VOY - Retrospect

[TrueMetis]

Do you mean Investigative psychology? Because police psychologists are psychologists who's job is the mental health of the police, not trying to figure out victims and criminals. Though I suppose this could just be a matter of terminology of your area.

And sure yeah, there may be experts who would be able to articulate why a victim might not be "behaving in a realistic manner" (though not nearly as well as you think they could I bet, one of the first things that came up in my entry level psychology class was that people can react very differently to the same stimuli if we had psychology down that pat, most of out societal problems would be fixed by now.) but we're not talking about an expert opinion. We're talking about the uninformed opinion of a random guy on the internet.

[clearspira]

If an expert seems like they have perfected the knowledge of human psychology then they are cherry picking results for TV and/or are fabricating their results. Having too much belief in a particular psychological science as nearly infallible is how things like false repressed memories became such a big problem.

True, but like all evidence, a psycological report is part of the sum of proof. You take that opinion and put it alongside other aspects such as motive, forensics, opportunity etc. and see what it all looks like when combined.

[clearspira]

Do you mean Investigative psychology? Because police psychologists are psychologists who's job is the mental health of the police, not trying to figure out victims and criminals. Though I suppose this could just be a matter of terminology of your area.

And sure yeah, there may be experts who would be able to articulate why a victim might not be "behaving in a realistic manner" (though not nearly as well as you think they could I bet, one of the first things that came up in my entry level psychology class was that people can react very differently to the same stimuli if we had psychology down that pat, most of out societal problems would be fixed by now.) but we're not talking about an expert opinion. We're talking about the uninformed opinion of a random guy on the internet.

I may have the correct title wrong I am perfectly happy to admit. And yeah, it is certainly an inexact science, one though that will be much improved by AI. We have programs now that have a very high success rate in correctly identifying lies. I wouldn't want to stake my future on one, but I can see them being used one day.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

We're talking about the uninformed opinion of a random guy on the internet.

Yeh lol.

[clearspira]

We're talking about the uninformed opinion of a random guy on the internet.

Yeh lol.

True.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

We're talking about the uninformed opinion of a random guy on the internet.

Yeh lol.

True.

And I was following what you were saying, though I'm not sure I can argue with a psych major about this.

edit: Actually yeah they were conceding a bit as to what you were trying to say, though that last part is the dilemma of people not believing the victim.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

We're talking about the uninformed opinion of a random guy on the internet.

Yeh lol.

True.

edit: Actually yeah they were conceding a bit as to what you were trying to say, though that last part is the dilemma of people not believing the victim.

And Yuka, I kinda put it on ice to not derail topic too much, but as it is admirable to hold concern for how yourself regards the situation, also keep in mind that a large part of believing the victim has to do with what's being brought up here, for starters.

On the social level, it's the matter of how someone's claims are received if they decide to come forward. Needless to say it often takes quite a bit of courage to do so, and there's the fact that people will dismiss claims unreasonably, which is personally damning. Not to mention that that seems like part of the reason or more why it's hard to come forward about it.

[Yukaphile]

Well, there's also the fact that this is coming from an anonymous written text, not an actual person with a name. So throw in victims behaving unrealistically, and you can see how I'd believe that way, I hope? A person with a name or a face is a thousand times more credible than words on a page that could have been edited over the years.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Well, there's also the fact that this is coming from an anonymous written text, not an actual person with a name. So throw in victims behaving unrealistically, and you can see how I'd believe that way, I hope? A person with a name or a face is a thousand times more credible than words on a page that could have been edited over the years.

I mean I guess that seems rational as far as your personal prerogative, but I'd probably defer back to that part up there that distinguishes expert opinions from random people on the internet like you or me.

And as I was gonna say, in light of how the development of not disbelieving the person has taken (on the internet), I don't feel like this is something where you should just silence your own thoughts for speculation either way. In that case either way though what I said just before this post might good to understand when either weighing in on a subject or if just for your own consideration.

[Yukaphile]

Said experts can't even agree on said document, so that just makes me feel all the more vindicated.