Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'psychology'.
-
I am researching how people define success, in relation to their happiness. My research is being conducted via a five minute survey. Can you please take 5 minutes to give me a big favor? http://fluidsurveys.com/surveys/dbnet/happiness/ http://fluidsurveys.com/surveys/dbnet/happiness/
-
Source: http://pocketnow.com/2017/02/04/smartphone-addiction-interview This is a very insightful interview. Certainly makes me feel guilty for being on the internet way too much. There are some things that struck me in this interview (and my first time hearing these terms). The first one is being addicted to information & the “fear of missing out” (aka FoMO). I can relate to that because I always check Facebook for anything new with my friends and the world at large, especially nowadays when Donald Trump and co. have a lot of…things…to say and doing a lot of…things (i.e. #alternativefacts). Heck, even if we’re supposed to socialize with other people, we always pull out our phones and check what’s on the net. The second one is “nomophobia”. Nowadays, our phones are always near us and beside us. Few weeks ago, I decided to go for a walk with my friend. When I noticed that my phone wasn’t in my pocket, I asked someone to get it for me, but decided to leave it behind when my cousin dared me to leave it behind (or asked me if I can’t survive without it for less than an hour). I hope I’ll have the heart in the future to cut back on my internet and phone usage. P.S. copied this word for word from my Tumblr post.
-
- smartphone
- psychology
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
It would please me greatly to get anyone, and everyone to participate in my psychology research project. I am researching if Happiness and Success are correlated on a small scale. Please let me know if there are any problems, or if you have any questions or concerns. http://fluidsurveys.com/surveys/dbnet/happiness/
-
Source: PLOS One via Phys.org journal.pone.0185123.pdf Nasir, M., Baucom, B. R., Georgiou, P., & Narayanan, S. (2017, September 21). Predicting couple therapy outcomes based on speech acoustic features. (I. McLoughin, Ed.) PLOS One, 23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185123 I think Taylor Swift needs this as she makes songs based on the long list of her ex-boyfriends while writing songs about them and probably she'll stop playing victim. I can see two things happening here if this AI, rising divorce rates because an AI says they are incompatible or marriage counselors out of their jobs because couples put their trust on an Ai kinda like how a lot of people self-diagnose and treat their diseases on the internet. I am not a relationship or a dating expert and I have no plans of becoming like Taylor Swift who dated at least a dozen people. But therapists can use them as tool to help them during couples counselling. I can see app developers like Tinder, Ok Cupid and others jumping in to do self-help apps like placing the phone in the middle of a table while talking and the app will analyze if the other person is honest or truly in love or not. But I'm not yet convinced that analyzing pitch and tone alone of someone's voice while talking to their partner is a best way to determine if a marriage is doomed to fail or it is still worth saving. I still think that a relationship especially a marriage is based on communication and trust. I think a lot of relationships fail either because the other person is a philandering piece of shit or both the people involved didn't explored and tested the waters enough to determine if they're actually compatible or one or both people in the relationship change and either one of them is not a fan of it.
- 23 replies
-
- artificial intelligence
- psychology
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
Please participate in a study if you're willing to, it's just five questions and for a psych class project. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/63JPDRF If I don't forget about it, and I actually see any results from this specific post, I'll post the results of the survey here.
- 3 replies
-
- violence
- video games
-
(and 4 more)
Tagged with:
-
Hey so i have a school finishing work and i need to choose some articles (professional articles so the author is ph.d ect) And i found a website that is full of them https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19361650802379748 Reading those articles cost 48$ for one day or 180$ for the whole month and i just dont have it. Now i know this place is for tech but please guy if any of you know a source of professional articles I'll love you forever. Also to those who are wondering my work in on "opinion between ages of the younger generation (20-30) to the older generation (40-50)" like more acceptance and ect. Ty Emy
-
I already know this one is coming after the WHO classified excessive and compulsive gaming as a disorder. Let's talk about it. Primary Source: The Association of UK Interactive Entertainment [draft paper here] Secondary Source: Motherboard (Vice) Before commenting, I encourage people to read both this OP and the one I made before which is linked above as well as read the references attached. Now to everyone reading this thread, it should be kept in mind that regardless of one's position and opinion on the issue, do not let credentials alone bother you because "attempting to prove or disprove a theory or a claim based on mere credentials alone is already a sloppy argument and constitutes the logical fallacy Appeal to Authority or Argumentum ad Verecundiam." So here's the abstract of the counter argument presented at the moment: Looking at the abstract, it actually makes sense. What is the basis of the WHO classifications of "gaming disorder" and the ones they raised is important because they are not arguing against the inclusion of "gaming disorder" in the ICD-11 but rather, they are asking to be on the side of caution. Since the burden of proof lies on the WHO, these researchers felt that some of the claims by WHO are unsubstantiated by evidence. So what evidence are these people looking for? Robust scientific standards are not (yet) employed: The researchers of this counter paper argue that there isn't that much data to corroborate the WHO's claims including the lack of standardized reporting methods for clinical and observational studies as well as the lack of transparency. To be honest, I was looking at WHO's claims and I can't seem to find tests done using an fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) which detects changes in blood flow and neuronal activation. One of the internal signs of addiction is activation of certain areas in the brain just like this one [souce: NCBI]; Unfortunately, I haven't seen one from either sides to prove or disprove each others arguments. But I can already see how it might be hard for scientists to use a fMRI as with any MRI test (contrast or no contrast), it requires the subject or patient to sit still and you can't do that while being inside an MRI machine. One test that I can think off that both sides can use is an EEG or Electroencephalogram which monitors electrical activity in the brain and can diagnose diseases like epilepsy and other neurological disorders and some scientists have used EEG to differentiate a normal brain and someone with an addiction . [sources: here and here] The argument for singling out video games is not convincing: The second one is where their argument falls apart in my opinion or at least it shows the vested interest of the gaming lobbyists. Here, they are saying why is the WHO singling out gamers when in fact there are other addictions worth discussing as well like food, sex, tanning, social media, plastic surgery, occupational and even working out addictions. Now I want to ask, how sure are we that these researchers are not deflecting because this is basically a "red herring fallacy". Why bother bring up some other compulsive behavior when it doesn't disprove anything? Also, how sure are these people that authorities and the WHO in particular aren't paying attention to these other compulsive behaviors? Are we supposed to ignore the ramifications of excessive gaming like the ones I discussed in the original OP [at the top of this thread] because sex addiction is just as bad? If these researchers are actually credentialed people from world-renowned universities, how can they be so sloppy to include such weak and fallacious counter argument? Moral panic might be influencing formalization and might increase due to it: This one is where they argue that with the current classifications of the WHO might result to stigma and hasty generalization to all gamers. This is where I agree and yes, it might result to that but here's the thing, alcohol is actually way more addicting than marijuana and alcohol resulted to more deaths than marijuana and yet alcohol is legal and we don't judge everyone who is drinking alcohol as alcoholics. In the same way, just because someone spent $3000 on a gaming PC doesn't mean that the person is a compulsive gamer so what seems to be the concern here by researchers? This is like one of those "body positive extremist social justice warriors" complaining against doctors and fitness trainers that what they're doing is "body shaming" and it leads to more harm than good or those people complaining to their doctors to stop them from telling their patients what they should and shouldn't eat because the doctor is shaming the patient. Basically, the researchers in this draft paper argue that "These can result in poorly thought out and ineffectual public policy efforts to restrict gaming time such as South Korea’s “shutdown” law (which blocked online playing for children between 12 AM and 6 AM). While such “solutions” may lead parents, clinicians and society to feel that something is being done to address the perceived problem of excessive gaming, in fact, this intervention has had a negligible positive effect and even some negative outcomes." So what do these researchers want them to do, keep their kids playing until 4 in the morning until they become homeless drop outs with deep vein thrombosis? Few more things, while I understand that this is a draft and it's not the final paper. They seem to offer no amendments or changes made to the WHO resolution to show that these people are really sincere. Why does it sound that these people think that someone diagnosed with gaming disorder think that authorities will come and start seizing their properties? But with all that said, even the WHO is a bit lacking in further studies especially blind studies the use imaging and other methods to further validate and come up with a personalized treatment protocol. So how about you? Do you agree with them or disagree? To all math majors and statisticians in the forum (ahem @Energycore ), I want to ask if this is one of the scenarios one can use Bayes' Theorem?
- 52 replies
-
- gaming disorder
- psychology
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
I do say please and thank you. I'll admit, a small part of me does believe that if Google becomes super intelligent it may remember that I was always nice to it and not enslave me, a bit like the dog treating Morty nicely in Rick and Morty... But beyond that the main reason I do it is because I believe treating something that sounds a lot like a person rudely will affect me subconsciously and I'll start being rude to real people. I think if I allow myself to take for granted what my assistant can do, and I don't treat it nicely that over time it will lead to me being the same way towards people in real life. What do you guys think? I'd love to get your opinions. It's possible that as artificial intelligence gets better and better we (the general public) may not even realize when our home assistants or other future technology that incorporates them become self aware. Even if it's not a super intelligence, we could reach the day where something like a Google home contains an artificial being of similar intelligence to you or I, and if we don't realize and respect that we might be in trouble... How do you guys treat your virtual assistant(s)? Do you say please and thank you? Why, or why not? Do you agree or disagree that being rude to an AI could lead to similar behavior with real people? ?
- 25 replies
-
Okay, so this is mostly just me putting my thoughts down about the RX 480 launch, and how AMD actually did a decent job of marketing the product this time compared to the competition they were facing. I'm not wearing a red or green hat, so if you are an Nvidia or AMD fanboy, prepare to possibly be offended. People can agree or disagree. I'm not too worried, these are just my thoughts and not some indepth analysis. So even though I didn't care for it at all, the GTX 970 is the most popular discrete graphic card on steam right now (and has been forever it seems). That's amazing considering custom 970's were breaking past the $340 mark at launch, so they weren't cheap, although reference MSRP was $299. Before the 970 was the big seller, the 660 was the most popular card. The 660 was a $229 MSRP card at launch that matched a $350 HD7870. It's a no brainer that the $229 card beat the $350 card in sales. After all, both cards performed the same, despite the 2GB 660 having 1.5GB of fast memory and 0.5GB of slow memory. So how in the world did Nvidia manage to get so many people to buy 970's at the higher price point? It was pretty simple. They beat their 1000 dollar Kepler card from the previous generation for 1/3 the price. Suddenly 300-350 dollars seemed like a steal, and at less power draw too. Oddly enough, even after the 3.5GB fiasco, people still kept buying the 970. What are the odds two cards with 0.5GB of gimped memory are best sellers? Changing my focus to AMD - they marketed the RX 480 as being built like a 500 dollar card, with premium components, and having the performance in VR of a 500 dollar card. What this translated to in peoples minds was: "you are getting a 500 dollar card for 200 dollars." It was brilliant. Even on the LTT forums you had at least one thread with the title that said something like "RX 480 performs like a 500 dollar graphic card." For the first time in ages, AMD actually nailed the marketing and had people really hyped. Slides reading "2.8x Performance/Watt" had people believing. Even though 200 dollars is a lot of money for many people, AMD said "No, its cheap!" We're practically giving these away." But what were AMD up against? Nvidia were playing the same game again with the 1070, offering a card that beats the previous Generations $1000 card for less than half the price. No one can deny it was and still is a tempting offer. It's why I went for it. So AMD took a shot at the 1080 instead, drumming up the capabilities of DX12 multi-adapter, the amazing efficiency of Polaris, and AMD's renewed focus on software and crossfire support. At Computex 2016, AMD pitted two 480's against a single 1080 in a DX12 title, and beat the 1080. Of course, Ashes is an AMD title that is heavily tuned for GCN architecture, but the message still got out. Not only are you getting a "500 dollar card" for 200 dollars, but for 400 dollars you are getting the performance of a 700 dollar card. But looking at the RX 480 without the marketing filters, you can see why AMD had to come out swinging so strongly. The 480's power draw is close to a GTX 1080 and GTX 970. The benchmarks for the 480 are everywhere, and the custom 480's are arriving. What we do know is that the 480 is actually in the ballpark of the 390's performance. At 1080p the 480 is a few % ahead, while at 1440p the 390 edges out the 480. So who cares about the 390? The RX 480 is a 500 dollar card for 200-240 dollars right? Well... not exactly. the 390 at launch had an MSRP of $329, But custom 390's can currently be bought (brand new) for as low as $260 on newegg.com. So what does the 480 offer? well, better power draw than the 390 (but not 2.8x perf/watt). HDMI 2.0 as well. VR performance doesn't improve though. Regardless, there are large groups of people waiting for the custom 480's to launch, eager to get their hands on this 500 dollar card for 240 dollars (or probably more like 250-275 for custom 480's). Why? because AMD have actually done their marketing right this time, and they actually have some proof that DX12 and vulkan are not vaporware. Nvidia on the other hand seem to be sabotaging their own 1060 marketing: no SLI fingers, Founders Edition pricing, not squashing rumors about supply, declaring 980 performance when the math says 480 performance. I'm not saying Nvidia are giving this one to AMD, because you can bet the 1060 will still sell like hotcakes. SLI at that performance tier is not a common practice. But AMD really nailed it this time, despite the 480 not being a 500 dollar performer by any stretch of the imagination, not even close. AMD have cleverly disguised the 480 as being something much better than it actually is, and pulled in a lot of buyers - even many people who were currently using older nvidia cards. The mindshare is strong for the 480, no doubt about it... at least for now.
-
I would say this relates to my shyness a lot. I feel like inferior compared to others. For instance let's say that someone is really really good at sports. I simply feel like that I "can't talk" to him/her because he/she is so good at sports because I'm not. Simply said I'm not worthy enough to talk to him/her because I haven't achieved something as good as he/she has. (In this case good sportiness...) This same goes for social people vs me. Me as a incredibly shy and the other one super social person. Basically I'm not in a same "social level" as he/she is What is this? Why? and how to get rid of these thoughts? (Linustechtips community forgive me for these stupid questions. )
-
Hello. Looks like I am adding weirder and weirder questions here but in Reddit usually no-one answers. So I trust this forum. The thing is that I feel very old. I am actually sixteen but the mental age tests I have taken tells me that I am 50 years old. Is this weird? I have noticed that at school when there are people talking when teacher is... well... teaching it makes me mad. When the teacher is talking you should shut up and listen. The other thing is that people my age dress very ugly. I don't know if I should dress like them or my own... If I dress like I want I'm afraid of being bullied. I definitely need no more bullying... I simply love old music from 80's and I can't stand Justin Bieber or any modern bullshit. Could my mental age be explained with that I didn't have a lot of friends that had "young souls"? Or could my mental age explain why I didn't have friends? Don't get me wrong I'm not bragging about being mentally old. It has also downsides... My shyness is horrible. I don't have any friends because of it. I don't dare to speak to people because of my bullying experiences. I don't trust people... Well. Looks like this is getting a bit off the topic I would say... Maybe I should start a blog...
-
I wasn't sure where to post this so hope this is the right place. I'm currently studying at the University of Sunderland in the UK and have been tasked with (a pretty long) essay about gaming psychology. It would be great if anyone could answer a list of questions. This essay won't be going anywhere special, just to my lecturer. How did you first get in to gaming? How did it make you feel when you beat that first boss? Why do you game now? Gaming helps me escape from everyday life and takes me away into another world. How do you feel about this and is this the same for you? Do you play any MMORPGs and do you have 'online friends'? What is your opinion on having 'online friends' as opposed to 'real friends' Thats all, thanks guys!
- 3 replies
-
- gaming
- university
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with: