6 ms·

Stop using small sample sized studies done on college campuses (n = 600, 178, 60) to push clickbait headline articles. Sounds like saying, "Don't cry when you'

Stop using small sample sized studies done on college campuses (n = 600, 178, 60) to push clickbait headline articles. Sounds like saying, "Don't cry when you're sad it Doesn't Work" How about let people do what they want? People vent because they want to know they aren't crazy or at fault. Not because they're trying to be calm or forget grievances.

JAlexoid 5y ago
Like almost all analogies - it's a bad analogy. Catharsis has a long history of study and proponents of catharsis have yet to get a "win".
- SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
  I think you missed an opportunity for a "find relief".
- peteradio 5y ago
  When I bang my thumb with a hammer I yell FUUUUUCCCCKKKKKK as loud as I can, are you telling me that doesn't make the pain less? I'm almost 100% certain that form of catharsis works. It even works in reverse for me, if I'm having a moment of intense emotional strain, punching the wall (also yelling fuck as loud as possible) resets my brain. To say catharsis doesn't work seems to be a limitation of the definition of catharsis in these studies.
  - JAlexoid 5y ago
    That's mischaracterization of catharsis. As for releasing intense emotional strain - you're more likely to lash out. Have you tried not punching the wall and have a time out instead? Because people who "punch the wall" are, according to multiple studies, more likely to lash out and be abusive.
    - mikepurvis 5y ago
      > Because people who "punch the wall" are, according to multiple studies, more likely to lash out and be abusive. Presumably the wall-punching and tendency toward other physical/emotional abuses are tied to one or more underlying common causes. That is, people shouldn't be told to punch a wall (for cartharsis) or even necessarily not to do so (because it'll make you abusive), but those for whom that is a temptation or tendency should seek assistance to uncover and address the root causes.
      - peteradio 5y ago
        I guess that's my point, how do you disentangle the need for cathartic outburst from the negative connotations and actual perhaps small positive impact of the cathartic outburst? Is practicing karate and punching boards on a schedule ok?
        mikepurvis 5y ago
        I feel like it's different when it's a scheduled, planned release, rather than losing control in the moment. Like, my overall emotional regulation is way better on the weeks when I've been more active, with cycling, lane swimming, taking walks, etc. And I'm certainly not doing those things "in anger", but it's still absolutely a kind of release. Of course, the article is mostly talking about venting as a scheduled, planned thing too, so I don't know.
        peteradio 5y ago
        Have you had what you would consider an extreme event which didn't ripple beyond a need to maintain regular exercise? One time I was upset because my now wife decided to spend time with friends instead of with me on the last day before I drove off to grad school across the country. I rode my bike around a large lake (not something I would normally do). Is that somehow doing it wrong? It seems like the whole issue is "don't rock the boat or people will look at you sideways and make you an outcast". Works fine to be and express yourself in a safe place (accepting people/sound-proof walls), even if its peakish at times, just my experience.
rectang 5y ago
The article reads as though its author has a vested interest in protecting some status quo that people complain about a lot. Like they just can't stand hearing people vent because they hate being reminded that people are unhappy.
- willhinsa 5y ago
  “What do you call your act?” “YouTube!” * a reference to The Aristocrats joke, and how YouTube removed publicly facing downvotes on videos. Great for concealing negative sentiment!
chaostheory 5y ago
To piggyback, until psychology has a repeatable theoretical model; it's hard to take conclusions like this seriously. It needs to become married with neurology. ie We need to see this happening from a biological perspective. A small sample of surveys is not good enough to form strong conclusions. Otherwise, the results and conclusions feel arbitrary.
parksy 5y ago
"Researchers first criticized essays written by the study participants and then told some of them to hit a punching bag. Afterward, they gave them all an opportunity to blast loud noise at the person who had insulted their writing. People in the bag-hitting groups reported experiencing more anger and were more likely to blast noise than those who did nothing." This does sound like a selection bias and priming. You have a group of people who are criticised. Some of those people are told to do something physically violent. All were then told to push a button to blast a noise. Blasting a noise is a mild aggression. Hitting a punching bag is much more aggressive. It's no surprise that the group primed for violence reported more anger and was more primed to the milder form of aggression. Also how did the people hit the bag? Did any resist and needed encouragement. Did they punch it full force or just tap it so they could get their reward and leave? There is no way this study can draw conclusions on people who are victims of sustained physical and emotional trauma. It only proves that people who had college essays criticised are more likely to press the beep button and feel angry if they're forced to punch a punching bag. edit - I am biased. I endured a tough childhood with bipolar parents, physical and emotional abuse was involved. I know there is a venting trap where you can get comfortable and wallow, but that's like finding a local minima, without any form of catharsis you never heal, with undirected catharsis you get stuck, but catharsis coupled with guidance and reinforcement really does help.
- bduerst 5y ago
  That's the point of the study though, right? That violent behavior begets more violence. It may seem like a "no duh" moment, but sometimes you need to observe it in a structured format to demonstrate it.
- roywiggins 5y ago
  > selection bias and priming "priming" has had something of a fall from grace. > The studies of behavioral priming that I had cited in the chapter were largely discredited in the famous replication crisis of psychology... behavioral priming research is effectively dead. https://www.edge.org/adversarial-collaboration-daniel-kahneman https://www.edge.org/adversarial-collaboration-daniel-kahnem...
kashyapc 5y ago
On studies with students: Our prefrontal cortex [which plays critical role in cognition, emotional regulation, and control of impulsive behavior] doesn't come fully online until you are about 24 (!). Given that, I take all studies done on university campuses with students younger than 24 with a good spoonful of salt.
snarkerson 5y ago
Bad science reporting and Slate go hand in hand. Clickbait is what they do.
roywiggins 5y ago
On the other hand, if these sorts of cathartic expressions of anger did reliably "work" at dissipating anger, I would expect it to show up in even small samples of college students? For it not to show up, either the effect only shows up in certain circumstances or it's actually not very strong.
mettamage 5y ago
Quite frankly, almost all psychological experiments are nonsense. After the replication crisis and other things (e.g. p-hacking) I simply can't be bothered to take the field seriously. I am beyond mad at the intellectual dishonesty many sciences have committed, social psychology in particular. I couldn't care less if it's an emergent failing of science. First principles were not followed, too few people cared, I can't ever trust the fields again that took part in this. I'll stick to forms of science that actually know something worthwhile. And when I need to intuit anything about human behavior, then I know that I am on my own. With that said, here's my criteria for a study I'm willing to take seriously: * n = 10000 * The effect size is big * It's measured in at least on western, one eastern and one other culture * It's independently reproduced by at least 2 other independent universities/research institutes There are probably another few things, but I think you get the spirit.
- mettamage 5y ago
  I get the downvotes, I understand. I stand by it. I did a 3 year bachelor in it and some select master courses. There are still some theories that I use and find useful (self-determination theory and the five factor model if personality). I use those theories to make my life better. I use the theories of clinical psychology in very rare cases to tell people that a conversation with the doctor might help and won’t do any harm (in The Netherlands at least, in my experience). I can’t rely on clinical theories more than that though because the science of it is too vague. Relying on psychological theories becomes problematic when the results are like normal studies (e.g. n = 100). A benign example: I am sure that the overjustification effect and self-determination theory have a link. In both bodies of literature I have never seen that link being investigated. If it would be investigated then there is a chance that the effect might be rebranded to something else in the name of precision. IMO it seems to be used too often as a euphemism to carve out your own research space. Most cognitive biases are not substantiated enough to be relied upon as psychological theories (there was a good HN post about this as well). And for me, that’s problematic and something to get angry about because media but also university professors tell with too much confidence that these ideas are true and are the best knowledge we currently have. I found personally, that I can better rely on how humans work by using my own mind (a combination of common sense and experience for edge cases). Science should be about uncovering what is true, as best as it possibly can. When it comes to the field of psychology, I feel that spirit has been mostly lost. Feel free to disagree, but if you do then I ask you: have you tried to rely on psychological theories to improve your life and take their advice to heart? If not, then you might want to give it a try. And I hope that it has a more positive effect on you than it did on me. The effect on me has an amazing silver lining but ultimately it is very bitter sweet. Contrast this with computer science which was painful but ultimately delightfully sweet because most of what was taught can be programmed into a computer and is therefore true (at least, true on some level).

JAlexoid 5y ago

Like almost all analogies - it's a bad analogy. Catharsis has a long history of study and proponents of catharsis have yet to get a "win".

SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
I think you missed an opportunity for a "find relief".
peteradio 5y ago
When I bang my thumb with a hammer I yell FUUUUUCCCCKKKKKK as loud as I can, are you telling me that doesn't make the pain less? I'm almost 100% certain that form of catharsis works. It even works in reverse for me, if I'm having a moment of intense emotional strain, punching the wall (also yelling fuck as loud as possible) resets my brain. To say catharsis doesn't work seems to be a limitation of the definition of catharsis in these studies.
- JAlexoid 5y ago
  That's mischaracterization of catharsis. As for releasing intense emotional strain - you're more likely to lash out. Have you tried not punching the wall and have a time out instead? Because people who "punch the wall" are, according to multiple studies, more likely to lash out and be abusive.
  - mikepurvis 5y ago
    > Because people who "punch the wall" are, according to multiple studies, more likely to lash out and be abusive. Presumably the wall-punching and tendency toward other physical/emotional abuses are tied to one or more underlying common causes. That is, people shouldn't be told to punch a wall (for cartharsis) or even necessarily not to do so (because it'll make you abusive), but those for whom that is a temptation or tendency should seek assistance to uncover and address the root causes.
    - peteradio 5y ago
      I guess that's my point, how do you disentangle the need for cathartic outburst from the negative connotations and actual perhaps small positive impact of the cathartic outburst? Is practicing karate and punching boards on a schedule ok?
      - mikepurvis 5y ago
        I feel like it's different when it's a scheduled, planned release, rather than losing control in the moment. Like, my overall emotional regulation is way better on the weeks when I've been more active, with cycling, lane swimming, taking walks, etc. And I'm certainly not doing those things "in anger", but it's still absolutely a kind of release. Of course, the article is mostly talking about venting as a scheduled, planned thing too, so I don't know.
        peteradio 5y ago
        Have you had what you would consider an extreme event which didn't ripple beyond a need to maintain regular exercise? One time I was upset because my now wife decided to spend time with friends instead of with me on the last day before I drove off to grad school across the country. I rode my bike around a large lake (not something I would normally do). Is that somehow doing it wrong? It seems like the whole issue is "don't rock the boat or people will look at you sideways and make you an outcast". Works fine to be and express yourself in a safe place (accepting people/sound-proof walls), even if its peakish at times, just my experience.

rectang 5y ago

The article reads as though its author has a vested interest in protecting some status quo that people complain about a lot. Like they just can't stand hearing people vent because they hate being reminded that people are unhappy.

willhinsa 5y ago
“What do you call your act?” “YouTube!” * a reference to The Aristocrats joke, and how YouTube removed publicly facing downvotes on videos. Great for concealing negative sentiment!

chaostheory 5y ago

To piggyback, until psychology has a repeatable theoretical model; it's hard to take conclusions like this seriously. It needs to become married with neurology. ie We need to see this happening from a biological perspective. A small sample of surveys is not good enough to form strong conclusions. Otherwise, the results and conclusions feel arbitrary.

parksy 5y ago

"Researchers first criticized essays written by the study participants and then told some of them to hit a punching bag. Afterward, they gave them all an opportunity to blast loud noise at the person who had insulted their writing. People in the bag-hitting groups reported experiencing more anger and were more likely to blast noise than those who did nothing." This does sound like a selection bias and priming. You have a group of people who are criticised. Some of those people are told to do something physically violent. All were then told to push a button to blast a noise. Blasting a noise is a mild aggression. Hitting a punching bag is much more aggressive. It's no surprise that the group primed for violence reported more anger and was more primed to the milder form of aggression. Also how did the people hit the bag? Did any resist and needed encouragement. Did they punch it full force or just tap it so they could get their reward and leave? There is no way this study can draw conclusions on people who are victims of sustained physical and emotional trauma. It only proves that people who had college essays criticised are more likely to press the beep button and feel angry if they're forced to punch a punching bag. edit - I am biased. I endured a tough childhood with bipolar parents, physical and emotional abuse was involved. I know there is a venting trap where you can get comfortable and wallow, but that's like finding a local minima, without any form of catharsis you never heal, with undirected catharsis you get stuck, but catharsis coupled with guidance and reinforcement really does help.

bduerst 5y ago
That's the point of the study though, right? That violent behavior begets more violence. It may seem like a "no duh" moment, but sometimes you need to observe it in a structured format to demonstrate it.
roywiggins 5y ago
> selection bias and priming "priming" has had something of a fall from grace. > The studies of behavioral priming that I had cited in the chapter were largely discredited in the famous replication crisis of psychology... behavioral priming research is effectively dead. https://www.edge.org/adversarial-collaboration-daniel-kahneman https://www.edge.org/adversarial-collaboration-daniel-kahnem...

kashyapc 5y ago

On studies with students: Our prefrontal cortex [which plays critical role in cognition, emotional regulation, and control of impulsive behavior] doesn't come fully online until you are about 24 (!). Given that, I take all studies done on university campuses with students younger than 24 with a good spoonful of salt.

snarkerson 5y ago

Bad science reporting and Slate go hand in hand. Clickbait is what they do.

roywiggins 5y ago

On the other hand, if these sorts of cathartic expressions of anger did reliably "work" at dissipating anger, I would expect it to show up in even small samples of college students? For it not to show up, either the effect only shows up in certain circumstances or it's actually not very strong.

mettamage 5y ago

Quite frankly, almost all psychological experiments are nonsense. After the replication crisis and other things (e.g. p-hacking) I simply can't be bothered to take the field seriously. I am beyond mad at the intellectual dishonesty many sciences have committed, social psychology in particular. I couldn't care less if it's an emergent failing of science. First principles were not followed, too few people cared, I can't ever trust the fields again that took part in this. I'll stick to forms of science that actually know something worthwhile. And when I need to intuit anything about human behavior, then I know that I am on my own. With that said, here's my criteria for a study I'm willing to take seriously: * n = 10000 * The effect size is big * It's measured in at least on western, one eastern and one other culture * It's independently reproduced by at least 2 other independent universities/research institutes There are probably another few things, but I think you get the spirit.

mettamage 5y ago
I get the downvotes, I understand. I stand by it. I did a 3 year bachelor in it and some select master courses. There are still some theories that I use and find useful (self-determination theory and the five factor model if personality). I use those theories to make my life better. I use the theories of clinical psychology in very rare cases to tell people that a conversation with the doctor might help and won’t do any harm (in The Netherlands at least, in my experience). I can’t rely on clinical theories more than that though because the science of it is too vague. Relying on psychological theories becomes problematic when the results are like normal studies (e.g. n = 100). A benign example: I am sure that the overjustification effect and self-determination theory have a link. In both bodies of literature I have never seen that link being investigated. If it would be investigated then there is a chance that the effect might be rebranded to something else in the name of precision. IMO it seems to be used too often as a euphemism to carve out your own research space. Most cognitive biases are not substantiated enough to be relied upon as psychological theories (there was a good HN post about this as well). And for me, that’s problematic and something to get angry about because media but also university professors tell with too much confidence that these ideas are true and are the best knowledge we currently have. I found personally, that I can better rely on how humans work by using my own mind (a combination of common sense and experience for edge cases). Science should be about uncovering what is true, as best as it possibly can. When it comes to the field of psychology, I feel that spirit has been mostly lost. Feel free to disagree, but if you do then I ask you: have you tried to rely on psychological theories to improve your life and take their advice to heart? If not, then you might want to give it a try. And I hope that it has a more positive effect on you than it did on me. The effect on me has an amazing silver lining but ultimately it is very bitter sweet. Contrast this with computer science which was painful but ultimately delightfully sweet because most of what was taught can be programmed into a computer and is therefore true (at least, true on some level).