[From Dag Forssell (930618.1200)]
Facts: Rick Marken (930618.0900)
...But this does remind me of one topic that should definitely
be included in the BBS article (book?). The topic would be
something like:How does PCT explain X?
Where X would be all the purported phenomena that behavioral
scientists think are phenomena (usually based on statistical
tests) but are not phenomena from a PCT perspective.... ...As
Mary says, there are probabaly a gadzillion "facts" of this kind
to choose from: the social psych and sociology literature would be
particularly fruitful, I imagine: obediance, bystander
intervention, etc. All purported facts that are not facts. Not all
the non-facts would be statistical. The idea that reinforcement
increases the probability of behavior is another non-fact because
it is only true in special circumstances (when the animal is
starved and it's connection to food input is weak [a demanding
schedule]). The "fact" is that animals control food input; the
apparent "effect" of that input (reinforcement) on behavior
depends on parameters of the feedback loop.
Rick, you are seconding my motion of a few days ago:
Dag Forssell (930615 18.10)
What I began to visualize turn out to be of another kind: MYTHS
TYPE 2: _Commonly accepted truths which are demonstrably false._
A clear articulation of these may be much more useful to promote
PCT. It would be much more upsetting and demanding of attention to
show that what people think they know is false, than to say that
something they never heard of, have gotten along fine without, and
don't care about is right.
......
How about it? I hope for some suggestions. Please post what comes
to mind as MYTH TYPE 2:a) Psychological (cognitive, behavioral) science says:
b) Common leadership understanding:
c) Perceptual Control Theory says:
I am very interested in a catalog of what Mary wrote about:
I suspect that this [menstrual synchronization] is one of
the gadzillion physiological and psychological *facts* about
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
people in which some statistical probability has been elevated
to rock-hard 100% certainty.
How can I (we) go about collecting this catalog of *facts* or myths
type 2, make sense of it and see if it appears useful to promote PCT?
Book suggestion? Listing from our minds? Psychiatric reference
works? Psychology textbook?
I am prepared to do some legwork, but PLEASE (all of you sharp
minds out there in CSGnet land) offer some suggestions!
···
-----------------------------------------------
Bill Powers (930618.1000 MDT)
....The variables that are under control are under CONTROL. There
is no doubt about a controlled variable when you find one. You
can't simply take hold of a real controlled variable and move it
around. If you try you'll have to struggle to get your way.
I once drove Bill to the airport on a Los Angeles freeway. We were
in the fast lane with cars all around. Bill asked: "Would you like
to see a good, tight control system?" "Of course," I said. Bill
reached over from the passenger seat, grabbed the steering wheel
and pulled on it, rather hard. I tensed immediately. The car never
veered from my intended position in our lane more than a few inches.
Bill let go. Again, no deviation of the car's position.
I understood the demonstration of a good, tight control system.
Best to all, Dag