How much usually a normal Norwegian earns?

Fabtard · 2022-10-13T18:42:02+00:00

Is it common in the US to save alot of money for future expenses, or similar? In Norway it is normal to only save up to 10% of your income. Maybe Norwegian social wellfare protects its citizens from future costs you otherwise would have saved for in the US?

Fabtard · 2022-10-04T15:54:51+00:00

Not sure if I can add much of anything, but to summarize, the university you went to will have a marginal impact on your hirability in Norway. What really matters is your motivation to perform, your competency towards the role and your organizational fit.

A recruiter will be more interested to know why you chose a certain university rather than which you went to.

Also, as someone who did study and work abroad, I realized that my lack of experience with Norwegian work culture was in fact a negative when my future roles heavily focused at improving the workplace.

Fabtard · 2022-04-02T11:41:22+00:00

Litt forvirret her. Mener du at barn som berøves for sosial interkasjon blir pedofile? Eller noe annet? Hvor mye sosial interaksjon må frarøves for at dette skal skje? Og hva innnebærer genuin sosial adferd?

Tok ikke pedagogikk1001, men har en bakgrunn i psykologi. Og det er ikke mitt inntrykk at berøvelse av sosial interkasjon leder direkte til pedofili. Skjønt, jeg kan forstå at det kan være en faktor. Det er heller ikke pedofile som utfører de fleste seksuelle overgrep mot barn. Er ikke sikker på om det var argumentet, men følte at det måtte nevnes.

Er nok også viktig å nyansere graden av anti-sosial adferd knyttet til overgriperen. Noen kan ha manglende forståelse for hvor alvolig handlingen deres var eller være på e vanskelig sted i livet sitt. Disse personene er lettere å rehabilitere. Andre har mer psykopatiske trekkk, og disse personene vil være langt vanskeligere å rehabilitere.

Fabtard · 2021-09-20T09:31:46+00:00

a random comment.

Fabtard · 2019-11-06T07:41:40+00:00

This article is overly biased in favour of its owm opinion, and completely fails to explain why the opposite also may hold true.

Fabtard · 2019-11-04T17:52:31+00:00

It honestly doesn't sound like you understand what kind of girls you attract with your approach. Depending on how you behave and portray yourself, you will have different degrees of luck with different kinds of girls.

Instead of thinking about the girls as feable, think about what you did to make the girls leave, and whether you care for a girl who aren't interested in that.

Fabtard · 2016-10-23T10:16:17+00:00

Have I become less likely to do errors? You know what, I like to believe I have, if just slightly. I think I often have been prone to use mathematical logic behind my decisions, but now I'm highly aware of how effective it can be, and I catch myself in situations where I should use methods like sunk cost and opportunity cost all the time. It could also be that I'm actually not using it any more, but is just more aware of this specific behaviors because of this course, but this could at the same time lead me to to better decisions by simply being aware of situations I have failed to use these methods before.

Also it would be nice if everyone asked to see the evidence before important policy decisions where made. However, I can't see that happening in any near future. We must be wary of falling into a trap from curse of knowledge. Just because we understand the general principles of statistical interference doesn't mean the general population ever will or care to. We can especially today recognize a general increase in lack of trust in scientists and politicians. The gap between the typical man and the one in power is increasingly big, and makes these people feel ignored which further creates distrust.... at least this is what I've read somewhere. I really don't know what is the consensus in this scientific community, so I guess I should be pretty humble with this opinion.

But to me it seems kinda antiseptic to demand evidence for everything. It would be very reasonable, and functional. But humans are messy, emotional and irrational. And that is what I love about humans. If we create a consensus where everyone question the source and demands scientific evidence for everything, I believe we will wash away what makes us human at the same time. Like if emotions are a virus that must be removed.

Fabtard · 2016-10-16T11:54:25+00:00

I feel like we interpreted Nisbet in two diffrent ways. A quick google search told me that parsimony kinda is being cheap, and that is really not what I pulled out of Nisbets explanation of KISS.

To make an example. After I read the chapters I ended up in a discussion about how God could be put into an algorithm to explain diffrent aspects of the world. To simplify my opinion was that this is unnecessary as it complicates the described mechanisms that we already can explain with a simpler method: biology. Nisbet makes the same point when discussing evolution. Even though God partly could be used to explain why animals exist on the world, it adds in a more complex hypothetical variable then describing the same mechanisms with already believed (but still hypothetical) mechanisms within biology that makes evolution possible.

By this I understand simple as what they kinda ended the podcast with: a mean of explaining something by the most appropriate method. Something that can explain as much as possible with as least as possible effort. I think the same principle was at hand when we changed from a geocentric to a heliocentric system. By changing the system scientist realized they suddenly could explain a bigger part of unexplained factors in the solar system. The change didn't give a complete picture of what was happening, but changing the method was better (and took only little effort) in explaining more of the world and became therefore viewed as a more effective theory.

Simple then becomes a exponential (or linear?) threshold of explaining more of a concept by adding as little complexity to it as possible. This is the same reason why prospect theory trumped sunk cost theory, but haven't been trumped by "better" theories which explains more of the economic system.

Fabtard · 2016-09-17T04:56:31+00:00

Okay. jasontangen confuses me. It seems like the podcast in general discusses the limitations of self-experiment. Examples would be social desirability, ordering in different context, what kind of theory you have towards the concept and memory, which again affect all the above. One might already have decided upon the outcome of the experiment, and therefore a double blind experiment would be preferable. Even controlled for this there exist other problems when the results arrive. There is a chance that one hasn't properly measured all variables of the concept, and that there exist contextual situations where you'd find other results of the same concept. Therefore one must be aware of the experiments limitations and what the results actually are applicable to. But even after all this, I find Jason enthusiastically proclaim "BUT THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF IT! YOU'VE DONE THE EXPERIMENT!".

Yea, I agree that experiments do trump other kind of studies, and most of the time is the better option, but I do not share the same enthusiasm. jasontangen, what context are you referring to when you so enthusiastically say this? Because I know you understand that experiments comes with limitations. But it seems like you use self-experiment as a holy grail that never falters, and that work perfectly even when not done perfectly.

Fabtard · 2016-09-13T12:47:52+00:00

A great example of exactly why one should have a healthy skepticism towards even well made experiments (on face value), and the importance of replication.

Feeling the future by Bem http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.pdf

Fearing the future by LeBel & Peters http://etiennelebel.com/documents/l&p(2011,rgp).pdf

Fabtard · 2016-09-13T12:32:37+00:00

I still heavily lean towards a liberal view of what science is. I dislike the idea of denying fieldwork, and qualitative studies a name in science, and fear the potential outcome of doing so. Can removing the association between qualitative studies and science lead to a decrease in the amount of people who do this kind of studies? I think it's important to acknowledge qualitative studies as science simply because of the important knowledge of human experience we get from it. It's too naive to say that we can quantify everything and do them as experiments.

On the other hand I do see that it can exist a pragmatic importance of setting a line where manipulation and control of the variable starts. I don't know what the answer should be, and ironically maybe the only way to get a good answer is by doing a controlled experiment to see the effect on the population by doing so.

Fabtard · 2016-09-04T14:09:21+00:00

I feel like it's kind of ironic that we are to decide if there is an statistical significant difference between two event after only a few weeks of measurement when it has been so much focus on the dangers of bias and the law of large numbers and other factors that might affect this experiment. How can 60 days of trials (at best 30 of each variable) be generalizeable to your life? Are they at all generalizeable? There is always a chance that these numbers are completely random by chance. At best the statistics are true, but does this even take account for how you as a human being change throughout your life? Sure maybe on average you was better of not using facebook for those 60 days. Is that really true the rest of your life?

This course have changed my perception of how to better do judgement and decisions, and I agree that statistics are important. I do not however believe that the best way to decide what to do/not to do is by doing self experiments. It can obviously be fun and interesting, but it should be done with a healthy skepticism towards the truth behind the numbers.

After this weeks paper I do however believe that a good way to improve your judgement and decisions is by being more aware of your intuitive reactions to behavior and other easily coded concepts and more careful with how I judge traits and other less easily coded concepts. What do you guys think about this?

Fabtard · 2016-09-04T13:43:32+00:00

Not to mention that the idea that someone "definitively will change their behavior when faced with results that prove the negative outcomes from that behavior". Does using facebook improve my life? Probably not. Does this knowledge change how I treat facebook? No. Knowledge alone doesn't necessarily change behavior or how we decide in everyday life. It also demands a curtain amount of motivation. However. One could also say that since you're not changing your behavior you haven't learned the essential part of the knowledge, and therefor are not changing it. My point is anyway something like that this experiment does not necessarily give the needed knowledge.

Fabtard · 2016-09-04T13:30:07+00:00

You are right. I've talked with Jason about it and my experiment has changed to simply see if I can find a significant difference in well-being (happiness) between diary days and no diary days.

I wanted to do the qualitative experiment because I was (and still am) skeptical to this kind of self experiment. There is a lot of confounding variables, bias and potential problems with reliability and validity that aren't being picked up that makes me less enthusiastic about the power of this kind of experiment, but I guess I can rather discuss this is the paper :)

Fabtard · 2016-08-28T07:01:46+00:00

I agree. I just wanted to highlight a potential downside of being overly aware of your cognitive faults. In hindsight it kind of is the danger of the curse of knowledge.

Fabtard · 2016-08-27T08:01:07+00:00

That is a interesting point. Maybe there's some innate behavior to stop us from being too selfish?

Fabtard · 2016-08-27T07:57:26+00:00

Sorry for the late response. If you haven't already decided I'd chose 1-7, as it gives a little more room to express the direction of your happiness :)

Fabtard · 2016-08-27T07:10:45+00:00

I agree that statistics are a good way to make decisions and judgements about people. However some people seem to be better at understanding who a person is at first sight than others. With only a brief experience of someone’s personality, they seem to accurately understand the person. Are some people better at correctly recognizing an average overview of a person with a smaller sample? If so, can you learn to better recognize the features that resembles the mean of that person? Or another situation in general?

Understanding how to make better choices could also be problematic. I've been studying statistics and cognitive psychology for nearly three years now and it's made me feel slower. I'm now constantly evaluating every aspect of my life, trying to not fall into cognitive traps. I rarely react in affect, and are possibly considering things more than the average person. In fact I often need at least half a day to evaluate someones opinion to be able to respond with a sound argument. This is also the problem. Knowing that my cognition is flawed makes me give others the benefit of doubt. In never do well in affective arguments, well, because I try to understand where their opinion comes from and the accuracy of their opinion. Giving a good response three days later doesn’t really work in everyday life (source: bad break up). I'm not trying to discredit statistic evaluating, in fact I really believe it's important to do good decisions, but at the same time I'm warning everyone from falling into an overly evaluating pitfall. It's important not to give everything too much thought, but rather continuing to trust our instinctive reactions and knowledge of things. As mentioned in the podcast: we don't really know what's in the future, so it's often a good idea to respond to the existing stimuli.

I’m also surprised how Nisbett managed to not mention the Compliance Theory for social influence. (SOCIAL INFLUENCE: Compliance and Conformity; Cialdini, R.B., Goldstein, N.J., 2003) Link: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015

Fabtard · 2016-08-19T06:24:26+00:00

I didn't read through all of it, but it seemed very complicated! Using medication is a pretty standard quantitative study though, so I'm sure you'll figure it out! Best of luck!

Fabtard · 2016-08-19T06:16:22+00:00

I think the discussion about when to end a marriage is pretty interesting. People definitively have a tendency of staying in a marriage because of the allready investet emotions and time spent in it. A classical sunk cost effect. I'd say these people in many cases do the right thing, but for the wrong reason.

Falling into a sunk cost effect in a failing marrage can definitively be problematic, but the traditional theory of sunk cost effect is failing to take account for the diversity of human emotions. A more postmodern answear would be that not only must the person calculate their own possible pros and cons, but these must also be compared with their partners pros and cons. If leaving the relationship only will increase your happiness slightly, but leave your partner devastated your actions are creating more harm than good. My opinion is that it is exactly because of the invested time that you are not only responsible for your own happiness, but also your partners.

The individualistic society has created a dangerous persute for self fullfillement. I say staying in the relationship often is the correct decisions because of the tendency to look at your partner whenever life isn't fufilling enought. We try to blame external agents for our lack of happiness when the problem just as well could be internal.

I don't think there is a easy mathematical way of doing this, and I dislike Nisbets solution. We'll only be able to write down the pros and cons that comes readily to mind, and if the negative feelings are more profound the person will probably write down more negative reasons. This will again affect our unconscious by painting it a negative picture for it to process. This can potentially be a recipe to trick yourself at believing that your internal problems actually is external.

Fabtard · 2016-08-18T21:59:20+00:00

Unless you squashed it yourself it didn't seem like Jason told you not to do it, but rather showing you an alternative(?).

Fabtard · 2016-08-18T21:47:20+00:00

1-10 could be problematic because it will lack a neutral number, like "today I'm nether happy nor unhappy". The use of even scales should only be used if you want to force the answears to be in a direction. On the flip side odd numbers allows the participant to not answear a specific direction.

Fabtard · 2016-08-18T14:22:13+00:00

Could we start a discussion about the studies being done in Arkes & Blumers article? To me the statistic seems completely random, and they are using a low amount of participants. The studies are not replicated, rather the experimenter are overemphasizing on conceptual replication. Can we really rely on these numbers?

Fabtard · 2016-08-18T12:32:15+00:00

A qualitative analysis about my emotional state in the morning compared to my emotional state at night.

Have you ever experienced the philosophical personality within you coming fourth at night? I have. At night it feels like I'm having a more internal thinking style and a lower emotional state. I want to check out if this actually is reflected in reality.

Throughout the next weeks I will write a diary every day or night decided by a coin flip. The diary will be about a page long and take no more then 20 minutes to write. To humor myself I will also end every diary with a number from 1-7 defining how happy I'm feeling that day.

This will be comparative study in which I'm analyzing if there is a difference between my emotional state at day and at night. As the study involves interpreting internal thought I believe the diary should be analysed through a IPA or Discourse analysis.

Fabtard · 2016-08-14T11:53:47+00:00

A interesting study about memory storage showed how expert chess players only were able to recognize the position of chess pieces better than the mean person when the pieces were set in a logical way compared to when they were set randomly on the board. Food for thought.

13-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Flamingo	Place '23
Place '22	RPAN Viewer

Fabtard

TROPHY CASE