4 ms·

What's more interesting is that the word "success" doesn't appear in the title or abstract at all, the functional word is "eminent", and their definition is def

What's more interesting is that the word "success" doesn't appear in the title or abstract at all, the functional word is "eminent", and their definition is definitely more complex than your summary: "Eminent individuals were defined as those who, by age 50, had accomplished something rare: creative and highly impactful careers (e.g., full professors at research-intensive universities, Fortune 500 executives, distinguished judges and lawyers, leaders in biomedicine, award-winning journalists and writers)."

asdf333 7y ago
oooh touché
hogFeast 7y ago
Yep, I really don't think that makes it better (can anyone explain why it is always psychologists who invent these kind of measures? Is there some test we can perform at age 13 so we can identify people who will go on to do this kind of research? A follow up paper perhaps, this will surely add to the "eminence" of the authors). I have met my fair share of Fortune 500 executives, the majority are borderline braindead. Equally, I am unclear what "award-winning" journalist/writer might mean...it clearly doesn't mean success in any general way..."eminent" is just a very weird definition. Equating "eminent" with "highly impactful" and "creative"...dear God, are the authors actually human? What is especially bizarre is this is a paper from psychologists who, presumably, should understand that equating success with other people thinking you are successful (which "eminence" clearly measures) is a fairly dysfunctional habit...the irony never ends.
alasdair_ 7y ago
>Eminent individuals were defined as those who, by age 50, had accomplished something rare Absolutely every single person who achieves age 50 has done something rare. The authors of the study (as professors themselves) simply measure their own biases here.

4 ms·

What's more interesting is that the word "success" doesn't appear in the title or abstract at all, the functional word is "eminent", and their definition is def

by corndoge 7y ago

asdf333 7y ago
oooh touché
hogFeast 7y ago
Yep, I really don't think that makes it better (can anyone explain why it is always psychologists who invent these kind of measures? Is there some test we can perform at age 13 so we can identify people who will go on to do this kind of research? A follow up paper perhaps, this will surely add to the "eminence" of the authors). I have met my fair share of Fortune 500 executives, the majority are borderline braindead. Equally, I am unclear what "award-winning" journalist/writer might mean...it clearly doesn't mean success in any general way..."eminent" is just a very weird definition. Equating "eminent" with "highly impactful" and "creative"...dear God, are the authors actually human? What is especially bizarre is this is a paper from psychologists who, presumably, should understand that equating success with other people thinking you are successful (which "eminence" clearly measures) is a fairly dysfunctional habit...the irony never ends.
alasdair_ 7y ago
>Eminent individuals were defined as those who, by age 50, had accomplished something rare Absolutely every single person who achieves age 50 has done something rare. The authors of the study (as professors themselves) simply measure their own biases here.