Dopefish wrote:Not a pysch person, but I would imagine you would have a rather hard time coming up with an objective way to measure hopelessness or altruism in order to have relative values to plot. Just sortof handwaving "Yeah, that guy is pretty hopeful, and fairly altruistic, so he goes here on the graph" isn't likely to get you very far for all sorts of reasons, since you'll be full of confirmation bias as well as it seems improbable that someones outward appearance in those regards may not reflect how they really feel.
Your mention of altruism did remind me of egoism which isn't quite what you're describing, but it is something that might interest you to read about.
A lot of pysch (from what little of it I know) comes down to carefully defining your variables in a clear way that minimises the liklihood of confounding effects, while still being something you can effectively measure. Can you clearly define each of the things you hope to measure? Is there anything more fundemental that might be influencing those variables that you could measure more directly? Do you expect that there will be a particular relationship between those two variables, or a fairly even distribution in all four quadrants? Do you expect your choice of variables will allow predictions, and if those predictions pertain to a third attribute, why not make plots against that third attribute directly?
Of course, if you're just doing it for passive interest, handwaving works fine and you can probably produce some 'true' results, but I'd be inclined to think it'd be true in the same sense that many horoscopes tend to be 'true'. It's not due to some special predictive power, so much as having sufficiently vague terms and definitions that you can almost always interpret things as being correct. As such if you want anything serious, you're really got to be explicit in your definitions. This isn't to say that you can't relatively general terms as your measures (and so your proposed ones could well be fine), but you do have to be careful in explicitly saying how your defining those terms, and how you're measuring it.
folmerveeman wrote:First of all, I'm really not sure if this belongs here, but mods: feel free to move this topic if necessary
Right off the bat I want to state that I have 0 experience with psychology, but I still consider myself an amateur, and I tend to psycho-analyse a lot of actions of a lot of people, and generally my predictions seem to be true.
Anyway, I always argue with people that a lot of our actions are based on a degree of hopelessness. For example, suicide would be an act of extreme hopelessness, and violence would also be an expression of hopelessness.
For example, someone with a lot of hopelessness and on the egoism end of the graph would be suicidal, while someone with a lot of hopelessness on the altruistic end of the graph would reach out for help.
First of all I was wondering if other people have tried to evaluate behaviour on these bases. I personally haven't found anything, but I don't have any expertise at all, nor do I have the google magic to find it
Second of all, is this way of behaviour analysis even viable? Most importantly, is the hopefulness/hopelessness a good value to consider? The egoism/altruism axis is just out of lack of better words/ideas.
Pleaaaase discuss this with me
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.