Scientests make earth shattering discovery

georgieporgy

What will they think of next! Canadian psychologists (I know they're not real scientists, but let's not let that spoil a good story ) use the Ouija board on their subjects. I quote;

"That's why the Ouija board has attracted the attention of psychologists at the University of British Columbia in Canada. Growing evidence suggests the unconscious plays a role in cognitive functions we usually consider the preserve of the conscious mind."

read the whole boring story here
www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/07/-is-there-anybody-there.html

Zombrex

It is always amusing that ouija boards became associated with the occult considered they were invented as a board game.

Its a bit like finding out in 50 years owning Twister makes you a devil worshipper :P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouija

georgieporgy

the real amusing thing is these guys use it to treat their patients.

Bloodwing

georgieporgy wrote: »

the real amusing thing is these guys use it to treat their patients.

I'm sorry but where in the article you linked to does it state they use it to treat patients? Maybe it's in a different article?

georgieporgy

Neilos wrote: »

I'm sorry but where in the article you linked to does it state they use it to treat patients? Maybe it's in a different article?

Still in the early stages. So far they use volunteers.

The team now plan to refine the technique, as a normal Ouija board can take too long to deliver an answer - up to two minutes. "We're trying to develop a reducted friction device," says Gauchou. She's even developing a "Ouija app".

Bloodwing

georgieporgy wrote: »

Neilos wrote: »

I'm sorry but where in the article you linked to does it state they use it to treat patients? Maybe it's in a different article?

Still in the early stages. So far they use volunteers.

The team now plan to refine the technique, as a normal Ouija board can take too long to deliver an answer - up to two minutes. "We're trying to develop a reducted friction device," says Gauchou. She's even developing a "Ouija app".

I can see that but you stated they use it to treat patients. It also doesn't mention anything about it ever being used to treat patients.

To me it looks like you read a lot more into this than is there. Firstly you acknowledge they are not scientists yet you went ahead and called them that in your thread heading. You also call it an earth shattering discovery which it clearly isn't.

What this article is actually about is a group of psychiatrists who are conducting test to establish the cognitive ability of the subconscious mind and to show the ideomotor effect at work. There is nothing unusual about college staff performing experiments like this and nowhere do they indicate that this will be used on patients with psychiatric issues.

Mintoz

georgieporgy wrote: »

What will they think of next! Canadian psychologists (I know they're not real scientists, but let's not let that spoil a good story ) use the Ouija board on their subjects. I quote;

"That's why the Ouija board has attracted the attention of psychologists at the University of British Columbia in Canada. Growing evidence suggests the unconscious plays a role in cognitive functions we usually consider the preserve of the conscious mind."

read the whole boring story here
www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/07/-is-there-anybody-there.html

Well, it is the subconscious that moves the thing around, but what can never be proven or disproven is whether some evil spirit is influencing the subconscious.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

MrMojoRisin

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No, no, anything to do with ouija boards would be the domain of the Paranormal forum. We've had a few threads about ouija boards.

Tbh, I don't see anything "earth-shattering" about the 'revelation' that the unconscious mind has been found to control or influence cognitive function. Isn't that just the plain, old 'Ideomotor Effect' that's been doing the rounds for years now?

MrMojoRisin

Sorry, Neilos. I see now that my post above makes me look like a parrot, seeing as I pretty much repeated what you said in your post earlier in the thread. I barely read any of the other posts here before posting. Sorry about that.

Musefan

As a psychology student, I am pretty sure I am studying a science subject (a recognized science!). For example, have a look at where the psychology forum is located on Boards . The top killers in terms of disease are directly related to our behaviours (of which psychology is the study of), so there is considerable funding into researching psychological scientific interventions.

Secondly, just as there are crackpot doctors, crackpot engineers, chemists etc. ect., there are also crackpot psychologists who use unvalidated, non-standardised unreliable methods like Ouija boards. Please understand I am not calling Ouija boards unreliable (I don't want to open a can of worms here). But I am referring to their unreliability in terms of their use as a therapeutic method.

Bloodwing

MrMojoRisin wrote: »

Sorry, Neilos. I see now that my post above makes me look like a parrot, seeing as I pretty much repeated what you said in your post earlier in the thread. I barely read any of the other posts here before posting. Sorry about that.

No problem MrMojoRisin. I'm just happy to see someone thinking along the same lines as me.

Musefan wrote: »

As a psychology student, I am pretty sure I am studying a science subject (a recognized science!). For example, have a look at where the psychology forum is located on Boards . The top killers in terms of disease are directly related to our behaviours (of which psychology is the study of), so there is considerable funding into researching psychological scientific interventions.

Secondly, just as there are crackpot doctors, crackpot engineers, chemists etc. ect., there are also crackpot psychologists who use unvalidated, non-standardised unreliable methods like Ouija boards. Please understand I am not calling Ouija boards unreliable (I don't want to open a can of worms here). But I am referring to their unreliability in terms of their use as a therapeutic method.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this in. My opinion is that psychology is not a science. I intend no disrespect to psychologists when i say that (I fully respect the field and truly believe you do a great amount to assist those with a mental illness) but its my opinion for something to be a science it must have observable and repeatable results and these results must be free from personal opinion. As psychology is basically humans studying humans it can never be free from the input of personnel felling or prior experiences.

In relation to your second point the reasons behind using the Ouija board in this case was not the work of crackpots trying to show some spiritual connection, it was just a device that served a purpose effectively. They could just have easily used a page with "yes" and "no" written on it. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the psychologists didn't have it lying in his locker after his college days!!

Atticus Jung

Neilos wrote: »

No problem MrMojoRisin. I'm just happy to see someone thinking along the same lines as me.



I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this in. My opinion is that psychology is not a science. I intend no disrespect to psychologists when i say that (I fully respect the field and truly believe you do a great amount to assist those with a mental illness) but its my opinion for something to be a science it must have observable and repeatable results and these results must be free from personal opinion. As psychology is basically humans studying humans it can never be free from the input of personnel felling or prior experiences.

Maybe your mixing up psychotherapists and psychologists. Which is strange since you seem to understand the experiment that is being done here a lot better than the op. There's no reason why humans cant scientifically and reliably study many aspects of being human e.g. behavior, longitudinal studies, physiological responses etc. There's no more personal feelings or prior experiences involved in the data obtained than in any other scientific subject.