http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93observer_asymmetry
"Sorry guys, I'm having a really bad game, I don't normally play this poorly"
"stfu, you're not having a bad game, you're just bad and this is a normal game for you"
How many times have you heard this, or something like it, while playing LoL? Someone on your team is feeding. He claims he's just having a bad game. Another teammate disagrees, claiming that he's a bad player and this is the normal level of play for him.
What you've witnessed is a blatant case of actor-observer asymmetry. We view our negative behavior as situational, and others' negative behavior as habitual. Pretty much everyone thinks this way: Me, you, and especially the average LoL player.
It also manifests itself in the reason for a lot of toxic behavior:
I'm justified in insulting that guy, because he's a bad player. Look at him, feeding. Look at that crappy build. How did he get in this bracket? How am I getting matched with people like this when I'm obviously so much better? I need to knock this fool down a peg, let him know that if he doesn't start improving, he's going to keep ruining games like he's ruining mine.
Why is this person so mad? So I died once or twice, who cares? I'm just having a bad game, is all. Shit happens, I don't always play like this. I bet this asshole is going to be banned soon anyway, since he probably spends every game just yelling at teammates like this. What a dick.
Why is it important to realize this? Well, I'm not trying to enlighten everyone or cause a huge shift in how LoL players think; that ain't happenin'. I'd just like you to know that these thought processes are normal human thoughts and occur in pretty much everyone. But you can take small steps toward improving the community if you just remember one thing:
I am no different from that player.
I have bad games, he has bad games. I say things I shouldn't, he says things he shouldn't. If that makes him a bad player and a bad person, why wouldn't it make me a bad player and a bad person? Therefore, either I must admit that I am a bad player/bad person, or I must realize that other people have bad games/get overly upset sometimes just like I do. I am not special or unique. I am one of millions. The people I play with view me in exactly the same way as I view them.
Yes, there are legitimately low-skilled players. If I'm getting matched with them, it's because the system believes I am of equal skill. If I want to believe I
... keep reading on reddit ➡I wasn't able to search for this question well enough to find it anywhere..
When we say anything with mass cannot reach the speed of light what is the point of reference? Let's say Jack is flying away from Jill with a constant speed of 0.9c and returns. For Jack 12 hours have passed but 24 hours have passed for Jill. What distance did he cover? (Not a homework question 😜)
Is it 12 hours * 0.9c or 24 hours * 0.9c? I assume it's based on 12 hours because otherwise he would've gone faster than the speed of light within his own frame of reference, right?
Which would mean from Jill's frame of reference (having to trust Jack when he tells her the distance traveled) he was only going 0.45c.
This concept has been bugging me for months and I would love to get mental closure even as someone who's mostly illiterate when it comes to physics.
Or in spiritual terms, if we are the untouchable, eternal spirit, what pays the price for our bodily sins? How does the Universe balance out the evil deeds of humankind if they go unchecked on Earth?
no but seriously, this fucking sucks, and it was out of nowhere
be safe friends, get checked constantly and exercise regularly, please.
👍
You would think that psychologists would look at what definitions exist already before trying to come up with new stuff lol
My waist/back is the one part of my body that would make my 5’1, pear shaped body look streamlined and a bit more proportionate. Unfortunately it’s deformed and looks even more abnormal irl when I’m moving around. This isn’t me being overly self critical, it’s been pointed out unprompted more than once by [well meaning and concerned] people.
For reference (slight NSFW): https://imgur.com/a/Rr1rsN2 I wear size XS top and size M bottom, hold almost all of my fat in my behind. These aren’t my day to day clothes, they’re just so you can see clearly
What I’m most having trouble with is finding a flattering outfit for when I’m going to be indoors and need to look put together.
A classic turtleneck or boatneck top tucked into trousers is too fitted at the waist and draws attention to the asymmetry from all angles. The high waist of a trouser that would make you look taller is also directly where my waist bends in on one side.
But a less fitted top left untucked, stops at the hip and cuts the body in half which makes petites look wide and compressed. As a short pear, I really can’t afford to look any shorter than I already am.
I love wearing dresses and skirts but they’re all either fitted at the waist or swallow me.
Is there anything I can wear indoors that can elongate my body, hide my scoliosis, and still look classic and feminine?
I am confused about how these two biases are different. Self-serving bias is defined as "when success is credited to internal factors but failure is blamed on external factors". Actor observer bias is defined as "when an individual is more likely to blame his or her own bad behavior on external circumstances". Is the key distinction that of failure vs behavior? Otherwise, these two seem the same. Thanks!
Actor-Observer bias
what is it?
''The actor-observer bias is a term in social psychology that refers to a tendency to attribute one's own actions to external causes while attributing other people's behaviors to internal causes. It is a type of attributional bias that plays a role in how we perceive and interact with other people. Essentially, people tend to make different attributions depending upon whether they are the actor or the observer in a situation.
The actor-observer bias tends to be more pronounced in situations where the outcomes are negative. For example, in a situation where a person experiences something negative, the individual will often blame the situation or circumstances. When something negative happens to another person, people will often blame the individual for their personal choices, behaviors, and actions.
For example, when a doctor tells someone that their cholesterol levels are elevated, the patient might blame factors that are outside of their control such as genetic or environmental influences. But what about when someone else finds out their cholesterol levels are too high? In such situations, people attribute it to things such as poor diet and lack of exercise. In other words, when it's happening to us, it's outside of our control, but when it's happening to someone else, it's all their fault.
Researchers have found that people tend to succumb to this bias less frequently with people they know well, such as close friends and family members. Why? Because we have more information about the needs, motivations, and thoughts of these individuals, we are more likely to account for the external forces that impact behavior.''
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-actor-observer-bias-2794813
My comments
In the following paragraph I am not picking on Aston Villa fans, I just picked a football team by random, from what I've seen every football club does the following. I suppose you can find the Actor-Observer bias happening in Basketball, rugby, cricket, baseball, bowling etc.
When the actor-observer bias show up more when the situation is negative, I suppose this happens when the outcome is positiv
... keep reading on reddit ➡I was watching a video recently and came upon the term "developed asymmetry." I realized I agreed with the person in the video (Alex) in that I don't really like when a game is so asymmetric that it gives me a set path to go on. This is what I disliked about Vast. I also disliked Smallworld, wherein you picked your asymmetry and then the game seemed to play itself.
For some reason it's different with 2-player games, such as War of the Ring or Raptor because you know there's a specific dynamic you're working in. Maybe the difference is really only in my mind. (Zee Garcia talked about this in a recent video, too).
This is different from variable player powers (like Pandemic) because they are just little helps and don't dominate your decisions for the rest of the game.
I really like the idea, though, of developed asymmetry. I've read in another post that pretty much all games become "developed asymmetry." An example of this would be Agricola, where you choose which of your cards to play and end up having very different powers than another player. In this game the "asymmetry" can come to dominate your play for the rest of the game, but it's not as simple as choosing a race combo in Smallworld. It involves more decisions to build up what is your asymmetric position.
In a game like Viticulture (base game) you have access to all of the same buildings and grape types. The differences are in where you place your workers and which cards you're able to find and play. San Juan is similar in that each player's tableau could end up looking exactly the same (aside from the Cathedral). But as the game developed they don't look exactly the same, and there is "asymmetry." Again, this involves several choices to build your asymmetric position.
Do you think there is such a think as "developed asymmetry" or does it pretty much exist in all games?
THANKS!
