![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 32. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Jen Star on July 22, 2005, at 19:33:14
hi Dr. Bob and everyone here,
I had a question about other mental health boards. I recently found and posted on a forum called Psych Central, just to see what it was like.Dr. Bob, do you, as a moderator, ever check out boards similar to this one to see how they are running, or to compare group dynamics and how they change over time? And to posters - do you post on other boards? If you do, what are the major differences that you see from this one?
My hypothesis is this, and I'd be interested to see if it's correct: Dr. Bob puts more of an emphasis on civility, so over time the people who migrate and stay at Babble tend to be the sorts who uphold the civility and are generally more supportive of the community as a whole than is seen at other places.
However, because the civility rules are stricter than other places, there also tends to be a much smaller but very vocal population of people here who love testing the rules, and some who are mad about a block and come back again and again to cause trouble.
So overall, if there was a bell curve drawn of people who come to babble, based on the factor of civility, babble would get larger "tails" (extreme left being very uncivil) and extreme right being very nice/civil) than other sites.
I'm not posting this with any weird intent to cause trouble. I really love Babble, and I plan to stay here! I'm just curious about the world "out there" and what experiences people have had. Within the bounds of appropriate civility and your own comfort level, would anyone be comforable sharing any experiences with me? Do you think my assessment is in any way correct?
I know some other boards don't condone publishable research (I think it's cool, personally), but naturally we can all form our own opinions about how things work, and try to understand where differences come from.
Thanks for reading, and thanks to any who feel comfortable responding.
thanks!
JenStar
Posted by alexandra_k on July 22, 2005, at 22:46:20
In reply to question to Dr. Bob about other boards research?, posted by Jen Star on July 22, 2005, at 19:33:14
> I know some other boards don't condone publishable research (I think it's cool, personally...
Why do you think that is cool???
Posted by 10derHeart on July 22, 2005, at 22:55:06
In reply to question to Dr. Bob about other boards research?, posted by Jen Star on July 22, 2005, at 19:33:14
Hi Jen,
There are posters here who post at PC. No doubt one or more will respond to your thread. I don't myself.
Just from reading, I have observed discussions about the two communities, unfortunately, sometimes become the source of heated exchanges that have seemed to result in hard feelings, PBCs, perhaps some blocks...and so forth :-(
You might want to read through this recent thread by another poster who was also curious about references to PC....
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050628/msgs/525786.html
You could also search the archives here for "PC" "Psych Central," "Doc John" (moderator there) and I'm sure you'd hit on many other threads to read, if you wanted to.
You asked some great questions in your post! You always write the most thought-provoking stuff.
I'll just speculate (as obviously I can't possibly *know* this!) that some posters may be feeling a little hesitant about stirring up the topic again....so don't take it personally if it happens you don't get a tremendous response..;-)
Of course, others probably will be eager to discuss it, too.
These are just my impressions from reading (with interest) about PB vs. PC for a year or so. Hope that helps a tiny bit. - 10der
Posted by gardenergirl on July 23, 2005, at 1:13:31
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 22, 2005, at 22:46:20
Alexandra,
I can't say for sure what JenStar meant, but I think she is referring to someone conducting publishable research using posts, versus published research in general.In order for research using posts to be acceptable under APA guidelines, I believe there would have to be a specific informed consent. It's been ages since I read the information here before I registered, but I would suspect that a blanket consent would not hold up.
gg
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 14:15:36
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 22, 2005, at 22:46:20
hi Alexandra,
what I meant to say was that allowing research is cool. I'm sorry if the wording was too vague! I kind of like the idea that Dr. Bob watches the board for trends and interesting patterns.I'd like to see him write more articles about internet boards, because to me it's quite fascinating. I don't feel like my privacy is/would be invaded by this, because I'm anonymous here. And I still own the copyright to my posts, too. So if I wanted to publish a book of "JenStar's Musings and Ideas" I certainly could use everything I myself have written here.
What do you think about research?
JenStar
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 14:17:25
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » Jen Star, posted by 10derHeart on July 22, 2005, at 22:55:06
hi 10der,
thanks for the link, I will definitely read it. And thanks for the heads-up that some people might not want to post on this! I can see how it would be a topic that is uncomfortable sometimes. Thanks for writing, though! And thanks for complimenting my posts. That made me feel really very good. :) It's so nice to start the day with a compliment. I enjoy reading your posts, too!JenStar
Posted by Racer on July 23, 2005, at 15:24:24
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 14:15:36
(And I'm a geek by nature, so any sort of research is cool to me...)
You know what I find even more interesting than the whole Internet group interaction thing? How similar these internet groups are to real life groups, in some of the cyclical dynamics that appear. Here on Babble, over the years, there are some pretty definite cycles, with a certain amount of Bob-bashing at times, and quiet periods, and so on. Or there are short bursts of hurt feelings that seem to go 'round, usually based on misunderstandings, where it seems that every board here will have two or three posters with hurt feelings over something -- different posters on each board, and it's all totally unrelated. Kinda as though there's some restlessness that's just infected the boards, and there has to be some sort of cathartic reaction to bring things back to equilibrium.
The same things go on in the Real Life support groups that I've been involved with. There is a bit less of the direct "person A hurt my feelings" in the RL groups, but there's the same sort of cycle of high emotion, and back to baseline.
It may be part of group dynamics -- something I know little to nothing about -- but I still find it fascinating when I see it in action, no matter where I find it...
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 16:49:05
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 14:15:36
>And I still own the copyright to my posts, too.
Um... Nope. You retain copyright to posts to the writing board - but thats all folks.
Posted by Dinah on July 23, 2005, at 16:54:03
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 16:49:05
I thought so too. But the latest FAQ seems to read differently.
That Dr. Bob has fair use, but the copyright belongs to the writer of the post.
Although I'm no genius and may have read it wrong.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 16:54:53
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by gardenergirl on July 23, 2005, at 1:13:31
> In order for research using posts to be acceptable under APA guidelines, I believe there would have to be a specific informed consent.
APA being...
American Psychological Association???
American Psychiatric Association???
American Philosophical Association???
Australasian Philosophical Association???I'm thinking you mean the first...
But doesn't that only apply to psychologists who are members of the association? I mean, the guidelines of other associations might be similar, but they might be a bit different...> It's been ages since I read the information here before I registered, but I would suspect that a blanket consent would not hold up.
Maybe the psychiatric association is okay with that.
To the best of my knowledge the Australasian Philosophical Association (and probably the American one too) wouldn't have a problem with fair use of posts so long as they are referenced with URL and time of access.Hmm.
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 17:02:25
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by gardenergirl on July 23, 2005, at 1:13:31
hi gg,
thanks for responding! Yes, the informed consent sounds reasonable, just to prevent issues later on. But I'm not familiar enough with copyright law to say for sure what is and isn't needed. In any case, I'm OK with Dr. Bob doing research here. I do remember checking or signing something when registering saying that I'm OK with it.JenStar
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 17:30:22
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 16:49:05
hi Alexandra,
unless you sign away complete rights, you still own copyright to your posts. Dr. Bob has copyright to your posts, too, which means he may use them in part or whole in a publication without further permission. But you can use your own posts, too.Here's a statement I cut/pasted from Dr. Bob's FAQ. Check it out - looks like acknowledges the copyright stuff. Good news, right? :)
---below copied from Dr. Bob's FAQ ---"How do copyrights work here?
My understanding is that when you write something, you (usually) get the copyright to it. It doesn't even have to include a copyright statement. There's a process by which you can register that copyright, but that's a somewhat separate issue. However, I want to be able to use these posts elsewhere. For example, on my Book Ideas page or in articles.You may therefore submit a message only if you agree to allow me unrestricted use of it. Submitting a message constitutes acceptance of that condition. But you retain the copyright.
At the same time, nobody should post anything they don't have the right to. When exactly one has that right, however, can be complicated. Even if the issue is the reposting here, without explicit permission, of the full text of an article copyrighted by someone else:
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:56:37 -0700
From: Lawrence LessigThis turns out to be a hard question. In my view, it is or should be fair use, but there is some authority to the contrary. Is there a reason you can't simply publish links?
Acceptable options include summarizing or paraphrasing, simply posting a link, as suggested above, fair use of a portion, or, of course, obtaining permission. If material you hold the copyright to has been reproduced here and you object, please contact me.
Posting a site password that's intended for only your use is prohibited. If I become aware of such a post, I'll delete some or all of it."
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 18:01:31
In reply to You know what I find even more interesting... » Jen Star, posted by Racer on July 23, 2005, at 15:24:24
hi Racer,
I'm a geek too! :) It's nice that there are more out there.I agree with you - it is interesting to look at group dynamics and cycles. I've noticed that in RL groups, too.
Another thing I'm becoming curious about -- does the "2 second" rule for first impressions have a counterpart for # of posts it takes to "get" someone's personality online? It's harder, b/c you don't have body language, expressions, etc. But can we form accurate impressions from reading someone's posts?
Obviously research on this could ONLY be conducted by someone who had access to the real people and their posts. And you'd have to design the experiment carefully. But I'd be quite interested to see results if someone did an exp. on this.
Just from work experiences (reading lots of emails and interacting with real people), I'd say there are SOME writing tags that identify character traits, but that it's a harder and more nebulous comparison that using body language and expressions to get to character traits.
What do you think about this?
JenStar
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 18:32:13
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 17:30:22
Yeah, we retain copyright to our own posts.
But my understanding is that Dr Bob gets to hold copyright to them too.
I would guess that means that 'fair use' doesn't apply.
'Fair use' is about how much of a thread, or how much of someones post you are allowed to use.
It gets a little ambiguous here... Copyright restrictions mean that... I think this is roughly correct... You can't reproduce more than 10% of a book or more than however many chapters... Or whatever. I can't really remember. But the point is that 'fair use' places restrictions depending on how you make the analogy between threads / posts and books / chapters / articles. If you use a whole thread in a publication that might be like using a whole chapter of someones book - which might be a bit on the hefty side with respect to the amount of information you are allowed to reproduce.If Dr Bob has copyright then he doesn't have to worry about how much from a thread / post he can use in one article / chapter / whatever.
Thats why I'm careful to put work I have done over on writing. Don't mind if people make fair use of it - but wouldn't want them reproducing too much of a chunk of it at a time.
But my understanding could be way off...
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 18:34:45
In reply to Re: You know what I find even more interesting... » Racer, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 18:01:31
If people did one of those personality inventories and saved it to the server...
(Like you can already do with some different tests)And their posts were analysed...
You might be able to work that out.
There might be some fairly reliable indicators of personality type that are apparant fairly early on from peoples posts...
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 18:35:58
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 16:49:05
> >And I still own the copyright to my posts, too.
>
> Um... Nope. You retain copyright to posts to the writing board - but thats all folks.
Sorry - I get you now.
You Do retain copyright - sorry bout that.
But Dr Bob gets to have copyright too (I think).
Posted by Racer on July 23, 2005, at 19:00:11
In reply to Re: You know what I find even more interesting... » Racer, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 18:01:31
I think you're definitely on to something, although I've no idea how it could be investigated. I know that some people just have something in the very first thing of theirs I read that grabs me, you know? Those people will always be on my radar, and I'll always look for their posts first. (I think SLS has been on my radar like that for many years...)
I also think that there are characteristics that you can see from the first post, that would be upheld by personality indices.
And I wonder, too, how many posts it takes to form that opinion? My guess -- based on what I remember of my own reading of posts here -- is "not many..."
Fascinating... Hey! Dr Bob! We got some ideas for you here!
Posted by Racer on July 23, 2005, at 19:05:14
In reply to Re: You know what I find even more interesting... » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 18:34:45
> If people did one of those personality inventories and saved it to the server...
> (Like you can already do with some different tests)
>
> And their posts were analysed...
>
> You might be able to work that out.
>
> There might be some fairly reliable indicators of personality type that are apparant fairly early on from peoples posts...You know, I think that's a brilliant idea! I could see a couple of ways of doing it, too...
Let's see, have volunteers from the audience (Babblers, that is) take a couple of different personality indices, grab a few posts from each of them -- preferably in context, meaning whole threads -- and have someone else, someone unfamiliar with the boards, see if they can form an opinion based on those posts. Then take those opinions, and check them against the personality profiles. Finally, give those readers the opinions formed by all the readers, with three personality profiles for each, and ask them to work out which opinion they think most closely matches the profile. Or something like that...
By the way, in case anyone cares, I was thinking that out as I typed. I don't think about these things much before I start typing, so you're pretty much getting how I talk when you read my posts... Only the spelling is better when I type... ;-)
Anyway, I'm really diggin' this thread. I think it's a great idea, and would love to see the results if anyone came up with a real version of what Alexandra suggested.
Posted by Dinah on July 23, 2005, at 19:32:24
In reply to Re: You know what I find even more interesting... » alexandra_k, posted by Racer on July 23, 2005, at 19:05:14
And see how many posts it takes them to reach a conclusion?
I find I not infrequently change my first opinion of a poster when I learn more information. Usually in an upward direction. Not sure what that says about me.
How many posts it takes me to conclude something varies widely with how distinctive the posts may be. But I generally try to keep in mind how often my conclusions have been incorrect.
On the other hand, I rarely change my IRL conclusions. That may be because of the intimacy of what we disclose here?
Posted by Deneb on July 23, 2005, at 20:19:11
In reply to I think you're definitely on to something... » Jen Star, posted by Racer on July 23, 2005, at 19:00:11
I wanna be a guinea pig! (They are sooo cute.)
I would much rather be the one doing the researching, but I wouldn't mind being the object of research! It might be interesting. I don't think posters are allowed to do research on other posters here though...I think I read something about that in a thread very very long ago.
Deneb
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 20:49:23
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 18:35:58
Yes, I think we're in agreement now! And what you said before makes sense -- to be careful what you post on the writing board, here or other sites. If you've put a lot of time and effort into a poem or story or other creative work, it's nice to have sole copyright ownership of it! :)
JenStar
Posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 20:52:04
In reply to Re: You know what I find even more interesting... » Jen Star, posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 18:34:45
very interesting idea, alexandra! I think it could work. Of course, I'm not sure that many people would be willing to be guinea pigs, and there would still be some subjectivity. But isn't there subjectivity in any kind of topic like this anyway?
This is cool stuff! I'm glad that you guys are interested in this too.
JenStar
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 21:05:48
In reply to Re: question to Dr. Bob about other boards research? » alexandra_k, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 20:49:23
> And what you said before makes sense -- to be careful what you post on the writing board, here or other sites. If you've put a lot of time and effort into a poem or story or other creative work, it's nice to have sole copyright ownership of it!
Yes. But what I didn't think of was that our posts are linked to google. That means that if I put a paper on the writing board people will get a hit to Babble for typing a bit of my paper (or the title) into google.
That means I don't want to have another copy of that same paper on the internet that has my irl name on it.
Otherwise by googling my paper people could make the link between my irl name and by babble posting name.
I didn't really think of that...
But I'm aware of it now.
I just need to be careful about what I do post on the boards.
And think a bit about what else I might want to do with those papers.
And about how much my confidentiality means to me...
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 21:08:55
In reply to Re: I think you're definitely on to something..., posted by Deneb on July 23, 2005, at 20:19:11
> I don't think posters are allowed to do research on other posters here though...
I don't know... that it would be possible to stop someone.
I haven't done anything.
I don't imagine that I will.
There is just the point that I really do think that if I (and therefore if someone else) decided to do that...
There may well be nothing that anybody can do.
People may get into trouble with the American Psychological Association but that only applies to members of the American Psychological Association and there are other associations out there that don't seem to have anything other than 'fair use' to say about that.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 23, 2005, at 21:15:13
In reply to Re: You know what I find even more interesting... » alexandra_k, posted by Jen Star on July 23, 2005, at 20:52:04
Its hard work to come up with a good research design... Everything needs to be operationalised along the way...
It would be a good Masters level project or something like that...
> I'm not sure that many people would be willing to be guinea pigs,
Yeah. I find it interesting to hear peoples views on being a research subject.
>and there would still be some subjectivity.
Could be eliminated. Have different people trawling the posts and hope they reach consensus. Also get them to specify the lines in the posts that made them classify the person the way they did. That way you might find that there are types of reliable indicators as to personality type.
Once you have a hypothesis about the types of reliable indicators then you could look to see whether these can be used as a reliable heuristic to personality assessment...
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.