung more as a philosopher of mind than an actual psychologist in the modern meaning of the word (although perhaps that observation applies more widely to *some* of Jung's contemporary colleagues) in that he very seldom formulated simple and directly testable hypotheses. Nor was Jung much \[if ever\] concerned with *systematic* empirical validation of his ideas. But also note that there's substantial disagreement whether Jung can be considered a philosopher.
* In, particular, it doesn't look like Jung formulated his ideas about thinking in the nowadays terms of cognitive functions. If we consider the amorphous way in which Wikipedia structures "Jungian cognitive functions" as a reflection of Jung's work (as opposed to the lack of editorial skill of some wikipedians), that page clearly mixes personality factors (types) with distinctions between cognitive processes that aren't the same kind of "types" in more recent research.
* Jung was also much less read than Freud, particularly in the US. So when Freud said something remotely relevant to a research topic, people usually don't fail to notice... but that doesn't seem to be the case with Jung.
* If one is inclined to "read the future" into some of Jung's essayistic pieces, then in only a few minutes, I did find a couple of his sayings as potentially anticipating interesting developments in cognitive psychology, in particular from the behavioral economists' camp (Kahneman etc.) In particular:

+ Wikipedia quotes Jung as saying "The faculty of directed thinking, I term 'intellect'. The faculty of passive, or undirected, thinking, I term 'intellectual intuition'." Did that anticipate dual process theory?
    + Wikiquote quotes Jung as saying "...the relatively unconscious man driven by his natural impulses because, imprisoned in his familiar world, he clings to the commonplace, the obvious, the probable, the collectively valid, using for his motto: 'Thinking is difficult. Therefore, let the herd pronounce judgement.'" He is clearly talking about herd mentality here, another topic that became the locus of interest of behavioral economists.
    + \[same source\]: "We should not pretend to understand the world only by the intellect; we apprehend it just as much by feeling. Therefore, the judgment of the intellect is, at best, only the half of truth, and must, if it be honest, also come to an understanding of its inadequacy." Of course many works on various kinds of emotional biases (affecting cognition) have been written since then.
> 4 votes

# Answer
As a scholar of Jung and his writings and work (and yes, he was a psychologist and worked with the mentally ill, as well as treating private patients throughout his career) I would point out first of all that his theory of "psychological types", which he developed in a book by that name, was a vocabulary for the psychodynamics that he observed in his work and patients, it was not the result of laboratory experiments. He offered the book as a starting point for further research, and it is useful as a lexicon to describe phenomena. It was not meant to be a system for labeling people, but for describing them. The problem with subjecting theories of consciousness to scientific study is that consciousness itself cannot be studied by empirical methods. As Jung pointed out, psyche is the only phenomenon that can be experienced in an unmediated state, i. e. psyche (which encompasses consciousness and the unconscious) can only be observed using psyche. But this is also true of everything else we observe, all of which is mediated by the psyche. When we are using out minds to describe how our minds work, we typically lack any physical evidence of the phenomenon (neurology of course can provide certain kinds of hard data on brain activity, but the contents of that activity can as yet only be crudely categorized.) More importantly, consciousness operates inside of complex systems of culture, personal experience, imagination and history, as well as the illnesses and conditions of the body, the totality of which would be impossible to fully control or evaluate. In the study of consciousness as such, so-called scientific evidence remains largely a matter of anecdotal accounts and interpretation, and has remained an ‘as if’ proposition. Although the development of AI may radically change out understanding of how the mind works, the complexity of the human mind is by definition beyond our comprehension. That said, the lack of citation of Jung in the literature is not due to a lack of influence or of scientific support for his theories or practices (psychoanalysis in general has been shown to be equally effective to behaviorist approaches, and perhaps with better long term outcomes), but to the politics of the psychoanalytical field in the early days. Jung's rift with Freud, who once considered Jung his successor, caused the majority of members of the psychoanalytical community to publicly disown him. Even as his ideas remained influential, he was rarely cited in early literature. The stigma that attached to him related to his interest in the psychology of religion, the misunderstanding of which caused him to be labeled a mystic. In fact, he was simply trying to point out that not all our motives, ideas and problems can be boiled down to sexuality, and more specifically the oedipus complex, as Freud insisted. Nonetheless the break with Freud was decisive, and the stigma perpetuated 100 years ago persists today. Yet Jung's ideas themselves remained influential and have entered the popular culture in the form of MBTI (which was based largely on his work) and its successors, archetypes, art therapy, dream interpretation, social psychology and more. There's no question that the notions Jung pursued have outlasted him, but again, due to the stigma, formal attributions to him, as the originator of many of the our widely-held ideas about consciousness, were largely neglected, or were reframed in ways that concealed his influence.

References:

Bair, D. (2003) Jung: A biography. Little, Brown

Beebe, J. (2017) Energies and patterns in psychological type: The reservoir of consciousness. Routledge

de Maat et al, 2009 The effectiveness of long-term psychoanalytic therapy: a systematic review of empirical studies. Harvard Review of Psychiatry doi: 10.1080/10673220902742476

Shumate, C. (2021) Projection and personality development via the eight-function model. Routledge
> 2 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, personality, cognitive-modeling, jung
---


# Question
Title: Why didn't the animal/human brain evolve to being able to create a comprehensive map of the environment?
I am just wondering about this. I am a computer science student, and I have been looking into the SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) problem. The problem is that you want to both create a map of the environment, while at the same time localizing your position in this map. You can use any suitable sensor, most commonly camera or LiDAR. This problem seems to be solved (though there are still technical improvements being made and depending on the types of sensors and requirements, there are different algorithms being developed that can trade-off different factors).

I am assuming the human eyes are a bit similar to a stereo camera and so they should be able to internally quite accurately estimate the depth of what they look at.

Now the question is, why wouldn't evolution have given us the quite useful ability to accurately build a map of the environment? I know, we do kind of have that ability, but it seems to be still very bad compared to what robots using SLAM algorithms are capable of.

Maybe my question is a bit naïve, as I don't know much about the capabilities of the human brain and eyes. Though as far as I know, there are low power devices like FPGAs that are capable of performing SLAM algorithm (src).

# Answer
> 4 votes
**SHORT ANSWER**

> why wouldn't evolution have given us the quite useful ability to accurately build a map of the environment?

Because of the energetic cost of building and maintaining such a map! Some bird species (see "The genius of birds" by Jennifer Ackerman) build and memorize detailed maps of their environment, along with temporal information about where and when they hid which seeds, because it is key to their survival. Humans evolved more limited mapping and memorization abilities because they were nomads in a changing environment, hunting moving targets, and such skills were not as essential to their survival.

**LONGER ANSWER**

Ed Young, in his book "An immense world", describes the concept of Umwelt (from the German word for "environment"), defined as the "*part of an animal's surroundings that an animal can sense and experience -- its perceptual world*". He gives various examples of senses (e.g. "*magnetic field*" of robins and sea turtles, etc.) and of sense organs (e.g. "*There are animals with eyes on their genitals*"), I recommend the reading in general if you are interested in bio mimetism and robotics.

More particularly, Young mentions that "*an Umwelt cannot expand indefinitely*", because "*Senses always come at a cost*":

> Animals have to keep the neurons of their sensory systems in a perpetual state of readiness so that they can fire when necessary. This is tiring work, like drawing a bow and holding it in place so that when the moment comes, an arrow can be shot. Even when your eyelids are closed, your visual system is a monumental drain on your reserves. For that reason, no animal can sense everything well.

The same argument applies to the organization and memorization of the information given by such senses: it does not come for free, and each species evolve to organize and memorize exactly the information that its individuals need to survive. My guess is that in the future, robots with stringer access to energy (such as nano robots, or even "normal" robots in a world less dependent on fossil energies?) will go through a similar selection process and draw less accurate maps, with a level of precision more tuned to the task they are programmed for.

I hope it helps! (and, from a fellow Computer Scientist interested in Psychology, a warm welcome to the Psychology Stack Exchange!)

# Answer
> 4 votes
**Short answer**
The brain is quite able to build internal spatial maps of the environment.

**Background**
If you've ever walked alongside a blind person in an environment they are familiar with, you will have noticed how capable the brain is of generating internal spatial maps. As an anecdote: I just started a postdoc at Hopkins Hospital, working with folks with end stage retinitis pigmentosa; they were legally blind. I was asked to bring one of them across the street to one of the other buildings to continue their testing. I had no clue, no clue as to where we actually were, where the exit of the building was we were in, let alone how to get to the designated location in the other building. The blind person noticed my anxiety, and being a long time patient there, they took my arm and requested permission to guide me back. They brought us back, across corridors, down to the basement, taking elevators and what not. And they were fast I'll tell you, happily chit chatting along the way.

The reason normally sighted folks don't have such detailed mental maps available is, likely, simply because they don't need them that much; visual cues and landmarks are 'computationally' less demanding and do the job well in most sighted people.

Here are some references that provide less anecdotal backgrounds to the mental spatial mapping observed in blind folks:

<sub>**References**
**-** Dodds *et al*., *J Vis Impairment & Blindness* (1982); **76**(1)
**-** Hersch *et al*, *ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing* (2020); **13**(2:6); 1–32</sub>

---
Tags: brain, sensory-perception, spatial-cognition
---


# Question
Title: The Power of Word Choice in Changing Perceptions
I am looking for any studies, research, or theories about how choosing particular words or descriptions can lead to perceptual changes and judgements. This would be like loaded or emotive language.

For example if a news headline were to state "President X **attacks** new tax plan". As opposed to "President X **opposes** new tax plan". The word difference here is attacks vs. opposes. "Attacks" is more aggressive, while "opposes" is more tame.

Or another example is if a news headline stated "drone strike leads to **loss of innocent life.**" As opposed to "drone strike leads to **collateral damage.**" This would be "loss of innocent life" vs. "collateral damage".

If you notice the messages are practically identical with the exception of the different word choices. I want to know if any studies, research, or theories demonstrate whether different word choices, such as what I demonstrated, will change are understanding and judgements of the information we receive. This is mostly in reference to online news article headlines but any study will suffice.

# Answer
The impact of word choice and language on perception, judgment, and understanding is an area of research that falls within the field of cognitive psychology and linguistics.

The phenomenon you described, where different word choices can influence perception and judgment, is known as framing effects. Framing refers to the way information is presented, emphasizing certain aspects and downplaying others, which can shape how people interpret and evaluate that information. It has been shown that subtle changes in the wording of a message can lead to different perceptions, attitudes, and decisions.

Numerous studies have investigated framing effects in various contexts, including political communication and media. Researchers have examined how different word choices can influence people's opinions on political candidates, policy issues, or social topics. The studies often involve presenting participants with the same information but framed in different ways to observe the impact on their attitudes and judgments.

For example, a classic study by Kahneman and Tversky (1984) demonstrated framing effects by presenting participants with a scenario involving a hypothetical disease outbreak. When the scenario was framed in terms of saving lives, participants were more likely to choose a treatment with a guaranteed number of lives saved. Conversely, when the scenario was framed in terms of potential lives lost, participants were more likely to choose a riskier treatment option with potential lives saved. This study highlighted how the framing of information influenced decision-making.

In the context of news headlines, studies have investigated how different framing techniques can affect readers' perceptions and attitudes towards specific events or individuals. For example, a study by Vallone, Ross, and Lepper (1985) examined the impact of media frames on public opinion during a U.S. presidential campaign. They found that when the media framed an issue positively for one candidate, it influenced the public's perception of that candidate.

Overall, numerous studies have demonstrated that word choice and framing can significantly influence people's perceptions, judgments, and attitudes. However, it's important to note that the effects can vary depending on individual differences, context, and other factors.
> -1 votes

---
Tags: perception, language
---


# Question
Title: How to build a support network against suicide in a community I am leading?
I am currently in a leadership position of a small gaming/online community. To give you a sense of scale, we have about 70 people on Discord, and about 10 in our core group.

In the past we've had 2 members of our community attempt suicide and last Sunday we've had a member of our core group attempt sucide. They contacted me about it today, told me they were on their way to a psychiatric hospital and asked me to disclose this to the other people in our group.

My question is what the best way to go about this is, as this is a really delicate topic and I don't want to mess this up.

*Edit to clarify: I don't just want to pass the information along, but I also want to create an environment where anyone else in the community having thoughts like that in the future will feel like they can approach me or other community members for help before anything happens*

My goals are to:

* Disclose the incident in a respectful way to the core group
* Convey to the group the ability to always talk to me
* Build a support network in the group
* Discuss ways to get through tough times

My anti-goals are:

* I don't want to make anyone feel called out
* I don't want to open old wounds for the 2 member who attempted suicide before
* I don't want to come off pushy

I am sorry if this is not quite on-topic, but I really don't know where to seek help with this.

# Answer
> 2 votes
While I admire your resolve in providing this much needed support, there are a couple of alarm bells that are ringing in my head regarding potential issues you may come across.

You said that your goals include building a support network in the group, and conveying to the group the ability to always talk to you.

With regard to building a support network, for the personal safety of both you and those you support, you need to remember that you will be **adding to the suicide support network which is already available**, and not providing anything separate. For some of the potential pitfalls in what you may be doing, or may not, I would like to draw your attention to the Drama Triangle and TED Triangle discussed in another answer of mine.

When conveying to the group the ability to always talk to you, you can be setting both yourself and others for a big fall. What happens if situations arise (e.g. mobile phone signal, family emergency...) making you unavailable at a particular time someone needs to call you? No individual can guarantee they will be available 24/7 365 days a year.

## When providing suicide support groups, you must

point out that you are just part of a large network of people who are available to talk whenever you feel the need to. One example is these worldwide suicide hotlines. People are on call there to talk to people struggling with the same kind of issues, regardless of location. If calling is not good, suicidal people can chat with them live online.

You need to be mindful of not just the suicidal people, but also yourself. For your own sake, you must not take on the idea that you are solely responsible for others who may be suicidal. Many things can happen outside of your control.

With regard to sharing suicidal ideation in others, be mindful of everyone's right to privacy. Privacy, and autonomy over personal information, is very important. It is fine to delicately provide the knowledge with signposting to the suicide hotlines in case they need them, but **only if they freely give permission to do so**.

The helplines themselves sometimes run training in supporting suicidal people. The Samaritans here in the UK definitely do. Maybe you could give your local service a call and see what they can provide? Just a thought

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, health-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Is it generally obvious to a therapist if someone is delusional?
I'm writing a story which is largely told by a patient to a psychologist in a therapy session, but the story which the patient is describing involves the supernatural, and it is set in present day modern world, so the psychologist is unlikely to believe in the supernatural. In the story, the patient is telling the truth (more or less), and she starts off by telling him that she's going to call it a story so that he doesn't think she's crazy. Would the psychologist just assume that the patient is delusional (sorry if this is incorrect terminology but I hope you know what I mean), or would he be able to tell that this is unlikely given the way which she is acting?

If it helps, she does suffer from anxiety and has been treated for it in the past, but her real objective for telling him her story is because she knows that something is going to happen to him and it is going to be a lot harder for him to deal with if it comes as a complete shock to him.

# Answer
A psychologist, in his/her professional capacity, is trained to listen and observe without immediately jumping to conclusions. Key indicators for delusions are the firmness of the belief, resistance to change even when confronted with contradicting evidence, and the impact of these beliefs on daily functioning.

In your scenario, when the woman presents her story as a 'story,' she's not insisting on its objective truth, which is inconsistent with typical delusional thinking. Delusions are not usually presented with such self-awareness or flexibility. They are typically firmly held beliefs that are out of touch with reality.

Moreover, the psychologist would pay attention to her general presentation, mood, thought processes, and how she interacts with the therapist and discusses other aspects of her life. Are these areas of her life also affected by unusual beliefs or perceptions? Does she show other signs of a psychotic disorder like hallucinations, disorganized speech, or grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior? If not, a conclusion of delusion would be unlikely.

The supernatural story she tells could be understood from several perspectives:

* Narrative or Creative Expression: The woman might be using the story as a way to communicate her feelings or thoughts indirectly. Therapists often encourage this kind of narrative sharing because it can reveal a person's internal emotional state.
* An Expression of Anxiety: Given her history of anxiety, the therapist might interpret the story as a reflection of her underlying worries, fears, or insecurities.
* Metaphorical Communication: The story might serve as a metaphor for her lived experience. Supernatural elements could symbolize elements of her real life that she's struggling to articulate directly.

Therefore, a trained psychologist would not hastily label her as delusional. Instead, they'd consider a multitude of factors before drawing any diagnostic conclusions. They would be more likely to see the supernatural story as a therapeutic tool she's using to convey her thoughts and feelings, rather than a sign of a severe mental illness.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: diagnosis
---


# Question
Title: What are the brain chemicals associated with food cravings? Possible to treat it by manipulating brain chemicals?
It is frequently mentioned that physical factors such as hormonal imbalances have an impact on brain chemicals, especially when it comes to food cravings (source). What are the brain chemicals associated with food cravings, and is it possible to alleviate or treat food cravings by manipulating these brain chemicals?

# Answer
Certain brain chemicals, or neurotransmitters, have been associated with the sensation of craving and consumption of food. The primary ones include:

* Dopamine: This is often referred to as the "reward" neurotransmitter. When we eat foods that we enjoy, our brains release dopamine, creating a pleasurable sensation. This can create a reward feedback loop that makes us crave those foods in the future.
* Serotonin: This neurotransmitter is associated with feelings of happiness and well-being. Certain foods, especially those high in carbohydrates, can increase serotonin levels and thus make us feel good, promoting further cravings for these foods.
* Ghrelin: This is a hormone rather than a neurotransmitter, but it plays a key role in stimulating appetite. It's often referred to as the "hunger hormone."
* Leptin: This hormone acts as a counterpart to ghrelin. It sends signals to the brain indicating that we're full and should stop eating.
* Endorphins: These neurotransmitters are the body's natural painkillers and can create feelings of euphoria. Certain foods, particularly those high in sugar and fat, can trigger endorphin release.
* Neuropeptide Y: This is a potent appetite stimulant released by the hypothalamus.
* Insulin: This hormone also regulates hunger and satiety signals. When insulin levels are imbalanced, it can lead to strong food cravings, especially for sugar.
* Glutamate: This neurotransmitter plays a role in the neural stimulation of specific food cravings.

Manipulating brain chemicals to control food cravings is a complex process, as these chemicals interact intricately. However, certain treatments and strategies aim to influence these interactions. Medications, like SSRIs, can increase serotonin levels in the brain, helping reduce cravings. Lifestyle changes, such as regular exercise and a balanced diet, can also impact these brain chemicals, helping stabilize them and reduce cravings. But it's important to remember that these approaches vary in effectiveness for different individuals, and a comprehensive approach considering psychological and social factors is necessary for controlling cravings.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: brain, feeding
---


title: The mechanism behind the ADHD?

text:
# Question
Title: The mechanism behind the ADHD?
Nowadays, is there any knowledge about the mechanism through ADHD act? Why the people which have ADHD manifest the symptoms related to the disorder? Is some type of malformation or the presence/absence of some neurotransmitter? I would like too to have reading recommendations, books or scientific papers.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by symptoms of inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity. The exact etiology of ADHD remains unclear. However, multiple factors are believed to contribute, including genetic predisposition, environmental influences, and neurological factors.

1. **Genetic Factors**: ADHD is considered to be a highly heritable disorder, with estimates ranging from 60% to 80%. Several genes, many of which are involved with the dopaminergic signaling pathway, have been linked to the disorder.
2. **Neurotransmitter Systems and Neuroanatomy**: Research has indicated abnormalities in several neurotransmitter systems—particularly dopamine and norepinephrine—in individuals with ADHD. Certain areas of the brain have also been found to be different in individuals with ADHD. For example, neuroimaging studies have suggested that frontal lobe and anterior cingulate cortex, areas involved in attention and executive functions, might be smaller or function differently in those with ADHD.
3. **Executive Function Deficits**: Many individuals with ADHD have deficits in executive functioning, which includes attentional control, inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility. These deficits can lead to difficulty in planning, focusing attention, following instructions, and managing details.
4. **Delayed Brain Maturation**: A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences showed that the cortical development in children with ADHD is delayed compared to children without ADHD, specifically in the prefrontal regions that control attention and motor planning.

For more detailed scientific insights into ADHD, consider the following publications:

* Faraone, S. V., & Larsson, H. (2019). Genetics of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Molecular Psychiatry, 24(4), 562–575.
* Thapar, A., & Cooper, M. (2016). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The Lancet, 387(10024), 1240–1250.
* Castellanos, F. X., & Proal, E. (2012). Large-scale brain systems in ADHD: beyond the prefrontal–striatal model. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(1), 17–26.
* Shaw, P., Eckstrand, K., Sharp, W., Blumenthal, J., Lerch, J. P., Greenstein, D., ... & Rapoport, J. L. (2007). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is characterized by a delay in cortical maturation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(49), 19649-19654.

I were reaserching in the ADHD field about two years ago. But hope this information helps.

---
Tags: neuroscience, learning, adhd
---


title: How many genders are there?

text:
# Question
Title: How many genders are there?
As I understand it gender is a self-assigned identity and is correlated but not wholly determined by sex.

Sex is presumably determined by the sex chromosomes present in the DNA of the cells of the individual? The sexes are presumably male and female and intersex?

Is there a list of possible genders?

# Answer
The subject of gender can be a very personal subject and the subject of gender is discussed among the LGBTQIA+ community.

The LGBTQIA Allyship is

> the practice of confronting heterosexism, sexism, genderism, allosexism, and monosexism in oneself and others out of self-interest and a concern for the well being of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and asexual people. Is founded on the belief and believes that dismantling heterosexism, monosexism, trans oppression/trans misogyny/cissexism and allosexism is a social justice issue (see the UCDavis link above)

The social sciences have a branch devoted to gender studies. Other sciences, such as sexology and neuroscience, are also interested in the subject.

The social sciences sometimes approach gender as a social construct, and gender studies particularly do, while research in the natural sciences investigates whether biological differences in males and females influence the development of gender in humans; both inform debate about how far biological differences influence the formation of gender identity. In some English literature, there is also a trichotomy between biological sex, psychological gender, and social gender role. This framework first appeared in a feminist paper on transsexualism (Yudkin, 1978).

## Genders

There is the binary gender (male or female) and some identify themselves under a third (non-binary) gender of either:

**See also: Gender Identity**

## Gender identity vs Sexual Orientation

Gender identity is separate from sexual or romantic orientation, and non-binary people have a variety of sexual orientations, just as transgender and cisgender people do.

A non-binary gender is not associated with a specific gender expression, such as androgyny. Non-binary people as a group have a wide variety of gender expressions. People who are non-binary have gender identities that are not exclusively masculine or feminine. They may identify as having an overlap of gender identities, having two or more genders, having no gender, having a fluctuating gender identity, or being third gender or other-gendered. Recognition of non-binary genders is still somewhat new to mainstream Western culture (McGee & Warms, 2011).

## Gender Identity and Society

Historically, many if not most societies have recognized only two distinct, broad classes of gender roles, a binary of masculine and feminine, largely corresponding to the biological sexes of male and female.

> Most cultures currently construct their societies based on the understanding of gender binary—the two gender categorizations (male and female). Such societies divide their population based on biological sex assigned to individuals at birth to begin the process of gender socialization. (Nadal, 2017).

In addition to these traditionally recognized third genders, many cultures now recognize, to differing degrees, various non-binary gender identities.

Gender neutrality is a movement to end discrimination of gender altogether in society through means of gender-neutral language, the end of sex segregation, and other means.

## Quantifying genders

Genders can only be quantified to a certain extent. As indicated, there are binary and non-binary genders. Binary being male or female and non-binary being others which don’t follow the binary convention. So, you **could** say there are three genders, but that is oversimplified. The genders in the third (non-binary) gender category is numerous, and can be bigger than the list I provided. It is all down to how people identify themselves in the way of gender.

## References

McGee, R. J. & Warms, R. L. (2011). *Anthropological Theory: An Introductory History*. New York: McGraw Hill.

Nadal, K. L. (2017). *The SAGE Encyclopedia of Psychology and Gender*

Yudkin, M. (1978). Transsexualism and women: A critical perspective. *Feminist Studies. 4*(3): 97–106. doi:10.2307/3177542 jstor: 3177542
> 5 votes

# Answer
Humans have hardware(a physical body) and software(behavior, also called gender/gender expression/sex roles).

Hardware = sex; describes one's genetically determined reproductive function, i.e. male, female

Software = gender; describes social and cultural differences between male and female(not physical ones). Think feminine and masculine

Gender, for better or worse, is commonly categorized as either male or female. One's sex does not necessarily determine their social expression, or gender. Like many animal species, human gender is labile(open to change). Gender is more fluid than sex and has numerous manifestations. Acting masculine(gender) is not the same thing as being male(sex). Source: "A Hunter Gatherer's Guide to the 21st Century", Heying, Heather; Weinstein, Bret
> -1 votes

---
Tags: sexuality, gender
---


# Question
Title: What is the primary source of the "mount stupid" graphic?
Online descriptions of the Dunning-Kruger effect are often accompanied by a "mount stupid" graphic similar to the below - from a Psychology Today article:

However, the research paper does not contain this graphic. Here are some of the graphics from the original 1999 paper:

These graphics bare little resemblance to the ones found online - having no "mount stupid" in evidence. The online images vary widely in their presentation, so if there is a primary source, then it would be good to know which one is the correct graphic, or if they are all fake.

\[\]\[\]

Similar images are used on some posts in this forum:

# Answer
A recent video essay on YouTube covers this topic quite well. The creator also failed to find a primary source for the "mount stupid" graphic, and concurs that it is *not* related to the Dunning-Kruger effect (see also this post, and this one). Notably, the graphic is incorrect in several important ways:

* The Dunning-Kruger effect is about performance, not expertise.
* The Dunning-Kruger effect is about estimated performance, not confidence.
* Poor performers are not more confident or arrogant than high performers.

These differences mean that **the graphic is not just exaggerated, but outright wrong**.

Some of the comments point to a possible candidate source, called the Hype Cycle (see also this post), that actually pre-dates Dunning-Kruger by a few years:

|  |
| --- |
|  |

This graphic is based on as much evidence as the "mount stupid" varieties - ie, none. Compare to:

|  |
| --- |
|  |

Additionally, it is worth noting that the Dunning-Kruger effect itself is under contention, as I summarize in my answer to: Is there evidence to support the Dunning-Kruger effect? Thus, even if the graphic was accurate, it may not represent a real effect anyway.
> 5 votes

# Answer
**Short answer**
The cartoon graphics showing mount stupid seem to be exaggerated, popular-scientific representations, and should, as far as I can see, be regarded as schematics to illustrate a more subtle effect.

**Background**
From what I can find, the cartoons you provide are exaggerated and simplified versions depicting the more pronounced examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect like in Fig. 1 where subjects performed a Wason task (Schlösser *et al*., 2013). The mountain is somewhat visible here, especially in panel B where the raw scores are plotted. There the subjective performance increases monotonically, while the perceived score in the poorest quartile is above the second, which resembles the peak you are referring to. However, this is one of the most pronounced samples I could find and it may well be caused by variance, as other graphs in that same paper, other sources you provide above (Kruger & Dunning, 1999) don't show this peak. Similarly, plots in Dunning (2011) are less pronounced at this point.

Fig. 1. Actual versus perceived performance on Wason task. Dotted line represents where perceived performance should lay according to the Krajč–Ortmann model. source: (Schlösser *et al*., 2013)

**References**
**-** Dunning, *Advances Exp Soc Psych* (2011); **44**: 247-96
**-** Kruger & Dunning, *J Personality Social Psych* (1999); **77**(6): 121-34
**-** Schlösser *et al*., *J Economic Psych* (2013); **39**: 85-100
> 6 votes

# Answer
I seem to have found the primary source of this piece of misinformation. I did a deep dive into this about a year ago when I saw these charts and instantly noticed none of them come from the source paper in any way.

I traced back reference upon reference until I finally found a chart with a watermark to this url: artandtechnology.com.au

Searching around the site, I found this image sitting there:

Using the Wayback Machine I found this post is dated October 15, 2011. Notice how the picture states Nobel Prize Psychology 2000 and on the post he states:

> This team won the Nobel Prize for Psychology in 2000 for proving that the unskilled in a field do not know what they don't know.

Which is a fact I also see repeated on a lot of similar charts, despite being completely untrue.

Setting a Google image search to only show posts before that date, I find only one other similar chart from a blog post. The blog post, found here, posts a comic from the webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal stating that it seems like a good representation of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. This blog post is from April 13, 2011. The SMBC comic is as follows:

This comic was posted March 8, 2011 and makes no mention of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. The only thing linking this comic to the Dunning-Kruger Effect is the aforementioned blog post.

My assumption is that the the cartoonist who made the cited Dunning-Kruger chart did a Google search for the term after hearing about it, saw the image result for blog post containing the SMBC comic, and copied it with only cursory knowledge. From there it was used by a few articles and it just spread from there.

These are all the earliest found mentions of anything with the Dunning-Kruger effect and a chart of this shape. All other versions of this seem to come after 2011. I found an article citing the artandtechnology.com.au chart in 2012, and then someone made a similar chart in 2013. Most charts look very similar to the artandtechnology.com.au one or are just slightly modified version to hide the source.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I believe this is the primary source of the "mount stupid" version of the graphic, another SMBC comic from 2011: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-12-28
> 0 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, reference-request, bias, metacognition, confidence
---


# Question
Title: What is the difference between chronic stress and anxiety?
The answers of this question, which are partly based on this website, explain that a prolonged stress is called anxiety.

But that is also the definition of chronic stress.

So what is the difference between anxiety and chronic stress?

# Answer
Chronic stress, as defined in the field of psychology, refers to a state of ongoing physiological arousal that occurs in response to prolonged exposure to stressful situations or stressors. These stressors can be external, such as financial hardship or work-related stress, or internal, such as chronic health conditions. According to the allostatic load model, chronic stress can cause a constant activation of the body's stress response systems, leading to wear and tear that can have significant negative impacts on physical and mental health over time.

In contrast, anxiety, as outlined in the DSM-5, encompasses a range of disorders characterized by feelings of excessive and persistent fear, worry, and nervousness. Unlike the relatively clear and identifiable stressors involved in chronic stress, anxiety disorders often involve fears and worries about potential future threats or negative outcomes, which may not be based on reality. Anxiety disorders, according to the DSM-5, include disorders such as generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and various phobia-related disorders, each with their unique diagnostic criteria.

While both chronic stress and anxiety involve sustained physiological arousal, there are key differences in their cognitive and emotional profiles. Chronic stress is typically tied to identifiable stressors and may not involve significant disruptions in cognitive processes apart from the preoccupation with the ongoing stressors. On the other hand, anxiety disorders involve cognitive processes such as excessive worry, anticipation of future threats, and avoidance behaviors, which can significantly interfere with a person's daily functioning and quality of life.

In the psychotherapeutic context, these differences between chronic stress and anxiety are important because they guide treatment approaches. Chronic stress may be addressed by helping individuals manage stressors, build resilience, and develop coping strategies, often involving stress management techniques, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and possibly changes in lifestyle and environment.

Anxiety disorders, on the other hand, are often treated with a combination of cognitive-behavioral therapy, which helps individuals identify and change thought patterns that lead to anxiety, exposure therapy for confronting feared situations, and in some cases, medication.

It's crucial to remember that while chronic stress and anxiety can overlap, they are distinct phenomena that require different therapeutic approaches. Always, the first step in treatment is a thorough diagnostic evaluation to accurately identify the problem and guide the selection of the most effective treatment strategies.
> 3 votes

---
Tags: stress, anxiety
---


# Question
Title: What peer-reviewed evidence supports Procatalepsis?
I copy pasted the transcript of *How to win a negotiation, with former FBI hostage chief Chris Voss*, starting at 3:39.

> So knowing that fear of loss is probably going to drive someone's decision-making more than anything else, tactically, I want to diffuse those fears. I want to get them out of that fear-based thinking, and I want to get them really in a more rational, open frame of mind as quickly as I can, which is why, tactically and empathy, I wanna address their fears first. Well, labeling is the best way to practice tactical empathy: In its strictest form, it's just saying, or writing, "it seems like, it sounds like, it looks like," putting a label on the dynamic. **And science is showing us now, that if we label a negative, it diminishes it. \[my emphasis\]** I'll actually say to somebody ahead of time, "Look, this is gonna sound really harsh, and there's a really good chance that when I get done saying what I'm gonna say, you're not gonna like me at all." And then I'll say what I have to say, and they'll say, "Wow, that wasn't that bad." So I know I can take a very preemptive approach to negative thinking because I know what a barrier it is to decision-making in business.

1. What "science" was Chris Voss referring to? Please cite *peer-reviewed* evidence?
2. I'm uncertain if the "highfalutin term for this is *procatalepsis*", or apophasis?

I'm leery of Procatalepsis, because My unsympathetic reading of the phrase "no offense" is that its user is trying to pre-emptively escape blame for saying something obviously offensive.

# Answer
Chris Voss's statement about science showing that labeling a negative diminishes it likely refers to research in psychology related to emotional regulation and affect labeling. Affect labeling refers to putting feelings into words, which can help people regulate their emotional experiences.

One study, "Putting Feelings into Words: Affect Labeling Disrupts Amygdala Activity to Affective Stimuli" (Hariri et al., 2006) published in the journal Psychological Science, found that labeling emotions can reduce the response of the amygdala, a part of the brain that plays a key role in processing emotional reactions. This implies that affect labeling, such as identifying and naming a fear, can help lessen the intensity of the emotion.

Another study, "Affect Labeling Enhances Exposure Effectiveness for Public Speaking Anxiety" (Niles et al., 2015) published in the journal Behaviour Research and Therapy, found that affect labeling can enhance exposure therapy outcomes for people with public speaking anxiety. This research supports the idea that labeling an emotion can help reduce its intensity and improve coping mechanisms.

As for the rhetorical terms you mentioned, both procatalepsis and apophasis are indeed highfalutin terms for rhetorical strategies, but they refer to different tactics:

Procatalepsis is a figure of speech in which the speaker raises an objection to their own argument and then immediately answers it. By doing so, they hope to strengthen their argument by dealing with possible counter-arguments beforehand.

Apophasis, on the other hand, is a rhetorical device where the speaker or writer brings up a subject by either denying it, or denying that they should talk about it. The effect is to bring the subject up in the minds of the audience without the speaker appearing to have done so.

In the context of the quote from Chris Voss, it could be argued that he's using a form of apophasis when he says "Look, this is gonna sound really harsh, and there's a really good chance that when I get done saying what I'm gonna say, you're not gonna like me at all." He's introducing a negative idea (that the listener might not like him) while seeming to dismiss it or distance himself from it. He then mitigates the impact of his subsequent statement by having already labeled and acknowledged the potential negative reaction.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: emotional-intelligence
---


# Question
Title: What happens to your body when overcoming side effects of SSRIs?
When you start taking SSRIs your body experiences side effects like vomiting, headaches, diarrhea etc.

Apparently these side effects go away after regular consumption.

What happens inside your body to make the side effects disappear?

My hypothesis is that your body adjusts to the extra stimuli in the environment via the apical dendrites changing to adjust the sensitivity of your neurons, making them less sensitive. Is that even vaguely accurate?

# Answer
> 4 votes
Well, I think that's a good question!

The resolution of side effects following the initiation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) can be attributed to the capacity of the human body to adapt to alterations in its internal chemical milieu.

First, let's have a quick review of the mechanism of action of SSRIs. These drugs work by blocking the reuptake of the neurotransmitter serotonin in the synaptic cleft, thereby increasing its concentration in the synaptic gap. This surplus of serotonin enhances signal transmission between neurons, which has a positive effect on mood regulation.

The initial side effects that patients often experience during the commencement of SSRIs, such as nausea, headaches, diarrhea, or dizziness, can be largely ascribed to this sudden increase in serotonin levels. However, the human body is a complex, adaptive system that is always striving for a state of equilibrium known as homeostasis. Hence, when exposed to the increased serotonin levels due to SSRI consumption, it will start adjusting its internal mechanisms to this new baseline over time.

One primary mechanism that contributes to the dissipation of side effects is neuronal adaptation or desensitization. Neurons are highly adaptive cells that can alter their response to neurotransmitters based on the level of exposure. In the case of SSRIs, over time, post-synaptic neurons become desensitized to the increased serotonin levels. This happens via down-regulation of post-synaptic serotonin (5-HT) receptors, primarily 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A. This process involves a decrease in the number or sensitivity of these receptors, hence reducing the overall response to serotonin and mitigating the initial side effects.

Your hypothesis about the involvement of apical dendrites is partially correct, as dendrites are indeed involved in receiving synaptic signals. However, the major adjustment in response to SSRIs happens at the level of receptors, not necessarily the structural alteration of dendrites. The plasticity of dendrites, including branching and changing in length, generally relates more to long-term potentiation, a mechanism implicated in learning and memory, and is a process that may be influenced by SSRIs, but is not the primary mechanism for reducing side effects.

Moreover, other physiological processes contribute to side-effect reduction, including metabolic adjustments where the body becomes more efficient at metabolizing and eliminating the drug, and possibly peripheral adaptations, such as changes in gut motility which could help lessen gastrointestinal side effects.

It's essential to remember that the timeline for side effects' dissipation varies among individuals, reflecting inter-individual differences in drug metabolism, genetic factors, and the specific drug's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. While most side effects tend to diminish within days to a few weeks, some patients may experience persistent side effects, and a small percentage may not tolerate the drug at all.

Therefore, patient education regarding the potential initial side effects, the typical course of side effect resolution, and the importance of medication adherence despite these discomforts is a key role for healthcare professionals prescribing SSRIs. The expectation of side effects also significantly influences their perception and management, a phenomenon known as the nocebo effect. A supportive, empathetic, and informative therapeutic alliance can help reduce this effect, fostering better tolerance and adherence to SSRIs.

---
Tags: neuroscience, neurophysiology, depression
---


# Question
Title: What is the average IQ in Bangladesh or of Bangladeshis?
In July 2010, Richard Lynn wrote the following in their article "National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations":

> "For example, there was no measured IQ for Pakistan, but there was a measured IQ (81) for India. It was assumed that the IQ in Pakistan would be approximately the same as in India, and hence Pakistan was assigned an IQ of 81."

But in "A Study of the IQ in Bangladesh" Published: 2007/09/01 DOI: 10.46469/mq.2007.48.1.5, he wrote:

> "At the time of this compilation we had no measured IQ for Bangladesh, so we assumed it would be the same as that of the Indian average for which we had a measured IQ of 82. We have now located a study in Bangladesh from which a measured IQ for can be calculated at 81."

Does that mean India's reduced by 1 point from 07 to 2010?

And the site worldpopulationreview.com mentions a score of 74.33 citing Richard Lynn and David Becker which is significantly lower than the two sources above (not linking it as I don't want to give them google juice) and lists Pakistan as having an average IQ of 80 and **Nepal 42.99**.

**Why these findings seem implausible to me.**

Lynn argues a strong correlation between IQ and wealth of nations exist. But,

* Bangladesh's GDP is 416.3 billion USD and Pakistan's 348.3 billion USD, and
* Bangladesh's Per Capita Income is 2457 USD and Pakistan's 1505 USD.

Doesn't that contradict his own findings? And the IQ of 43~ of Nepal is considered in the "mentally retarded range" but they have the per capita income of 1,371.971 USD which is close to Pakistan's where the IQ is supposed to be 80.

Pakistan is a much larger country with a lot of mineral resources while Nepal is a landlocked country. If there hypothesis is correct, then what causes these inconsistencies?

So, my question is, **what is the average IQ in Bangladesh based on sound research?**

# Answer
> 3 votes
**SHORT ANSWER:**

* The average Intelligence Quotient (IQ) in any given country is 100, by definition.
* People attributing an IQ value to countries do not understand the notion of IQ, and are likely to be using it to support racist views: better ignore them.

**LONGER ANSWER:**

The concept of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is to **QUOTIENT** the mental performance on a test of an individual with that of their peers within the same social group, in general individuals of the same age and country.

The concept of Countries IQ is ill-defined:

> The question of the intelligence of a certain nationality or population may be controversial. In fact, intelligence is influenced by national, political, and geographic factors.

Such (poorly defined) concept seems to be used mostly to build racist or xenophobic arguments showing the inferiority of some "races" or nations to some others, as in websites making statements "scientifically proven" without giving any scientific reference:

> Often surprisingly but scientifically proven, a warmer climate badly affects the intelligence quotient.

Better ignore such statements. There are better indicators to compare countries, such as the happiness index or the inequality-adjusted Human Development Index to cite just a few.

I hope it helps!

---
Tags: iq
---


# Question
Title: Main Breaktroughts in Neuroscience in the past decade [2014-2023]
I just finished an online introductory course on neurobiology, dated 2014. Given the fast pace of progress in research in science in the last decade, I wonder if any of the core principles known to neuroscience from 2014 has been modified, or if significant new findings have been made or any advancements have been made to cure major diseases. To make the question answerable, I'm referring only to major findings that could be presented in a future introductory course.

Any reference is appreciated.

# Answer
I will give it a shot, even though I would appreciate a reply from a more experienced fellow. :)

* **The rise of Neurogenetics**, thanks to cheaper cost of DNA sequencing.
* **Brain-Computer Interfaces** and neural implants.
* **The rise of optogenetics and chemogenetics**: These techniques, which allow researchers to control the activity of specific neurons using light or drugs, respectively, have revolutionized our ability to probe the function of neural circuits.
* **Advancements in neuroimaging**: The development of new imaging techniques like CLARITY and expansion microscopy, which enable high-resolution, three-dimensional imaging of large volumes of brain tissue, has transformed our ability to visualize neural circuits and their activity.
* **The microbiome and the brain**: The influence of the gut microbiome on the brain and behavior, a field often referred to as the "gut-brain axis," has emerged as a major new area of research. Studies have linked changes in the gut microbiota to a variety of neurological and psychiatric conditions, including autism, depression, and neurodegenerative diseases.
* **Use of AI techniques** to study the brain.
* **Expanded knowledge of glial cells**: Glial cells like astrocytes and microglia are now recognized as more active participants in brain function compared to older views.

Overall, no radical overturning of core principles have happened.

Sources:
> 0 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience
---


# Question
Title: Are Rorschach (inkblot) tests still used as a diagnostic tool?
Are Rorschach tests still used as a diagnostic tool today, or are they just a relic from the 60's? If they are still in use, what sort of information do they provide?

# Answer
> 7 votes
Yes, they are still in use, and they provide rather bad information. My former advisor once worked with a clinician who told him that the main reason they're any better than using the weather report as a projective stimulus is that the Rorschach tests have been in use as-is for decades. Hence we have a better understanding of how people normally react to them, and some catalog of unusual reactions that have been associated with particular characteristics. Had we started with a set of weather reports and stuck with them though, maybe not much else would be different.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from Wikipedia about usage:

> ## United States
>
> The Rorschach test is used almost exclusively by psychologists. In a survey done in the year 2000, 20% of correctional psychologists used the Rorschach while 80% used the MMPI.\[8\] Forensic psychologists use the Rorschach 36% of the time.\[79\] In custody cases, 23% of psychologists use the Rorschach to examine a child.\[80\] Another survey found that 124 out of 161 (77%) of clinical psychologists engaging in assessment services utilize the Rorschach,\[81\] and 80% of psychology graduate programs teach its use.\[9\] Another study found that its use by clinical psychologists was only 43%, while it was used less than 24% of the time by school psychologists.\[79\]
>
> ## United Kingdom
>
> Many psychologists in the United Kingdom do not trust its efficacy and it is rarely used.\[82\] Although skeptical about its scientific validity, some psychologists use it in therapy and coaching "as a way of encouraging self-reflection and starting a conversation about the person's internal world."\[25\] It is still used, however, by such prestigious mental health organisations as the Tavistock Clinic.\[83\]
>
> ## Japan
>
> Shortly after publication of Rorschach's book, a copy found its way to Japan where it was discovered by one of the country's leading psychiatrists in a second-hand book store. He was so impressed that he started a craze for the test that has never diminished. The Japanese Rorschach Society is by far the largest in the world and the test is "routinely put to a wide range of purposes".\[26\] The test has recently been described as "more popular than ever" in Japan.\[83\]

And about the objects of (intended / purported) measurement:

> The general goal of the test is to provide data about cognition and personality variables such as motivations, response tendencies, cognitive operations, affectivity, and personal/interpersonal perceptions. The underlying assumption is that an individual will class external stimuli based on person-specific perceptual sets, and including needs, base motives, conflicts, and that this clustering process is representative of the process used in real-life situations.\[33\] Methods of interpretation differ. Rorschach scoring systems have been described as a system of pegs on which to hang one's knowledge of personality.\[34\] The most widely used method in the United States is based on the work of Exner.

---

**References**
8. Raynor, P., & McIvor, G. (2008). *Developments in social work offenders (Research highlights in social work)* (pp. 138). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. ISBN: 1-84310-538-1.
9. Weiner, I. B., & Greene, R. L. (2007). *Handbook of personality assessment*. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN: 0-471-22881-8. 25. BBC News. (2012, July 24). What's behind the Rorschach inkblot test? *BBC News Magazine*. Retrieved July 31, 2014 from http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18952667.
26. Fidgen, J. (2012, July 25). On A. Hall (Producer), Dr Inkblot. *BBC Radio 4*. Retrieved July 31, 2014 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01l0kch.
33. Groth-Marnat, G. (2003). *Handbook of psychological assessment*. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN: 978-0-471-41979-2.
34. Mons, W. (1950). *Principles and practice of the Rorschach Personality Test* (2nd ed., pp. 30–31). Faber.
79. Hughes, Gacono, C. B., & Owen, P. F. (2007). Current status of Rorschach assessment: Implications for the school psychologist. *Psychology in the Schools, 44*(3), 281. DOI: 10.1002/pits.20223.
80. Butcher, J. N. (2009). *Oxford handbook of personality assessment (Oxford Library of Psychology)* (pp. 290). Oxford University Press. ISBN: 0-19-536687-5.
81. Camara, Nathan, J. S., & Puente, A. E. (2000). Psychological test usage: Implications in professional psychology. *Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31*(2), 131–154. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7028.31.2.141.
82. Guardian staff. (2013, November 8). Hermann Rorschach Google doodle asks users to interpret inkblot test. *The Guardian*. Retrieved July 31, 2014 from http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/08/hermann-rorschach-google-doodle-inkblot-test.
83. Hall, A. (2012, July 25). Dr Inkblot. *BBC Radio 4*. Retrieved July 31, 2014 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01l0kch.

# Answer
> 0 votes
The whole controversy over the Rorschach test leads us to see it as a useful medium but not as a valid personality test.

In using the Rorschach test, the tester should then focus on *how* the subject considers the test procedure, the pictures and how he/she identifies the inkblots... or refuses to, rather than focus on *what* the subject tells he sees.

As @NickStauner states, in this regard you could even use weather forecasts as a test medium... Rorschach inkblots in this respect are probably appreciated because they show a rich palette of patterns and colors which have already been listed and commented.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I highly recommend the book What's Wrong With The Rorschach by Lilienfeld et al which explains the psychological reasons why clinicians use the test and believe it works even though there is no evidence at all for its validity except for highly bizarre responses correlating with thought disorders and food responses correlating with dependence needs. This book is one of the most interesting books in psychology full stop for students and lay readers as it examines the culture, delusions of power, biases, resistances to science, and more that have affected far more psychologists than they should have given clinical psychology was supposed to be a science. Those problems are what led to science-minded psychologists breaking away from APA to form the legitimate science body of psychology in the United States, the Association of Psychological Science. The science of evaluation finds validity of conclusions is increased the more you can integrate: history, observations, collateral tests or interview, and personality tests (however the latter can be invalidated if the patient is unmotivated or lies in answering paper and pencil tests). The Rorschach however adds no validity, and has the potential to reduce it.

---
Tags: measurement, test, psychoanalysis
---


# Question
Title: Why equal probabilities sometimes seem different?
I was told that's more a psychology question than probability. If for example i throw a dice 4 times and get {3,5,2,1}, i would be less surprised compare to getting {1,1,1,1} even though every permutation has the same probability. Why is that?

Why in real life we would be more suspicious the dice is rigged if we got a "special" sequence than getting something that looks random?

Also, what tags can i add for this question?

# Answer
You should look at Kahneman's heuristics on the topic. We all have deeply engrained a system that takes pleasure in finding surprising situations (for example creating presuppositions on emotional valence) without taking into consideration the factual side of the event. He calls the rational, less used one system 2, and the more intuitive and impulsive one system 1, which is present for most of the time causing cognitive heuristics. We are classically conditioned to take in the more diasporic result as more usual.

As Michael mentioned above. It might have something to do with gestalt perception also deeply ingrained in our machinery to acquire information.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: perception
---


# Question
Title: Leveraging emotional intelligence effectively in choice process
I am stuck between choosing between a few options. I have analyzed them rationally and yet I cannot decide what is the most suited for me.

I have read that a powerful tool here would be leveraging emotional intelligence and "feel" more the various options. Yet, I have never invested on this skill and I do not know any practical way to let EI help me at this stage.

The other factor is that the opportunity is short lived (few days).

> What practical ways do you know to apply EI to my thought process, that is effective in a short amount of time?

Any reference/material is welcome.

# Answer
you can start with:

> Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 185–211. https://doi.org/10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG

public document in PDF is also available.

once you grasped EI framework, you could proceed with using it in your actual needs.

whether you have enough time to project 20+ long document on your own topics is subject of your circumstances.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, cognitive-development, emotional-intelligence
---


# Question
Title: What introductory and advanced textbooks on cognitive psychology are recommended?
What introductory and advanced textbooks on cognitive psychology are recommended?

Thanks.

# Answer
1. Algom, D. (Eds). (1992). Psychophysical Prospects to Cognition, Amsterdam:Elsevier.
2. Durso, F. T. (2007). Handbook of Applied Cognition (2nd Ed). New West Sussex : Wiley & Sons.
3. Esgate, A. et al. (2005). An Introduction to Applied Cognitive Psychology. Psychology Press: New York. - **A good book to start with the basics of Cognitive Psychology.**
4. Galotti, K. M., Fernandes, M., Fugelsang, J., Stolz, J. (2009). Cognitive Psychology: In and Out of the laboratory (First Canadian Edition). Canada: Cengage Learning. - **Bible of Cognitive Psychology along with interesting demonstrations and web resources at the end of each chapter.**
5. Levitin D. J. (2002). Foundations of cognitive psychology: core readings. MIT Press. - **Foundation level**
6. Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.) (2000). Handbook of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Sternberg, R. J. (2009). Applied Cognitive Psychology: Perceiving Learning and Remembering. Australia: Cengage Learning.- **Advanced level**

I hope these references help:)
> 1 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, reference-request
---


title: Misogyny – books

text:
# Question
Title: Misogyny – books
I'm looking for some book recommendations that can introduce me to psychological analyses of the problem. Anything related to the topic would also be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

# Answer
**Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them**

> When Loving Hurts and You Don't Know Why.

**Susan Forward** and **Joan Torres**
> 0 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology
---


# Question
Title: EEGs of 2 individuals really show "...it's literally true — your brain waves are synchronized listening to music." What does this data look like?
From NPR's July 31, 2023 transcript and podcast These scientists explain the power of music to spark awe:

> "It modulates levels of dopamine, as well as opioids in the brain. Your brain makes opioids," (Levitin1) says.
>
> Neurons in the brain even fire with the beat of the music, which helps people feel connected to one another by literally synchronizing their brain waves when they listen to the same song.
>
> "What we used to say in the '60s is, 'Hey, I'm on the same wavelength as you man,'" Levitin says. "But it's literally true — your brain waves are synchronized listening to music."

I can imagine that if one checked nerves that went to the feet or fingers one might see evidence that one is thinking about tapping them and generating impulses in the spine in some sort of a sub-threshold way. But for a traditional EEG monitoring brain waves is there really a significant correlation between waves recorded from one listener to those of another? Is it strong enough to be visible to an untrained observer - in other words do the waves actually line up? What does this brain wave synchronization look like if plotted?

---

> 1Daniel Levitin, a neuroscientist at McGill University who scans the brains of people while they listen to tunes.

# Answer
> 2 votes
When I worked at an audio lab a few years ago, it was explained to me that EEG has sufficient resolution to reconstruct speech (albeit at a low fidelity) heard by the subject.

> Frequency following response (FFR) ... is an evoked potential generated by periodic or nearly-periodic auditory stimuli. Part of the auditory brainstem response (ABR), the FFR reflects sustained neural activity integrated over a population of neural elements ... It is often phase-locked to the individual cycles of the stimulus waveform and/or the envelope of the periodic stimuli. ... The recording procedures for the scalp-recorded FFR are essentially the same as the ABR. A montage of three electrodes is typically utilized: An active electrode, located either at the top of the head or top of the forehead, a reference electrode, located on an earlobe, mastoid, or high vertebra, and a ground electrode, located either on the other earlobe or in the middle of the forehead. ... FFRs have the potential to be used to evaluate the neural representation of speech sounds processed by different strategies employed by users of cochlear implants, primarily identification and discrimination of speech.

This is a routine procedure that I performed dozens of times at the lab: The subject is fed (using in-ear speakers) some repetitive beat for (say) 25 minutes - they can watch a show (closed captioned) or even fall asleep during the process. Here is an example of what it looks like (from Kraus & White-Schwoch, 2017):

For a review of the capabilities of EEG FFRs with speech and music see Krizman & Kraus (2019). A demonstration of this effect involving multiple subjects seems gimmicky to me, as the "brainwaves" synchronize to the stimulus, not the other subjects. EEG FFRs are typically used to study audio processing in the brain, for applications such as helping the hearing-impaired.

---
Tags: eeg, music, brain-waves
---


# Question
Title: What differences are between testable theories and falsifiable hypotheses?
*Psychology: the Core Concepts* says

> Psychology differs from the pseudosciences in that it employs the scientific method to test its ideas empirically. The scientific method relies on testable theories and falsifi- able hypotheses.

What differences are between testable theories and falsifiable hypotheses?

What differences are between theories and hypotheses? Are they the same?

# Answer
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/difference-between-hypothesis-and-theory-usage

https://www.dictionary.com/e/theory-vs-hypothesis/

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/understanding-science-101/how-science-works/science-at-multiple-levels/

Typically, "theory" describes explanation of how the world works in some way. Hypotheses are more specific. A theory would suggest hypotheses that can be tested: the theory makes predictions about whether certain hypotheses are true or not.

A theory could be that the left hemisphere of the brain controls muscles on the right side of the body. A resulting hypothesis might be that people who have weakness on the right side of the body after suffering a stroke have damage on the left side of their brain. If this hypothesis is correct, it supports the theory; if it's incorrect, it suggests the theory is wrong or incomplete. Other hypotheses might be that electrically stimulating right motor cortex will cause twitches or movements on the left side of the body, or that axonal pathways can be traced using retrograde labels from muscles to motoneurons and so on but eventually will cross to the opposite side.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: test
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible for someone to experience amnesia immediately after a traumatic event?
I was wondering if at the end of a painful experience, it is possible for a person to forget what happened before the traumatic event. Specifically, can the retrograde amnesia happen instantly after the traumatic event, or does it take months, or even years, to forget about that event?

I've been documenting about combat fatigue, and how it could affect soldiers in many ways, including personality troubles, inability to fight or physically shoot, amnesia...

So my question is: Can someone instantly forget an atraumatic event, or does it take time before they start to face major psychological effects such as amnesia?

# Answer
> -1 votes
According to Potter-Efron’s rage blackout rubric, these bouts of unconsciousness can last anywhere from seconds to hours, leaving the individual exhausted with no memory of their actions3. Learn more:

1. globalnews.ca
2. medicinenet.com
3. vice.com Causes can stem from drugs, alcohol, PTSD, medication side effects... I have personally blacked out a number of times after getting extremely angry.

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Why are "restricted and repetative behaviors" in autism considered a "symptom" given thier utility in the workplace?
A full-time job usually involves a *very* large time commitment to a *very* narrow interest. Both "blue" and "white" collar workers spend 40+ hours a week performing specific sets of tasks. Labor is highly specialized, and people are expected to devote large amounts mental energy following through with the rules and details of their assigned projects.

This DSM5 excerpt summarizes autism as two general traits: social deficiency and restricted sets of interest. The former of course a significant problem while on the clock, but the latter seems to be a mixed bag.

Hyper-reactivity to sensory stimuli can cause issues, if present. However, "excessive adherence to routines" and "perseverative interests" are *the bread and butter of most full-time jobs*. If anything, "neurotypicals" should struggle to maintain such a laser focus. Given how we organized most of our economy and society around full-time employment, why would "restricted interests" be considered "symptoms" of autism?

# Answer
ASD is a neurodevelopmental disorder and its associated body of psychological research is heavily centered around childhood behaviors. The DSM-5's criteria will also reflect this deference to developmental symptoms and thus doesn't focus on observable differences in the workplace or other adult environments. It's also important to remember that the term "symptom" isn't a value judgement in the context of the DSM: whether a symptom helps or hinders an affected individual varies on a case-by-case basis, and a "symptom" is just an observable difference that can be used for diagnosis.

As far as the nature of "restricted and repetitive behaviors" being beneficial in the workplace, these symptoms are described by an article on VeryWellHealth as often "purposeless and obsessive, highly selective, and unwavering." Once again, this is primarily described with relation to children, but the inability to direct such intense focus doesn't necessarily translate well to being harnessed for a workplace environment (though employing them for such benefit is commendable).
> 2 votes

---
Tags: autism
---


# Question
Title: Why do people have the tendency to pick their nose while driving?
It seems that whenever I am driving I've always got to pick my nose. I've also noted that other people do this on a daily basis as well. Why do people have the tendency to pick their nose while driving?

# Answer
I suppose one explanation of this observation is that being a driver in a car is a semi-private space. It is semi-private in that it often feels like people can't see you. In addition, even if someone sees you, you will be driving away from them shortly. And it is unlikely that they know who you are and that your nose picking will ever affect your reputation.

Thus, presumably there are many activities that people tend to do more in private, that occur often in a car. E.g., random singing, farting, etc.
> 5 votes

# Answer
Because it it socially unacceptable to pick ones nose. However, we all do it at some point or another. Whether there is a tissue directly involved or not is another story.
Also, typically people are alone in their car and due to "***social inattention***" (also called civil inattention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil\_inattention) they may assume that no one is paying close enough attention to care. Even if they do, the chances that it is someone they personally know are typically low (depending on various factors such as size of the city and neighborhood etc.) But, I'm betting that most instances happen outside of the proximity of one's neighborhood. I'd like to see a statistic on that one!
> 2 votes

# Answer
I think the one contributing factor is that when we are in our cars we may have the vents pointed at our faces or the windows rolled down. As we go about our day it probably isn't too often that we have a stronger wind source blowing directly at us and as we breathe in we may start to notice that our nasal passages are a little blocked up. Perhaps the added force of the fans or wind as we drive really push the mucus (and whatever dust or dirt it stopped from getting into our lungs) and stimulate the hairs in our noses which causes a mild annoyance. Probably why we know exactly where to reach at it first.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, habituation
---


# Question
Title: What is the area of Psychology called that focuses on interaction and emotions?
Quickly to my background, I did communications studies for my bachelors and I am currently finishing my Psychology master.

In short, I should know what i am about to ask, but I don't.

When a person say something a specific was, for example: Give me that pen!

the other person will feel a specific way because of it. Maybe some memories/experiences/traumas are activated/subconsciously recalled. Flight/Freeze or Fight may be executed and so on.

And finally a response is given. Which off course depends on a whole host of parameters (personal relation, status, current feelings or maybe even physical illness at the time etc.)

This interaction off course is communication, but it seems like there should be a science or an area of study that focuses specifically on the emotional/behavioral side of communications and at least tries to create a framework for this extremely complex phenomenon.

Communication as a field of science kind of does that, but not to a deep degree (at least i never stumbled across it) and kind of a psychological lens is needed on it as well in my opinion.

So far i am unable to call this area of science by any specific name, psychology and communication are both way to broad and don't really describe this, so what is it called then? Are there books on it? Am I a moron?

I know, a basic question, but neither google nor ChatGPT could answer me, maybe you can ^^

# Answer
I studied communication psychology in college. Maybe that's what you're looking for? You can use this reference as a start: APA Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4317224
> 1 votes

# Answer
I believe that the study of human interactions are more the domain of "sociology" than of psychology, but the field of psychology specifically dealing with emotions is called "Emotional Psychology", of which the emotions in reaction of some interactions would be a minor subset, which I guess is not large enough to be a field in itself.

You might try searching for keywords such as "Emotions in the workplace" (which yields a corresponding wikipedia page entirely dedicated to the topic!) to find results dealing with emotions and social interactions; or more generally keywords such as "social interactions and emotions" which leads to pages such as "The Emotions of Social Interaction" and "Studies in Emotion and Social Interaction", each with various references more or less related to both emotions and social exchanges.

Finally, if you are doing a Master in Psychology, I would strongly suggest trusting your professors and not being afraid to ask them for advice and help: you are still a (Master) student, they are professor, if you ask respectfully they will be happy to help, it is part of the job of being a professor!

I hope it helps!
> 0 votes

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, social-psychology, communication
---


title: What are the symptoms of over stress?

text:
# Question
Title: What are the symptoms of over stress?
What are the symptoms of over stress?

I define "over stress" as the state where the amount of stress hormone has exceeded an optimal threshold for performance, and where the arousal is very high (see the picture below, from the blog "I Done This").

The documentation (the article from the blog "I Done This", and Lupien (2020)) I was able to read point to symptoms like anxiety, impaired performance, loss of memory, confusion of thoughts.

But I wonder if there are any other symptoms, like irritability, impulsiveness, etc.

This question and answer tackle only in part my question. The answer focuses on the cognitive appraisal by the experiencer, and the question was framed to target stress as a long-lasting experience (several days), while I am focusing on a stress which lasts for a couple of minutes to a couple of hours.

**References and credits:**

Lupien, S. (2020). *Par amour du stress*. Éditions Va savoir.

http://blog.idonethis.com/science-stress-management-brain-cortisol/

# Answer
anxiety, impaired performance, loss of memory, and confusion of thoughts, are indeed common indicators of over stress. In addition to those, irritability, impulsiveness, changes in sleep patterns, physical symptoms like headaches or muscle pain, and even digestive problems can also be associated with elevated stress levels. It's important to note that the symptoms can vary from person to person and can be influenced by a range of factors. If you want to understand the biological cause of this put it in comment.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: stress
---


# Question
Title: Do Humans Have a Biological Need for Hierarchies?
If I understand correctly, Jordan Peterson argues in *12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos* that hierarchy is natural and humans tend to form hierarchies.

Are there any studies to confirm or infirm this statement?

# Answer
> -1 votes
Maybe this can be of help concerning your question about hierarchy: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5494206/

---
Tags: social-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Is there a mental disorder in which one is unable to determine personal preferences, and as a result, is a cause of great distress?
I know that our preferences and tastes help shape our behaviors and what activities we willingly engage in, but I also know that being faced with indecision is a common feature of the human experience. However, I wanted to know if there is a mental disorder classified in the DSM or elsewhere, where an individual's indecisiveness is so great that it prevents one from settling into an identity and determining what hobbies, interests, aesthetic preferences, etc. to pursue, and as such, causes a large amount of distress and significantly impacts said individual's life?

# Answer
There is no specific symptom criteria in DSM that matches your description. It’s a very general problem that can be conceptualized in a variety of ways.

The closest thing I can think of that resembles your description would be generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Dugas and Ladoceur claims in their research that the main underlying factor causing GAD is intolerance for uncertainty (IU), which - among several things - increases anxiety in decision making. IU paired with another factor for GAD - cognitive avoidance - causes tendencies to avoid difficult decisions completely, or dealing with decisions with excessive worry.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/11142548/

Please bear in mind that proper assessment and diagnostic requires a face to face consultation with a licensed specialist.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I was diagnosed with ASP a couple years ago. I'd say I have a big problem with this. I think there are various forms of poor awareness of ones own preferences. In my case I think there's Alexithymia.

A few years ago I was visiting my parents and feeling very uncomfortable, but hadn't realized it. My mom asked me for hep with the trash. When we were outside she asked if I was all right. For a second I wondered what she could be talking about. Then I realized, I was feeling miserable. My dad was very sick and my sister was having a manic episode. It was really getting to me and mom had to point this out to me.

There have been many other cases where I was bothered by something, people across the room were aware and I wasn't.

I don't qualify for Dependent Personality Disorder, but I score pretty high on assessments for it. One of the problems is ignoring your own preferences or boundaries for the sake of others.

Doubtless there are other conditions.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, psychology, psychiatry, behavior, personality-disorder
---


# Question
Title: How can we determine the authenticity of an online psychologist's credentials?
I have come across an online psychologist who claims to be licensed and a member of the USA Psychology community. I would like to verify the authenticity of their credentials and ensure that they are a legitimate psychologist. Are there any specific online resources or databases that can assist with this verification process?

I used the ChatGPT to find some websites such as:

Or

However, since I don't know which state the psychologist is licensed in, I am unsure if there is a website that allows for validation of psychology credentials across the entire USA. Should I ask this question here?

Additionally, I have seen some questions on Google like the following, but I have not been able to find a satisfactory answer:

How can we tell if a psychologist is real or fake if we find them online? (URL: https://www.quora.com/How-can-we-tell-if-a-psychologist-is-real-or-fake-if-we-find-them-online)

**Update 1:**

I have used the ChatGPT for emailing to apa.krg as you can see at below too (ChatGPT link):

And this the email sent photos and link :

# Answer
> 1 votes
To my knowledge, every psychologist who sees online patients will either be working independently or working for a company that provides online therapy.

In either case, you can ask the psychologist, or the company for which they work, where they are licensed.

You can then look up their license to validate it on the official website for the licensing board for the correct jurisdiction. To my limited knowledge, there is never a charge for this. If someone tries to charge you, it is most likely a scam.

Make sure you verify they are *currently* licensed, and haven't had any disciplinary actions taken against them.

Note that many (most? all?) licensing boards may not tell you when a psychologist (or other professional) is currently under investigation, even for very serious matters. For this, you will have to search court records, newspaper archives, disciplinary hearing records & notices, and law enforcement records. These records may not be in the same jurisdiction(s) in which the psychologist is currently licensed to practice.

From horror stories I have repeatably heard from the USA, medical professionals, and the companies for which they work, rarely disclose their problematic histories to patients, even when it may impact the quality and safety of health care.

*(Please note that all the above is generic help to find relevant licensing information on any USA psychologist, and is not intended to be specific to any individual psychologist.)*

---
Tags: criminology, validation, apa-style
---


# Question
Title: Preregistration questions sample/outliers
HI I'm extremely new to research and my professor asked me to complete a preregistration for a project he wants to co author. However, I am stuck because the preregistration he asked me to complete requests a sample size and how I will define outliers.

The study is a pretty straight forward moderation model with each of the three variables measured by a psychometric assessment. I have been trying to teach myself more about statistics and how to define outliers using a median absolute deviation and determine a sample size a priori using gpower software but I'm in over my head and keep running into walls. Like the gpower method requires you a desired effect size and due to my lack of experience I'm struggling to know what is a "good" effect size for a moderation model? How would you determine that? I'm trying to look at other studies using moderation models but I'm still quite lost. As for outliers I think I might just be overthinking this as every other preregistration I've referenced has only defined them using criteria based on completion time, and incomplete data, I thought I might need to use some more rigorous qualifiers based on like distance from the mean or median.

I feel like I may be overthinking a lot of this but any direction would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

# Answer
> 1 votes
In leu of a proper answer, here are a few quick thoughts for you to consider.

**Power analysis**

Power analysis is a notoriously tricky thing to do well. Your efforts to gather information on effect sizes from previous research make sense to me. Look for other analyses that have used similar variables in similar populations (as close as you can get). Sometimes, you'll need to translate this into an effect that can be read by G\*Power (I'm glancing through my options in G\*Power wondering which one you'd use for a moderation effect: maybe The $F$ test for $R^2$ increase?). You could always just use a default "moderate" effect size (many do), though this reduces the reliability of the power analysis estimates. If you're new to this, consider using at most an $\alpha = 0.05$ and least a power of $0.80$.

I'll admit, though, that I'm biased against such canned power analyses (perhaps another contributor who is a fan could provide you with better guidance). They make a lot of implicit assumptions. The only ones I've ever trusted were simulations based on empirical data, and even those I take with a grain of salt.

**Outliers**

There's several ways to do outlier detection, depending on your data collection method. I'd a) specify a reasonable range per variable (i.e., an age of 135 would be excluded), b) specify some details regarding the data collection procedure (this is what you reference), and c) consider if an analytic method that you have access to can handle outlier removal.

There are some classic outlier removal methods (e.g., 1.5\*IQR or standardized residuals \>3), but there are more modern "robust" methods that diminishes the impact of outliers without complete removal. Some (including myself) believe that should a datapoint be validated and within the plausible range (defined in a) for a variable, removal of the outlier is questionable. In these cases, perhaps you can consider presenting the analyses both ways: using analysis that includes the outlier(s), and using an analysis that removed/diminished it/them.

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


# Question
Title: What exactly does "single trial" mean in neuroscience research?
I am new to neuroscience (coming from a data science background), and I'm a little bit confused about the terminology used in many of the resources I have come across. Many studies mention "single-trial" analysis, "single-trial" EEG data and so on and I'm not sure what it means. My guess would be that "single-trial" refers to splitting EEG (or other) data into sub-series and treating each of them as separate trial, where trial means sample. But I don't understand why is it called "single" trial even if we use many of them in final analysis.

Example usage of 'single-trial" I don't understand:

> **Single-trial** analyses refer to methods that consider the variance within subjects. Two broad families of methods can be distinguished: univariate methods extract information among trials in space, time, or both; multivariate methods extract information across space, time, or both, in individual trials. Single-trial analyses may thus be used for behavioral experiments (e.g., Etchells et al., 2011) and neuroimaging experiments (e.g., Cohen and Cavanagh, 2011; Macdonald et al., 2011; Milne, 2011; Rousselet et al., 2011; Touryan et al., 2011; Wutte et al., 2011). Single-trial analyses of neuroimaging data have seen their use increase since the late 1960s, starting with Donchin (1969). Despite this long tradition and several advantages over group analyses, single-trial analyses remain nevertheless marginal.

(source)

# Answer
EEG measures very, very small voltages.

Therefore, traditionally a very common EEG technique is to do something repeatable, like present the same sound, record EEG relative to that event, and average over several trials with the same event. This helps improve signal to noise, because any time-locked EEG responses are in every trial, whereas noise from outside sources averages out.

Single-trial analyses are those that avoid this traditional averaging step. Though I've also seen it misused where someone claims they are doing single-trial analysis when they definitely are not, so be wary and look at the actual methodology.

"Consider the variance within subjects" is certainly true, I just wouldn't consider it the primary organizing feature. But, indeed, it should be clear to you with a data science background that if you've averaged all the trials for a given state in a given subject, you don't have a measurable variance within that subject, so that's what they're referring to there.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: terminology
---