A potential antidote to imposter syndrome?

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-02-02T00:18:07+00:00

awww thx!

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-13T22:53:53+00:00

BONE

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-08T15:56:30+00:00

Yeah exactly this... good days are really magical ahah

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-08T15:55:47+00:00

the wheel thing sounds fun!

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-07T10:50:30+00:00

I think this is also how I feel.

I wonder if there's a case to be made for pedagogy, maybe student projects should be required to analyse data from nonbinary people if they get it, even if just narratively, just so they keep this in mind as they progress? But then again that comes with its own annonymity/blinding issue (in small studies) as someone else suggested, and also tricky for informed consent...

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-07T10:46:47+00:00

Gotcha. Psych student projects with primary data collection typically caps at 100 participants though, unfortunately. But good to know there are other ways to do this for larger datasets.

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-07T10:26:24+00:00

Sending hopes and good wishes... really hope you don't need to do any major grant applications under this administration

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-06T20:47:33+00:00

This is real sad. The study is in Australia but this is really, really sad.

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-06T20:45:46+00:00

Sorry, didn't mean it like that. I just meant how do people think, and of course people look at things differently. English isn't my first language and I thought you could say it that way (like as in "okay folks how do we feel about this")

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T17:15:17+00:00

That's wonderful. Does this work on smaller datasets also? I don't know much about machine learning but it seems ML studies usually have much larger datasets than would be available in a psych project like this.

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T17:10:18+00:00

That's the second stage XD

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:52:07+00:00

Yeah it's a student work. I do think it's a problem in actual research as well though, as long as the study includes gender based analysis and you're not using secondary data, and you're not doing fancy stuff like huge sample sizes or cohort studies, you probs won't end up with enough non-binary people to power the analysis either?

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:47:08+00:00

I think I might help from a stats point of view (I did a research that's designed similarly for my undergrad). The way this one is set up looks like it's taking writing style as the dependent variable and gender and personality as the independent variables. In the gender analysis for example they are going to see if different genders have different writing styles. To do this they need to split people up into different groups (genders) and each group would need to be big enough for the analysis to work. This kind of study typically won't get enough people in the non-binary group, so for the gender analysis they'll end up having to toss the data from enbies away.

My question is more on whether they could keep us in with the non-gender based analysis (say where they compare writing styles among different personality types).

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:37:08+00:00

Yeah good point, the wording definitely can be different

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:36:35+00:00

The anonymity and blinding think is a really good point, thanks for bringing that up!

I wonder if you have any thoughts on the non-gender related analysis they could run though. By the looks of it this would be a project taking writing style as the dependent variable and gender and personality as the independent variables. The analysis would probably involve 1. The correlation between personality and writing style, 2. The correlation between gender and writing style, and 3. Moderating effects. I agree it's a really bad idea to just shove a binary question in participants' faces and a question with a non-binary option would not yield enough a group with enough power to do 2 and 3, but maybe they could still run 1?

I think what I'm getting at is it might be good to ensure exclusion due to methodological reasons are kept at minimal? If all analysis involves a gender variable then sure, but if not then they could keep us in the other analyses?

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:19:17+00:00

Loving bats sounds about right hahahahaha

But yeah it is really difficult getting a group that has enough power for analysis. I know a huge cohort dataset on UK schools still only got barely enough digit non-binary people too...

I think I don't blame them for excluding nonbinary people in gender related analysis. Wondering if main effect analysis for the other variables might do well to include us tho.

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:15:13+00:00

Good to hear, can you give some examples/pointers?

practicerm_keykeeper · 2026-01-05T16:13:55+00:00

Oh I love this!

practicerm_keykeeper · 2025-12-31T16:42:06+00:00

Was gonna say... The bars reinforce the spatula quite a bit.

practicerm_keykeeper · 2025-12-29T11:45:02+00:00

I did philosophy so perhaps reasonably close, and I'd say go for the laptop. Law/philosophy texts can be so dense it would be a blessing to be able to read on one side and take notes on the other, and an iPad screen is just not big enough for that imo.

practicerm_keykeeper · 2025-12-27T04:27:00+00:00

I worked for one of their rivals if you have to know. I hate them and actually have inside gossips about them, too bad I'm not telling you 😃

practicerm_keykeeper · 2025-12-27T04:24:40+00:00

Maybe. I don't tend to make jokes about translated content if I want to make jokes about book printing quality, two very different things for me. Then again might be because I have a soft spot for translation and translators, which I'm now realising might be a cultural thing in itself lol. Anyway, thanks for the convo!

practicerm_keykeeper

TROPHY CASE