These questions both make me want to go back to studying and run away screaming in equal measure.
I'd say that quite a bit of that involves learning the terms and structure of how to do professional psychology. I couldn't do any of those without doing a tonne of research - ie doing a crash course in psychology.
You took out the b word but don’t seem to realise the misogynist tropes that still remain in the post. Try again please.Talk about flogging a dead horsewhen will him and his 'no publicity' gold digger going to realise no one gives a fuck.
I'm waiting for the 'leaked' sex tape - theres bound to be one on the go
ETA - name changed as requested.
Plus in this particular case you'd have to be a dyed in the wool shite to have it appear applicable when the woman in question was enjoying a highly successful career in one of the top paying professions.
She’s earned more through genuine work than Harry ever has.
Just one of the problems is that often people trying to be amateur psychologists only say things from their own “common sense” perspectives, many of which are completely at odds with the evidence base. Such as “smacking children installs discipline”.
It's an empirical science. I get it. In the end we mostly have a semantic disagreement about what the words 'psychology/psychologist' mean. Your definition is narrower than mine. I also agree with the original point made by mojo that just cos we're all amateur psychologists, that doesn't mean we're any good at it.Just one of the problems is that often people trying to be amateur psychologists only say things from their own “common sense” perspectives, many of which are completely at odds with the evidence base. Such as “smacking children installs discipline”.
If we’re really going to quibble on this, to be an amateur psychologist you’ve got to, at minimum, be able to draw on wide data sets to make more individual judgments, and be able to appraise what data sets are worth paying attention to and why. Being able to reflect on your own biases is a bonus.
But tbf I’ve learnt not to get involved with psychology debates on here as I often end up being mansplained to.
I see your point but it really comes down to the question of whether there is something categorically and valuably different about a formalised and accumulating body of academic knowledge about a subject, which is worthy of being distinctively named as such.
Yes it’s exactly that. And whilst I would say that we are the experts in our own subjective/phenomenological experience (and health professionals should always acknowledge it), lay people are only “amateur x” if they’ve informally studied it as according to the discipline parameters. Which is obviously not a handful of YouTube videos.
Honestly, I’m struggling to give that a bare pass. It misses out some really important ideas to a social psychological approach and talks about cognitive psychology instead, it isn’t referenced and most importantly of all, it doesn’t truly critically evaluate anything, which was what the question asked for.Question 2 .. answer by ChatGPT
Approaches to Attitude Change
Critically evaluate the main approaches social psychologists have proposed to explain attitude change
Social psychologists have proposed several approaches to explain attitude change, including cognitive dissonance theory, social influence theory, and the elaboration likelihood model. Each of these approaches offers a unique perspective on the factors that influence attitude change and has been supported by empirical research.
Cognitive dissonance theory suggests that people experience psychological discomfort, or cognitive dissonance, when their attitudes and behaviors are inconsistent. To reduce this discomfort, individuals may change their attitudes to align with their behavior. This theory has received significant support in numerous studies, but some critics have argued that it has limited explanatory power and that it cannot account for all instances of attitude change.
Social influence theory, on the other hand, proposes that attitudes can be influenced by social pressure from others. This theory suggests that people conform to group norms and adopt the attitudes of others in order to fit in and avoid rejection. Social influence theory has been supported by a wealth of research, including classic studies such as Asch's conformity experiments. However, critics have argued that this theory neglects the role of individual differences in personality and cognitive processes.
Finally, the elaboration likelihood model proposes that people can be persuaded through two different routes: the central route and the peripheral route. The central route involves careful consideration and evaluation of arguments, while the peripheral route relies on superficial cues such as the attractiveness or credibility of the person delivering the message. The elaboration likelihood model has been supported by a large body of research and offers a comprehensive explanation of the factors that influence attitude change. However, some critics have argued that the model oversimplifies the complex cognitive processes involved in attitude change and that it may not account for all instances of persuasion.
Overall, each of these approaches has its strengths and limitations, and researchers continue to explore the factors that influence attitude change from a variety of perspectives
Fair enough. It's also important to know what medics don't know, of course. I'm playing a little faux naive here as I have some knowledge of the history of psychiatry and psychology. There have been some very bad ideas through the decades. Still a few knocking around. I'm not saying that to diss your subject. You and AS know a bunch of things I don't know, clearly.
Thing is, the fact that there have been and are bad ideas knocking about is exactly why you want somebody that has made an effort to formally study the subject and isn’t just uncritically picking up on a hodgepodge collection of ideas.
It’s also a bit insulting to those who work in the area if truth be told. And whilst there are exceptions (eg vaccines), most of the time people don’t claim this with medicine but do with individual psychology. Is that an “ologies aren’t proper subjects” thing? Or, in the case of Clinical Psychology which is hugely female dominated these days, is there an underlying aspect of sexism there?
Oh yes, and there are also plenty who are perfectly eminent in their field that I would have massive epistemological or ontological differences with too
. But at least we’d both understand what the basis of our disagreement was and why we disagree…I think the fact that it affects people so much, people are so systematically psychologically distressed these days and the preponderance of lay literature that claims to (and often does) help people resolve that personal distress doesn’t help either. Undertaking a piece of self-reflection that has resolved some issues deriving from personal subjectivity can encourage the belief that this self-reflection generalises to a wider biopsychosocial understanding. “It worked for me” becomes heuristic, in the same way that amateur medics may prescribe cutting out gluten to their friends when they hear their friend has pain.
That is the problem, seeformiles. You are not helping matters.
My claim was slightly more than that. My point was that we try to understand the experiences of others, not just ourselves, not even primarily ourselves even, and that's where the amateur psychology comes in. But I think my claim is also slightly less than what you took it to be. I wasn't intending to dismiss your field.Yes it’s exactly that. And whilst I would say that we are the experts in our own subjective/phenomenological experience (and health professionals should always acknowledge it), lay people are only “amateur x” if they’ve informally studied it as according to the discipline parameters. Which is obviously not a handful of YouTube videos.
And I gave you the term for that - mentalization. I know wiki is a usually dodgy source but I do like the definition it offers:
And with the idea of mentalization in mind, could you please step back for a minute and consider that it might have been a bit mansplainy to double down?
As you said earlier, it’s my field.
No swastika armband?Prince Harry will be relieved to learn he has at least one fan left in the UK
World Book Day: Redhill boy, 3, dresses as Prince Harry
Ellis, from Redhill, Surrey, "is obsessed with being a prince", says his mum.www.bbc.co.uk
Massive FAIL.
