ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Taffi Abernathy · 12 March 2009, 09:33 PM

OK Edward, and please, call me Faith. Taffi is my beloved Jack Russell you see in the avatar.

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taffi Abernathy

No, there is much more here than urban myth. I have no objection to the use of the MMPI, but don't you think you should check out the inventory (a highly valid instrument) and rethink the diagnostic criteria before rejecting it outright? You've never used it and aren't familiar with it; why would you reject something before you've even learned about it?

I'll reject it on the basis of it being qualitative in nature, much in the same way as I reject the Rorschach or TAT as being anything resembling an index by which diagnoses can be made - at best, they are only indicative of what needs to be further explored. Yeah, I go along with the pseudo-science company line - tough bickies.

As you would (hopefully) know, the MMPI is quantitative and data-driven rather than theory-driven, having been developed by first testing an extensive sample of cases via discriminant function analysis before determining what each item reflects. That's the minumum standard (in conjunction with a complete conduction of differential diagnoses) upon which a diagnosis can be made. After all, you do know where the DSM-IV and ICD-10 stand, don't you?

If you want to claim that this "nutcase sister scenario" is a valid instrument, please provide studies to demonstrate not only its concurrent validity, but its discriminant validity. After all, we wouldn't want a Type II error when determining if someone's a nutjob murderer, now would we? Hell, I'll even help you out here - please provide studies that have been performed on successful business leaders. If you know what you're doing, you'd know what I'm getting at.

On top of that, the APA (and also the APS to which I subscribe) insist that it is each psychologist's ethical obligation to clearly investigate the qualities of instruments before endorsing it, much less employing it. If you want to even suggest that I accept this test, please prove that it holds water - you know that it's your obligation even if I'm not on your couch.

I don't know what you do for a crust, but I'm an organisational psychologist and my obligation to my clients is that the feedback I produce to them is based on hard data and not on wishful thinking. They place millions of dollars of their core business on my not giving them fairy tales, and in light of that, I'll leave the qualitative stuff to the sociologists, thank you very much. I just don't have time for Dr Phil, and I sure-as-all-get-out don't have time for backyard pop-psychology experiments that purport to provide clear evidence.

In case you're wondering why I'm giving you such a hard time, even though I'm here as a moderator and not as a psychologist, don't expect me to allow members here to be given information that can be erroneously extrapolated. The ethical rules on both your side and my side of the pond forbid that, and you know it.

Jimbits76 · 13 March 2009, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taffi Abernathy

No, there is much more here than urban myth. I have no objection to the use of the MMPI, but don't you think you should check out the inventory (a highly valid instrument) and rethink the diagnostic criteria before rejecting it outright? You've never used it and aren't familiar with it; why would you reject something before you've even learned about it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taffi Abernathy

Thanks directioneng, you've redeemed yourself. To respond to your question, the MMPI stand for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Psychologists use this instrument to test for every known type of psychopathology. The instrument consists of over 550 items which are divided into scales. For instance, there are scales to measure hypochondriasis, schizophrenia, depression, etc. There are also questions designed to detect when subjects lie. For example, a person will be asked about a particular behavior and later on, that question will reappear (reworded of course) to see if the response remains consistent or the individual lies. It's the gold standard of measuring psychopathology.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gedanken

I'll reject it on the basis of it being qualitative in nature, much in the same way as I reject the Rorschach or TAT as being anything resembling an index by which diagnoses can be made - at best, they are only indicative of what needs to be further explored. Yeah, I go along with the pseudo-science comapny line - tough bickies.

As you would (hopefully) know, the MMPI is quantitative and data-driven rather than theory-driven, having been developed by first testing an extensive sample of cases via discriminant function analysis before determining what each item reflects. That's the minumum standard (in conjunction with a complete conduction of differential diagnoses) upon which a diagnosis can be made. After all, you do know where the DSM-IV and ICD-10 stand, don't you?

If you want to claim that this "nutcase sister scenario" is a valid insrtument, please provide studies to demonstrate not only its concurrent validity, but its discriminant validity. After all, we wouldn't want a Type II error when determining if someone's a nutjob murderer, now would we? Hell, I'll even help you out here - please provide studies that have been performed on successful business leaders. If you know what you're doing, you'd know what I'm getting at. On top of that, the APA (and also the APS to which I subscribe) insist that it is each psychologist's ethical obligation to clearly investigate the qualities of instruments before endorsing it, much less employing it.

I don't know what you do for a crust, but I'm an organisational psychologist and my olbigation to my clients is that the feedback I produce to them is based on hard data and not on wishful thinking. They place millions of dollars of their core business on my not giving them fairy tales, and in light of that, I'll leave the qualitative stuff to the sociologists, thank you very much. I just don't have time for Dr Phil, and I sure-as-all-get-out don't have time for backyard pop-psychology experiments that purport to provide clear evidence.

Yeah I'd agree with what the intelligent guys were on about.

Now what were we talking about again?

Errrrmmmmm I like cheese.

J

jdc · 13 March 2009, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Yeah I'd agree with what the intelligent guys were on about.

Now what were we talking about again?

Errrrmmmmm I like cheese.

J

with holes or without, pasteurised or non, soft or hard, I am sure it will reveal all

Taffi Abernathy · 13 March 2009, 12:38 AM

Just as you finished your last post, I was preparing to leave you and Edward a message. I went back and read my responses and felt that I overreacted. I came home from vacation prematurely due to a family illness and as of this entry, haven't slept in about 30 hours. Needless to say, I am not in the best frame of mind.

Nonetheless, I must tell you, there is a way to disagree with people in an assertive yet tactful manner. You are not simply a psychologist, when you are on this forum, you are also a moderator. Like it or not, that makes you a role model. As a psychologist you understand the importance of knowing how your behavior affects others. Anything more that needs to be said in a PM since this is not the appropriate venue.

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 12:39 AM

Bugger that, lads - CAMEMBERT!

Jimbits76 · 13 March 2009, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdc

with holes or without, pasteurised or non, soft or hard, I am sure it will reveal all

Holes, soft with a little mould and some serious blue veining....

Oh Good Lord...my results tell me I'm in love with Bubba!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taffi Abernathy

Anything more that needs to be said will be done in a PM since this is not the appropriate venue.

Yes, yes, you should know how your behaviour affects others. That said, you would then appreciate how your public challenge to my view required a reciprocally public answer.

From what I gather, you deal with individuals. As both an organisational psychologist and a moderator, I deal with groups and in light of that, I'll stand by what I've done.

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Bugger that, lads - CAMEMBERT!

Sorry James, Gorganzola or possibly Stilton (with a nice red).

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carolina

Sorry James, Gorganzola or possibly Stilton (with a nice red).

Wensleydale?

Jimbits76 · 13 March 2009, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carolina

Sorry James, Gorganzola or possibly Stilton (with a nice red).

Caroline....with this statement and your general tastes in music....If I weren't married and you weren't married....well let's just say I'd be on the next flight to the US and I'd be wearing my cleanest underpants!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

jdc · 13 March 2009, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Bugger that, lads - CAMEMBERT!

are you sure? Is that not soft and squishy?

jdc · 13 March 2009, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Holes, soft with a little mould and some serious blue veining....

Oh Good Lord...my results tell me I'm in love with Bubba!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdc

are you sure? Is that not soft and squishy?

Waddaya gonna do - stick Viagra into it?

Jimbits76 · 13 March 2009, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Waddaya gonna do - stick Viagra into it?

I know one redneck who would!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 12:56 AM

Wiki tells me that this was originally produced by monks (

) and made from sheeps milk.

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 12:57 AM

Boys, you are all a bunch of cheeseballs.

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

I know one redneck who would!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Now you know JJ's going to pipe up and ask how he got dragged into it!

Lisa · 13 March 2009, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Caroline....with this statement and your general tastes in music....If I weren't married and you weren't married....well let's just say I'd be on the next flight to the US and I'd be wearing my cleanest underpants!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Oh, over here, over here, Jim! I like W & G, too! Um, A Close Shave?!! The Wrong Trousers?!!

(Hmmm... I think I'm trying too hard again. Must learn subtlety...)

Idle Swede · 13 March 2009, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taffi Abernathy

Anything more that needs to be said in a PM since this is not the appropriate venue.

Oh how I agree with you, had you not publicly posted this I would have no idea I was a phsyco, killer, liar, control freak and what not.......

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Caroline....with this statement and your general tastes in music....If I weren't married and you weren't married....well let's just say I'd be on the next flight to the US and I'd be wearing my cleanest underpants!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Jim, clean underpants are always on my short list of courtship prerequisites.

Gedanken · 13 March 2009, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Oh, over here, over here, Jim! I like W & G, too! Um, A Close Shave?!! The Wrong Trousers?!!

Dammit, woman, you forgot A Grand Day Out!

jdc · 13 March 2009, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Caroline....with this statement and your general tastes in music....If I weren't married and you weren't married....well let's just say I'd be on the next flight to the US and I'd be wearing my cleanest underpants!!!!!!!!!!!!

J

Caveat emptor. Caroline remember how long is the flight is!!!!!!

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisa

Oh, over here, over here, Jim! I like W & G, too! Um, A Close Shave?!! The Wrong Trousers?!!

(Hmmm... I think I'm trying too hard again. Must learn subtlety...)

My mom just sent a DVD to the kids a while back...but can't recall the name.

I think it had an enormous, ticked off rabbit in it!

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdc

Caveat emptor. Caroline remember how long is the flight is!!!!!!

Oh dear...

Lisa · 13 March 2009, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gedanken

Dammit, woman, you forgot A Grand Day Out!

Oh, I know! It was a given - isn't that where you pic came from?

Love that little skiing machine guy!

jdc · 13 March 2009, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carolina

My mom just sent a DVD to the kids a while back...but can't recall the name.

I think it had an enormous, ticked off rabbit in it!

Curse of the were-rabbit, a matter of loaf and death is the latest

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdc

Curse of the wererabbit

Yes, that's it!

Welshwatchman · 13 March 2009, 01:13 AM

My immediate thought to the question posed was "how the hell am I supposed to know?"

I guess that falls into some bloody psychological profiling category.

Carolina · 13 March 2009, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

My immediate thought to the question posed was "how the hell am I supposed to know?"

I guess that falls into some bloody psychological profiling category.

Paul, the discussion has now turned to cheese... and Wallace & Grommit!

13 March 2009, 12:39 AM	#36
Gedanken "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Sir Location: Melbourne Watch: F-series SD Posts: 8,589	Bugger that, lads - CAMEMBERT! __________________ You buy a Casio to make sure you're on time; you wear a Rolex because you don't have to be on time.

13 March 2009, 12:56 AM	#46
Carolina "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North Carolina Watch: it, Bubba! Posts: 6,271	Wiki tells me that this was originally produced by monks () and made from sheeps milk. __________________ . .Member #5380 .

13 March 2009, 12:57 AM	#47
Carolina "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North Carolina Watch: it, Bubba! Posts: 6,271	Boys, you are all a bunch of cheeseballs. __________________ . .Member #5380 .

13 March 2009, 01:13 AM	#59
Welshwatchman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Paul Location: Wales, UK Posts: 14,578	My immediate thought to the question posed was "how the hell am I supposed to know?" I guess that falls into some bloody psychological profiling category. __________________ ..33

12 March 2009, 09:33 PM	#31
Taffi Abernathy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Faith Location: Philadelphia, PA Watch: TT DJ, SS DJ Posts: 4,053	OK Edward, and please, call me Faith. Taffi is my beloved Jack Russell you see in the avatar.

13 March 2009, 12:38 AM	#35
Taffi Abernathy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Faith Location: Philadelphia, PA Watch: TT DJ, SS DJ Posts: 4,053	Just as you finished your last post, I was preparing to leave you and Edward a message. I went back and read my responses and felt that I overreacted. I came home from vacation prematurely due to a family illness and as of this entry, haven't slept in about 30 hours. Needless to say, I am not in the best frame of mind. Nonetheless, I must tell you, there is a way to disagree with people in an assertive yet tactful manner. You are not simply a psychologist, when you are on this forum, you are also a moderator. Like it or not, that makes you a role model. As a psychologist you understand the importance of knowing how your behavior affects others. Anything more that needs to be said in a PM since this is not the appropriate venue.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)