In a market like this (with so many new investors experiencing a bull market turn choppier), I thought it might be good to remind everyone of the psychology of investing. You want to be aware of potential biases and factors contributing to your decision-making. If you don't know what you don't know (the Dunning Kruger effect), you are screwed.

Our human brain is not a rational economic actor. When faced with uncertainty, even the best investing minds may throw good money after bad, sell at the first sign of trouble or make all manner of muddled financial decisions.

These flaws in our everyday decision-making, first chronicled in the 1970s by Israeli psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, gave rise to the field known as behavioral economics, which aims to mitigate the effects of these embarrassing foibles by heightening our awareness of them.

https://preview.redd.it/k8vzv1ho11381.png?width=802&format=png&auto=webp&s=ecee7ad364716b8f78c7862d48bf4fe31aadf33c

You buy stock in XYZ Corp. and, after several lackluster earnings reports, find it’s down 25% from what you paid for it. Which is the best course of action?

Reexamining the investment is the right move. However, many investors will instead hold a stock until it reaches a value they have in their head (the price they paid for it, say, or a previous high)—a behavioral bias known as anchoring. Getting wed to a number can weigh down your judgment, even when the price you’re anchored to is irrelevant to the decision at hand.

https://preview.redd.it/ctnf004s11381.png?width=2388&format=png&auto=webp&s=3fd95df0f270ac7c746c5d87366ff77007c8933d

In one seminal study,Kahneman and Tversky spun a wheel containing the numbers 0 through 100 and then asked their research subjects what percentage of the United Nations is made up of African countries. When the wheel landed on 10, the average estimate was 25%, whereas when the number landed on 65, the average estimate was 45%. The numbers on the wheel had absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand, but they influenced the research subjects’ estimates nonetheless.

**A year after buying two particularly promising stocks, one has surged while the other has sl

Here's the theory, When a large organization makes decisions, it makes them usually by a council of people agreeing to make this decision as a whole. When a group starts off small, it starts off with an idea that is at it's purest form. By purest form, I mean the original idea, by the creator, maintaining the original meaning. That creator may go out and tell others about their idea, and they might find followers that agree and respect the original idea in it's original form. But there becomes a point, I'm not sure at what point that this change happens, but when the group receives a certain amount of council members, and continuous situations arise that have to be maneuvered by the group, decisions have to be made. Decisions on decisions, eventually the group displays a pattern of behavior that is predictable to a certain extent, also the pattern of behavior in the past becomes recognizable, distinguishable, and categorizable, same way every decisions made by the human mind can become recognizable, distinguishable, and categorizable. This is because humans run the system. Just like inside your mind is a battle ground of decision making every time you wake up to the moment where you go to sleep, your decisions define you. There is a certain level of predictability to these actions, based on prior decisions. There is always the opportunity to make any decision you want in any circumstance, but there are certain decisions that would go against the "original idea." In this case the original idea is the ego. The expectation to live up to a certain standard, so you follow that standard by the decisions that you put out into the world. If the ego of the majority of the individuals in an organization is built out of hate or trauma, that will reflect with bad decision making because trauma is a concept that forms the structures of thinking and logic. Just like if an individual is acting out of trauma and not out of higher purpose, that individual will eventually crash and burn. A large organization will do the same. These organizations such as countries like America, Russia, movements like BLM, Pride, large companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and Google, people consider to be corrupt due to their actions. But the problem isn't the idea or the company, the problem is the individual running the company that think the decisions that they're making are out of furthering the idea, and best interest for the company, which sometimes is correct, but whe

I was on r/AskMen this morning reading a post about male stereotypes people feel are untrue and found it very interesting.

As someone who’s currently in therapy dealing the the repercussions of certain masculine stereotypes being forced at a young age, I’d be interested in finding a science-based book that explores the psychological and behavioral dangers and/or benefits of western masculine messaging.

Not looking for anything entirely opinion based or written to “debunk” feminist discussions.

Thanks!

Hi!

I have a quick questions about behavioral psychology for anyone who has taken this course. How was the course material, difficulty of the course, exams, etc? I plan on taking behavioral psychology with 4 other course. How easy or difficult is it to get an "A"? Lastly, was the prof you took it with Alfredo Spagna? If so, how was he as a professor?

I found some interesting videos. He talks about voting strategy in GP999. It is basically videos for fans of Japanese trainees, but I think it's an interesting theory so let me share it.

Here is the summary.

• Korean votes are the most powerful. The most favorite of Korean viewers is likely to be Korean trainees.
• Even if you support only one Korean trainee, you still have to vote for Japanese and Chinese. For example, if you are supporting Korean trainee in 5th place, it is not a good idea to vote for Japanese in 4th place or Chinese in 6th place. It's like a down vote for your favorite trainee.
• So the wisest action for the majority Koreans is to vote for the top Japanese and Chinese. Therefore, >!Yurina and Xiaoting!< will get significant votes in the third round. But it doesnt reflect the actual popularity, you dont have to care about it.
• In the final round, there will probably be no national boundaries and it will be a pure one-pick election. That means that Korean trainees will be the strongest.
• Trainees who are ranked high in the third round are at a disadvantage in the final round. No one wants to help the highly ranked trainees. So fans of >!Mashiro and Hikaru!< shouldn't aim for the top in the third round.

Source: 1 2

I need to take a course from the "Behavioral and Systems Neuroscience" core section which is neuropsychology, learning processes, physiological psychology, and developmental psychobiology. Which of these would be the easiest class and with what professor?

Marvin is a unique and customizable productivity tool that aims to help you beat procrastination, feel in control of your life and be more productive. Marvin incorporates principles from behavioral psychology. Marvin is specifically designed to help you get your tasks done and not just store them. It is a popular app in the Office & Productivity category.

https://www.amazingmarvin.com

How is this class? May take it in the spring. Is it a new prof? can't find any info on rate my professor

hi, everyone! hope all is well. i started college this year as a freshman and i was wondering if a double major in psychology (bs) and cognitive and behavioral neuroscience is a good idea. i am really interested in both, but i am hesitant/unsure in making the switch from general psych to a double major. i know that i have a lot of time to decide, but i’m a bit of an over thinker and like to plan out things before.

the cognitive and behavioral neuroscience major at my school is offered jointly by the cogsci and psych departments here, and recently i have taken more of an interest in learning about behavioral neuroscience and i would love to combine it with my passion for psychology. however, the reason i first decided to major in general psychology is because i don’t know what career path i want to go down when i graduate, and i would like to keep my options open. i’ve been trying to look for some satisfying careers in cognitive and behavioral neuroscience specifically, but i haven’t been able to find any that prefers the major specifically. for this reason, i am a little hesitant and looking for some advice.

do you think that a double major in both psychology and cbn is useful? or is it not worth it? any advice is helpful. thank you so much for your help in advance!

Looking for Ackert, Lucy & Deaves, Richard. (2015). Behavioral Finance: Psychology, Decision-Making, and Markets. Mason, OH : South-Western Cengage Learning, 2015. It is the second edition. Cannot find it anywhere. Please help me.

Let's get to it.

If you’re not struggling, you’re not learning.

What’s your idea of learning to code?

Whip out your computer, type out a couple of cool commands. And bam - beauty personified.

Sorry, nope.

The process is at least 50% struggling especially at the beginning. And that’s how it should be. I’ve seen people quit programming because they don’t want to struggle with bugs. That’s like hating the gym because you don’t want workouts to hurt.

But the struggle is the way.

You don’t run from bugs;

You train yourself to find them quicker.

>A proficient programmer is an efficient detective of bugs.

If you’re feeling frustrated that things are not smooth, remember that this is how learning actually works.

Neuroscience research confirms that practice doesn’t simply make you perfect; it is deliberate practice to improve in a specific task that makes you better. And deliberate practice involves struggling.

So your mantra should be:You code.

You debug.

You struggle.

You overcome.

And you repeat.

If you’ve not struggled at all, you’re simply playing around. If you struggle all the time, then the next section is for you.

You’re not dumb, you’re learning at the wrong level.

Let’s start with a little analogy.

Imagine learning the English language (the language of exceptions :)

You start with a tutorial motivating you to learn to spell big words like ELEPHANT.

But it’s not working. After beating yourself for so long you decide to go to a lower tutorial and learn to spell smaller words like ANT.

But you still struggle.

So you conclude that you’re dumb because you lowered your tutorial level and still didn’t grasp anything.

But when a new teacher investigates why you’re struggling, they find out that you’ve been struggling because you actually don’t know the English alphabets.

Let’s bring this home to our coding world.

Some people jump into beginner tutorials to learn a React framework (ELEPHANT). Then realize it makes no sense so they move on to learn JavaScript (ANT). But that still makes no sense to them, so they quit.

But they’re simply working with something that’s too advanced.

Even introduction courses can be advanced because your thinking is not wired yet to programming in general. There’s no shame in finding something lower than Intro courses and starting from there to build up to Intro courses.

I don’t see this recommended enough but if you’re struggling with intro courses, you should consider Intro to programming

As the title states, I’m currently working as an MHT in an acute inpatient hospitalization setting. Anyone who has worked in community mental health will know what I mean when I say it’s becoming too much. I’m looking to move on and potentially into a different position than direct care. Essentially I entered into this field because I’m planning to return to college to become a counselor/therapist, but I’m learning quickly that the acute crisis stabilization setting isn’t for me nor do I think I would be able to continue working a 1.0 FTE (full-time) schedule there and also go to school full-time. I’m willing to both work and study full-time but not while I work in inpatient psych.

So, that said, I would love to find something that gives me life/energy. I’m looking for a job that works with populations that aren’t necessarily in crisis at the moment and aren’t experiencing acute psychosis or the like. I would like to find an environment that is fun and invigorating. I’m planning to study child psychology/early childhood development, so working with children would be great. I also wouldn’t mind working in a more supportive/administrative role doing office work.

When I entered into this line of work it was because I wanted to compassionately care for people not police their behavior. Pretty much anything that isn’t “behavior policing” would be great.

Thanks in advance for any advice!

I am planning to apply for Behavioral Psychs at QUT (Or maybe even a double degree just to loosen the competitiveness) next year if Covid is not an issue anymore. So it would be great if to hear some of you guys’ opinion : _ Is the support from the academic staff/ professors/ tutors effective? Or carrer services? _How is their CMS/portals ? Do you guys ran into errors and weirdly missed attendance checks often? _ Were you able to network much? _What about the usage of green tobacco ? Is it frowned upon? Asking for a friend that one. Yea concerns covered, thanks dudes/dudettes ✌️

Something honestly starts feeling off if I haven’t bought some shares of gme yet on a trading day. Anxiety starts to rise up within me. Then I go into my trading app and perform the same behavior I’ve done countless times daily for months, and suddenly everything feels right. It’s hard to wage a psyops war against a population which has become immune to psychological persuasion due to following rote, hardwired behaviors that fly in the face of that persuasion.

Ie, considering a personality disorder to be the root of a trait rather than natural type? Or are they interconnected, with it being needless to try and differentiate the two?

hi, how are these courses different? and which is more recommendable to go to?

I’m not a psychology student or anything, I’m just really interested in it. The way the brain functions fascinates me, and so does the way its “mistakes” affect us. Bonus points if it helps to analyze people, like what does it mean if they present certain behavioral patterns and stuff like that. But not too complex, I’m pretty young and I don’t know much about the human brain. That’s all.

Here's the theory, When a large organization makes decisions, it makes them usually by a council of people agreeing to make this decision as a whole. When a group starts off small, it starts off with an idea that is at it's purest form. By purest form, I mean the original idea, by the creator, maintaining the original meaning. That creator may go out and tell others about their idea, and they might find followers that agree and respect the original idea in it's original form. But there becomes a point, I'm not sure at what point that this change happens, but when the group receives a certain amount of council members, and continuous situations arise that have to be maneuvered by the group, decisions have to be made. Decisions on decisions, eventually the group displays a pattern of behavior that is predictable to a certain extent, also the pattern of behavior in the past becomes recognizable, distinguishable, and categorizable, same way every decisions made by the human mind can become recognizable, distinguishable, and categorizable. This is because humans run the system. Just like inside your mind is a battle ground of decision making every time you wake up to the moment where you go to sleep, your decisions define you. There is a certain level of predictability to these actions, based on prior decisions. There is always the opportunity to make any decision you want in any circumstance, but there are certain decisions that would go against the "original idea." In this case the original idea is the ego. The expectation to live up to a certain standard, so you follow that standard by the decisions that you put out into the world. If the ego of the majority of the individuals in an organization is built out of hate or trauma, that will reflect with bad decision making because trauma is a concept that forms the structures of thinking and logic. Just like if an individual is acting out of trauma and not out of higher purpose, that individual will eventually crash and burn. A large organization will do the same. These organizations such as countries like America, Russia, movements like BLM, Pride, large companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and Google, people consider to be corrupt due to their actions. But the problem isn't the idea or the company, the problem is the individual running the company that think the decisions that they're making are out of furthering the idea, and best interest for the company, which sometimes is correct, but when

Here's the theory, When a large organization makes decisions, it makes them usually by a council of people agreeing to make this decision as a whole. When a group starts off small, it starts off with an idea that is at it's purest form. By purest form, I mean the original idea, by the creator, maintaining the original meaning. That creator may go out and tell others about their idea, and they might find followers that agree and respect the original idea in it's original form. But there becomes a point, I'm not sure at what point that this change happens, but when the group receives a certain amount of council members, and continuous situations arise that have to be maneuvered by the group, decisions have to be made. Decisions on decisions, eventually the group displays a pattern of behavior that is predictable to a certain extent, also the pattern of behavior in the past becomes recognizable, distinguishable, and categorizable, same way every decisions made by the human mind can become recognizable, distinguishable, and categorizable. This is because humans run the system. Just like inside your mind is a battle ground of decision making every time you wake up to the moment where you go to sleep, your decisions define you. There is a certain level of predictability to these actions, based on prior decisions. There is always the opportunity to make any decision you want in any circumstance, but there are certain decisions that would go against the "original idea." In this case the original idea is the ego. The expectation to live up to a certain standard, so you follow that standard by the decisions that you put out into the world. If the ego of the majority of the individuals in an organization is built out of hate or trauma, that will reflect with bad decision making because trauma is a concept that forms the structures of thinking and logic. Just like if an individual is acting out of trauma and not out of higher purpose, that individual will eventually crash and burn. A large organization will do the same. These organizations such as countries like America, Russia, movements like BLM, Pride, large companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and Google, people consider to be corrupt due to their actions. But the problem isn't the idea or the company, the problem is the individual running the company that think the decisions that they're making are out of furthering the idea, and best interest for the company, which sometimes is correct, but whe

How deep do both majors go?