UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2012 > May > May 22

Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary

From: Eugene Frison <cthulhu_calls.nul>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:42:12 -0500
Archived: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:06:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary

>From: Cathy Reason <Cathym.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul>
>Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:08 +0100
>Subject: Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary

>>From: Eugene Frison <cthulhu_calls.nul>
>>To: <post.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 17:27:35 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary

>>I have not admitted that the only type of measurements ever taken
>>during psychological research are operationalized measures, and
>>based on proxy notions to boot.

>Then you are simply wrong. See:


No. Not wrong at all. This is just a long, long, long piece that
describes the problems with psychology's use of operationalized
measures - of it's confusing proxy notions of things when using
such measurements. I have never argued against the notion that
this is, indeed, a very widespread problem within psychological
research. You are again trying to make it look like I am arguing
against well established fact. This lengthy paper which you are
referencing merely describes in great detail what was never in
contention during the discussion, i. e. psychological research
regularly confuses proxy notions of measurement. This is a great
paper describing the problem but I never argued against this -

I still have seen nothing that says every time psychological
research uses an operationalized measurement it confuses proxy
notions of things. The problem is extensive, to be sure, but I
still don't see it stated anywhere that it _always_ confuses
proxy notions of things when using operationalized measurements.

Anyway, I said you may have a valid point here. I agreed you
_may_ be correct regarding this. Just that I have not come
across anything that states psychological research makes
confused proxy notions of things _every_ time it attempts to
make an operationalized measurement.

But psychological research uses more than operationalized types
of measurement. Operationalized measurements are only one type
of measurement taken during psychological research. It is fact
that psychological research uses controlled empirical
experimentation and observation and makes extensive use of other
types of measurement, such as statistical analysis. Anyone can
prove this very important point to themselves in just a few
minutes of easy research. In just half an hour, I have located
more than a hundred papers covering psychological research's use
of statistical analysis when taking measurements of its
observations. Here are just a couple to get you started:

Cohen, B. H. (2007) Explaining Psychological Statistics, 3rd Edition

Howell, D. (2009) Statistical Methods for Psychology, International
Edition (Wadsworth)

Bottom line: hundreds of empirical controlled experiments.
Thousands of observations. Nothing to do with operationalized
measurements of any type. All of these experiments both
repeatable and reproducible.

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com