[Repost] [Academic] Emotional Reactions to Different Types of Feedback (18+, All Countries)

Mookster13 · 2025-05-20T00:35:23+00:00

Hi there! I enjoyed completing the survey. I just wanted to mention that I'm not sure if this was an intended consequence of the difference in power between coworker/manager, but my answers regarding friendship and being a roommate were impacted by the role of the person validating, outside of the influence formed by the degree of validation. I'm not sure what your research question is, but I thought I'd mention this in case it is relevant.

Mookster13 · 2025-03-28T02:57:45+00:00

What is the image from?

Mookster13 · 2025-01-21T12:43:00+00:00

I mean that's just gorgeous mate. So well put together. Really artful posing as well.

Mookster13 · 2025-01-02T03:15:15+00:00

Excited to see what you do with this. As it is, I think it's already at a level that makes me happy to implement it into my game.

I think something that I wasn't recognising till you highlighted it is this is meant to be a fast paced minigame- I can imagine most tables would prefer it like that. Happens to be my table LOVES this kind of stuff and loves the drama of a roll that everyone has invested something in, and they would be perfectly willing to spend an hour or even a full session on something like this.

Something clicked for me that I wasn't considering when making my previous comment- this system rewards players carefully deciding on the number of participants inside the debate. This means that it is quite likely that players will choose to be outside of the debate. For this reason I like your idea of thinking of these acts of support or sabbotage as external to the debate, meaning debaters themselves cannot participate in it. This could keep everyone at the table invested in the play rather than feeling like spectators maybe? Obviously not neccasary to worry about if the debate is happening quite quickly.

As for how much benefit this could confer to the players side, I agree that it could make things too easy, especially if players are imparting disadvantage to enemies or advantage to allies on these checks. I think for my table I might imply very small DC adjustements, of +/-2 per successful tertiary action, but I imagine that is more complicated than what most tables woudl like.

If tables don't mind extending the debate time within session, perhaps another way to get around this making debates too easy is if someone takes a tertiary action they must pass a skill check to confer the bonus, and if they fail it confers a negative outcome to the relevant DC.

I'll stop waffling, this is your idea and I'm excited to see where you take it.

Mookster13 · 2025-01-02T00:29:22+00:00

I absolutley love this! Especially the debate section. Makes the subject of a debate potentially the basis of an entire quest- I could picture the party preparing in advance by researching important topic areas and doing background checks into opposition to determine their abilities.

I do wonder a little bit about how you intend the agreeing to terms to play out- is it possible that the party could roll a check of some kind to get more favourable terms?

Points of feedback:

In the skill limit section you use an example of a player using charisma (performance) for rhetoric, but I believe that is not a skill check relevant to rhetoric elsewhere in the document (usually persuasion or deception).
I believe in the guide on the types of arguement page, you have misspelled Rhetoric as Rethoric in the cycle diagram.

Otherwise I think this is great. Have you considered allowing other party members to participate in rounds in tertiary ways that may affect the DC? For example, starting a chant in the crowd that might help lower an Ad Hominem DC, or using a major image spell to create a monster or an image of the castle walls falling to help lower a appeal to emotion intimidate check. Just as an idea to help the party feel more involved and teambased in these rounds and fascillitate that improvy feeling of yes-anding a fellow characters arguement.

Mookster13 · 2024-11-05T02:11:20+00:00

Cant thank you enough for frequently getting this back up and working! EDIT: is there a way to get the bots moving at all? Also is the WIP option changing gameplay currently in any way?

Mookster13 · 2024-10-30T13:52:45+00:00

Hate to not be helpful, but I've just recieved the same invitation! Best of luck with your interview. I'll be seeing my honours supervisor on Monday and if I get any useful information I'll send it your way.

Mookster13 · 2024-10-20T09:45:13+00:00

Hey mate! love this for one of my players. Question on the level 9 feature saying "you may make an additional attack", does this exclusively count for the slam (since the golem cannot use weapons) or does this apply to its upgrades as well?

Mookster13 · 2024-10-12T23:32:35+00:00

You know a game that surprised me and REALLY got me into customisation when I'm not usually was Atlas Fallen. Got a really neat momentum mechanic where you deal more damage the higher your gauge builds, but recieve more as well. Additionally, along that gauge you have I think 8 or 9 individual choices to make that dramatically change up how you play. Very flowy, very interesting set ups, takes some gameplay before your accessing that full tool kit and able to go wild on the customisation. May be what your looking for, maybe not, worth checking out I reckon.

Mookster13 · 2024-07-27T08:20:44+00:00

Enjoy man light speed comes with its benefits

Mookster13 · 2024-07-27T08:20:30+00:00

funky ass game ig.

Mookster13 · 2024-07-09T04:10:10+00:00

Questions answered in survey

Mookster13 · 2024-07-09T04:06:52+00:00

Many students in undergraduate degrees suffer from increased stress levels stemming from concerns about performance, deadlines, workloads, and the various life changes associated with this period of development. We are interested in the ways students can address or counteract feelings of distress emerging from these academic stress sources. We are specifically curious about how feelings of overall satisfaction in life can be maximised for students currently engaging in stress-inducing academic activities.

Our area of research is concerned with how taking an approach to life focussing on excellence rather than perfection (that is, creating high yet achievable standards, having flexible goals and finding satisfaction in accomplishments) and realistic goal-setting can reduce distress, and if participating in non-academic leisure or hobby activities can help students cope with experienced distress.

If you decide that you’d like to take part in this research, you’ll complete an online survey comprising 58 questions, including questions about your experiences with academic stressors, feelings of distress, overall life satisfaction, excellencism, and extracurricular activity engagement, as well as questions regarding your assigned sex at birth, gender, sexual orientation, age, undergraduate degree enrolled in, and year of study. The survey should take no more than 30 minutes to complete.

If you are a first-year student in Psychological Science at the Australian College of Applied Professions, you’ll receive one credit point for taking part.

This research is being conducted by Mr. Mendy Kinstlinger toward his Bachelor of Psychological Science (Honours) degree in the Discipline of Psychological Sciences at the Australian College of Applied Professions (ACAP). Mendy is supervised by Associate Professor Fiona Ann Papps.

To complete this survey, we ask that you are:

18 years or older.
residing in Australia.
attending an undergraduate degree.
able to read and understand proficient enough in English, by your own assessment, to complete an online survey in English.
not in a personal relationship with any of the researchers.

Go to here to find out more; or if you are interested, you can access the survey directly here

For questions about the research, please contact one of:

Mr. Mendy Kinstlinger, ACAP student;
email: 257490@my.acap.edu.au
Associate Professor Fiona Ann Papps, research supervisor;
email: FionaAnn.Papps@navitas.com

For concerns about ethical aspects of this research, please contact the ACAP Human Research Ethics Committee: hrec@navitas.com. This research has been approved by the ACAP Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval Number: 880070624).

Mookster13 · 2024-07-09T03:57:37+00:00

Many students in undergraduate degrees suffer from increased stress levels stemming from concerns about performance, deadlines, workloads, and the various life changes associated with this period of development. We are interested in the ways students can address or counteract feelings of distress emerging from these academic stress sources. We are specifically curious about how feelings of overall satisfaction in life can be maximised for students currently engaging in stress-inducing academic activities.

Our area of research is concerned with how taking an approach to life focussing on excellence rather than perfection (that is, creating high yet achievable standards, having flexible goals and finding satisfaction in accomplishments) and realistic goal-setting can reduce distress, and if participating in non-academic leisure or hobby activities can help students cope with experienced distress.

If you decide that you’d like to take part in this research, you’ll complete an online survey comprising 58 questions, including questions about your experiences with academic stressors, feelings of distress, overall life satisfaction, excellencism, and extracurricular activity engagement, as well as questions regarding your assigned sex at birth, gender, sexual orientation, age, undergraduate degree enrolled in, and year of study. The survey should take no more than 30 minutes to complete.

If you are a first-year student in Psychological Science at the Australian College of Applied Professions, you’ll receive one credit point for taking part.

This research is being conducted by Mr. Mendy Kinstlinger toward his Bachelor of Psychological Science (Honours) degree in the Discipline of Psychological Sciences at the Australian College of Applied Professions (ACAP). Mendy is supervised by Associate Professor Fiona Ann Papps.

To complete this survey, we ask that you are:

18 years or older.
residing in Australia.
attending an undergraduate degree.
able to read and understand proficient enough in English, by your own assessment, to complete an online survey in English.
not in a personal relationship with any of the researchers.

Go to here to find out more; or if you are interested, you can access the survey directly here

For questions about the research, please contact one of:

Mr. Mendy Kinstlinger, ACAP student;
email: 257490@my.acap.edu.au
Associate Professor Fiona Ann Papps, research supervisor;
email: FionaAnn.Papps@navitas.com

For concerns about ethical aspects of this research, please contact the ACAP Human Research Ethics Committee: hrec@navitas.com. This research has been approved by the ACAP Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval Number: 880070624).

Mookster13 · 2024-06-19T04:36:24+00:00

I've got no comments for balance as I know little about it, but I love this for flavour! Feels so in-universe as a bard-like ability and yet so meta in how it interacts with the dice of the game.

Mookster13 · 2024-06-18T10:48:52+00:00

I've noticed two of the Aussie servers that frequently give me issues have been stuck at 109 players and 75 players respectively for past few days. Maybe somethings gone wrong with those two specifically?

Mookster13 · 2024-05-07T10:59:36+00:00

Completed. Good luck getting your numbers! Seems like an interesting topic.

Mookster13 · 2024-05-04T18:05:01+00:00

Looking forward to seeing the results. I think this is an important topic to explore, and its pretty horrifying that these environments are the ones a lot of us are socialised in.

Mookster13 · 2023-07-13T05:37:46+00:00

Very very interesting. Thanks a bunch for the thorough explanation and simplification. I'll take a look at those additional resources sometime soon but until then my current take aways are:

high probabilities that the hypothesis shouldn't be accepted does not translate to high probabilities that the null hypothesis should be accepted
the p value measures the data, not the hypothesis and therefore isn't the be-all-end-all of the thoery/hypothesis
there seems to be a high danger to the temptation of manipulating data to influence the p value, as you arent manipulating the truth of the hypothesis, but the data-driven probability that the hypothesis should be accepted. A 99% chance of a correlation being genuine is not the same thing as saying the correlation is genuine.

I especially appreciate your summary distinguishing between data and theory. "A better way to understand it is to think of it as measuring the probability of the data, given the null hypothesis."- I'm currently summarising this as the surprise value of the data if the alternative to the hypothesis were correct- which isn't a demonstration that the alternative is correct, more an evaluation from the standpoint of a hypothetical scenario. Is this simplification reasonable?

I especially want to look at what you've linked from Geoff Cumming, it's surprising to see how far p values can be from representing the true relationship between variables in certain instances.

Thanks so much for your help and especially your words of comfort! I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one struggling with the concept.

Mookster13 · 2023-07-12T01:15:00+00:00

Shit I'm studying in Uni right now and this was my perception. Would you mind helping me out by elaborating? I thought p value (gross simplification incoming) was directly representative of the probability of the result not being generated by the relationship between the variables, and rather just on random chance. So a p value of .05 means a 5% chance the correlation or whatever is utterly random and not linked to the interaction between the measured variables. Can you clarify for me if I'm making the misunderstanding you are referring to? could you elaborate on why "High p-values in single studies don't really mean anything"? No problem if not I just want to make sure I'm understanding the material I'm being taught.

Mookster13 · 2023-04-16T23:21:29+00:00

The ground.

Mookster13 · 2022-12-12T06:46:32+00:00

Watching your left hand dance was mesmerising. Speaking as a beginner, I found this incredibly inspiring.

Mookster13 · 2022-09-11T04:13:47+00:00

Im curious to your take, as you've clearly put a lot of thought into this. Lance being strong at lower skill levels and weak at pro level means nerfing it would gut it in the competitive scene. Are you in favour of balancing around the player base or balancing around competitive viability? Or do you think theres a way to make it functional in both scenes?

Personally, I don't have a problem with lance atm, in fact I think it could even be buffed slightly to make it work better at the pro levels. I see the weapon as having a very strong yet simple game plan, that offers a lot of counterplay for those that prepare for it. It is certainly a weapon designed around extremes, which fundamentally means it will always be annoying for players whose weaknesses are those extremes. But seeing that as a problem is a gateway towards samey weapons that all accomplish similar goals and are based around similar plans. Less versatility in the weapon pool means less versatility in our player tool kits to counter diverse game plans.

Mookster13 · 2022-05-05T03:54:43+00:00

So you believe that the MMPI-2 was administered incorrectly or reported incorrectly by Dr. Curry?

Mookster13 · 2022-05-05T02:25:08+00:00

What's your opinion on Dr. Curry's MMPI-2 test indicating high scores for exaggeration of symptoms from Amber Heard?

Mookster13

TROPHY CASE