4 ms·

The study compared the MRI scans of people who said they “often” feel lonely with the scans of people do not report feeling that way. This feels like a faulty

The study compared the MRI scans of people who said they “often” feel lonely with the scans of people do not report feeling that way. This feels like a faulty approach. There is a world of difference between being alone and feeling alone. You can feel alone without being alone, for example. I am wrapping up my fifth military deployment and as such have spent a considerable amount of time actually alone compared to other adults. From numerous points of observation some adults are more capable of performing, and even possibly appreciating, time apart from other adults more than others. Some people simply cannot handle it and literally go crazy. If the study does not account for such a foundational distinction I can’t, in good faith, consider the results valid. This distinction is hard to appreciate until you have been alone for an extended period and observed differences of performance relative to other people.

eyelidlessness 6y ago
It’s not faulty at all if the study is focused on the subset of people who, as described, feel lonely. The study isn’t about you (or me), person who feels comfort from certain amounts of alone time.
- austincheney 6y ago
  Right. It isn’t about objective criteria, but instead subjective self identification not associated with external measures.
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    I don’t understand what you’re trying to make objective, but if you spend lots of time alone and don’t feel lonely, and if other people spend lots or even little amounts of time alone and do feel lonely, those are objectively different emotional experiences. Why isn’t that worth understanding?
    - austincheney 6y ago
      Because social anxiety, of which loneliness without consideration for being alone is a part of, is already extensively researched, even its implications on neurophysiology. Being alone and the implications of resulting loneliness is radically different and less understood. Using improper measures to confuse the former for the later is bad science.
      - eyelidlessness 6y ago
        Huh?
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    Reading this again, I think it’s worth pointing out to you a couple of things: - A lack of emotional response is just as subjective as a presence of emotional response. - Those of us (including me) who lack common emotional responses are more likely to miss normal social cues, and thereby less likely to have objective interpretations of social scenarios.

eyelidlessness 6y ago

It’s not faulty at all if the study is focused on the subset of people who, as described, feel lonely. The study isn’t about you (or me), person who feels comfort from certain amounts of alone time.

austincheney 6y ago
Right. It isn’t about objective criteria, but instead subjective self identification not associated with external measures.
- eyelidlessness 6y ago
  I don’t understand what you’re trying to make objective, but if you spend lots of time alone and don’t feel lonely, and if other people spend lots or even little amounts of time alone and do feel lonely, those are objectively different emotional experiences. Why isn’t that worth understanding?
  - austincheney 6y ago
    Because social anxiety, of which loneliness without consideration for being alone is a part of, is already extensively researched, even its implications on neurophysiology. Being alone and the implications of resulting loneliness is radically different and less understood. Using improper measures to confuse the former for the later is bad science.
    - eyelidlessness 6y ago
      Huh?
- eyelidlessness 6y ago
  Reading this again, I think it’s worth pointing out to you a couple of things: - A lack of emotional response is just as subjective as a presence of emotional response. - Those of us (including me) who lack common emotional responses are more likely to miss normal social cues, and thereby less likely to have objective interpretations of social scenarios.