Forum Message

Posted by: Ryan Nagy
Date/Time: 27/02/2003 02:28:33

Patrick wrote:

2) If we want to "sell" our pattern to other scientists (e.g. in psychology), backing up patterns we cannot prove (using accepted rules) with statistical evidence makes sense - it's a matter of building rapport.

Patrick - I can relate to your sentiment. Statistical models are the norm in the social sciences and it is often difficult to sell our ideas without them. I believe that the key will be to train people in emergent process-based approaches like dynamic systems approaches (and/or NLP).† I can see virtually no way for us to explicate patterns by doing analysis of aggregates -† we lose too much valuable information. For instance, as a Feldenkrais practitioner, knowing the "average amount" that a person can rotate their hip is irrelevant information for me. I want to know "what can this person do, right now, in this context, and how can I help her move easier now and get what she wants from her life (i.e. generalize her new behaviors/ movements to other contexts)."

In my psych research, I am interested in development of particular behaviors as they occur, in time and in relationship, in a dyad: mother-infant, practitioner-student (etc). If I were to quantify behaviors and average across dyads, I would lose the actual process. The rub, of course, is that sensory-based, process research is often denigrated by many social scientists, most who simply do not know how to think without their statistical tools. My sense is that psychologists (including nearly all of my professors and fellow grad students) don't know how to recognize and respond to pattern. Likewise, they donít have a strategy to give meaning to a pattern. The larger framework for them (deep structure?) is (I think) a desire to find "the cause" of a behavior. I.e. Where is the "genetic program," "motor program," "cognitive structure," that produces behavior X? When researchers are trained to look for an "It" it's difficult to step back and see the pattern.

If you want to begin to train yourself in how to scientifically capture the evolution of behavior through time I recommend;

"Dynamic Patterns" by Scott Kelso and "A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action" by Esther Thelen and Linda Smith.


Entire Thread

TopicDate PostedPosted By
NLP & statistics02/01/2003 10:42:12Patrick E.C. Merlevede, MSc. (
     Re:NLP & statistics02/01/2003 11:27:47Patrick E.C. Merlevede, MSc. (
          Re:Re:NLP & statistics04/01/2003 08:44:24Bruce
               Re:Re:Re:NLP & statistics04/01/2003 11:23:38Patrick E.C. Merlevede, MSc. (
     Re:NLP & statistics04/01/2003 18:33:09Bruce
     Re:NLP & statistics05/01/2003 17:23:40John Grinder
          Re:Re:NLP & statistics06/01/2003 07:47:18Patrick E.C. Merlevede, MSc. (
               Re:Re:Re:NLP & statistics17/01/2003 19:46:21John Grinder
               NLP & statistics18/01/2003 00:16:31suzyhomemaker
                    Re:NLP & statistics18/01/2003 04:03:44John Grinder
                         Re:Re:NLP & statistics18/01/2003 23:03:27Robert
                    Re:NLP & statistics09/02/2003 12:10:24Patrick E.C. Merlevede, MSc. (
               27/02/2003 02:28:33Ryan Nagy
               NLP/statistics/dynamic systems27/02/2003 02:33:32Ryan Nagy
                    Re:NLP/statistics/dynamic systems03/03/2003 06:53:34Patrick E.C. Merlevede, MSc. (
                         Re:Re:NLP/statistics/dynamic systems04/03/2003 17:45:19Ryan Nagy
                         Re:Re:NLP/statistics/dynamic systems04/03/2003 22:09:54John Grinder
          A statistical model of elegance and diffusion21/01/2003 03:19:20Rob Manson
               Re:A statistical model of elegance and diffusion21/01/2003 04:16:48John Grinder
                    Re:Re:A statistical model of elegance and diffusion21/01/2003 10:55:06Rob Manson
                         Re:Re:Re:A statistical model of elegance and diffusion21/01/2003 17:22:38John Grinder
                    The genetics analogy21/01/2003 11:54:19Rob Manson
                         Re:The genetics analogy22/01/2003 04:27:46John Grinder
                              Re:Re:The genetics analogy22/01/2003 05:35:59Rob Manson
                         Re:The genetics analogy22/01/2003 04:27:48John Grinder
                         Re:The genetics analogy22/01/2003 04:27:53John Grinder
                         Re:The genetics analogy. topic: Solutions to Puzzles/Recommendations22/01/2003 05:53:24nj
                              Re:Re:The genetics analogy. topic: Solutions to Puzzles/Recommendations22/01/2003 07:39:41Rob Manson
                                   Re:Re:Re:The genetics analogy. topic: Solutions to Puzzles/Recommendations22/01/2003 17:24:09John Grinder
                                        Re:Modelling vs Analysis22/01/2003 23:16:12Rob Manson
                    The genetics analogy21/01/2003 11:55:16Rob Manson
     Re:NLP & statistics24/01/2003 06:49:17Mike
          Re:Re:NLP & statistics24/01/2003 16:39:35John Grinder
               Re:Re:Re:NLP & statistics24/01/2003 17:25:03Mike
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:NLP & statistics24/01/2003 18:26:08John Grinder
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:NLP & statistics28/01/2003 20:04:54Mike

Forum Home