WEBVTT - #1779 The Pracademic - Harps & Tiff 0:00:01.080 --> 0:00:03.880 Giving in and cook Craig Anthony Halp of The You Project. 0:00:04.800 --> 0:00:07.280 Possibly I've been rolled with the punches. Who fucking knows? 0:00:07.320 --> 0:00:10.920 It could be a share a co share, Hi tiv. 0:00:11.200 --> 0:00:13.560 Hi Harps, I dare say it will it's been a 0:00:13.560 --> 0:00:16.160 while since your dulcet tones of grace, the role with 0:00:16.200 --> 0:00:20.080 the punches platform. Where you've been, bro, I've. 0:00:19.960 --> 0:00:22.919 Been, I've been. I've been doing grown up things like 0:00:22.920 --> 0:00:25.000 a big boy. I've been like a big boy doing 0:00:25.000 --> 0:00:29.600 the PhD, big boy PhD, trying to interpret all the results. 0:00:30.480 --> 0:00:32.120 And do you want me to give you a quick 0:00:32.120 --> 0:00:35.720 snapshot on where I'm at? Yeah, sure, my brain it's 0:00:35.760 --> 0:00:38.400 already so I've done it. No, nothing, it's not. I've 0:00:38.400 --> 0:00:40.400 done all my research, which I should have because I'm 0:00:40.400 --> 0:00:43.080 five years in, so hurry the fuck up, you old prick. 0:00:44.720 --> 0:00:46.839 All my studies have then done, All the data's in, 0:00:46.920 --> 0:00:50.919 all the interpretation is nearly done, or what they call 0:00:51.000 --> 0:00:54.440 academic milestones have been ticked off for of those. I'm 0:00:54.440 --> 0:00:57.760 writing papers. I'm writing multiple papers. I'm writing a systematic 0:00:57.840 --> 0:01:01.279 literature review. I'm writing two maybe three empirical papers. What 0:01:01.320 --> 0:01:04.000 that means is when you do your own research, that 0:01:04.200 --> 0:01:07.240 is your own new research. You're adding new kind of 0:01:07.280 --> 0:01:10.720 stuff to the world of science, so you're doing empirical 0:01:10.760 --> 0:01:14.200 studies and then reporting on that. I'm doing that, and 0:01:14.760 --> 0:01:18.880 I just spent the last two hours going through the 0:01:18.920 --> 0:01:21.880 first draft of one of my papers, which is both 0:01:21.920 --> 0:01:24.640 exciting but also makes you want to punch yourself in 0:01:24.680 --> 0:01:29.560 the face. So that is where I'm at. And I 0:01:29.600 --> 0:01:32.800 think I may even like I've never thought I have 0:01:32.880 --> 0:01:34.559 ADHD and I probably don't. 0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:36.199 I think you might. 0:01:37.560 --> 0:01:39.679 I don't know, but you know how, like some things 0:01:39.880 --> 0:01:44.479 I am I can get engrossed in, right, then there 0:01:44.480 --> 0:01:48.120 are other things and it's like the actual focus of 0:01:48.160 --> 0:01:52.360 my researchers, you know, which is metaacricy metaperception, understanding how 0:01:52.400 --> 0:01:55.400 others see you and essentially how to measure that and 0:01:55.440 --> 0:01:57.800 how to like what are the things that determine how 0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:02.480 good somebody is at understanding how they are seen, perceived, 0:02:02.520 --> 0:02:05.560 experienced by other people, What are the variables, what are 0:02:05.600 --> 0:02:10.320 the cognitive traits, like the kind of the brain things, 0:02:10.320 --> 0:02:13.280 and what are the emotional kind of attributes that influence 0:02:13.320 --> 0:02:17.959 the like in day to day real world conversations out 0:02:18.280 --> 0:02:23.160 out and about doing life. It's fucking fascinating, right, But 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:27.480 when it comes down to looking at is the data 0:02:27.520 --> 0:02:31.560 analysis from you know study too, and here's here's a 0:02:31.600 --> 0:02:37.160 fucking Excel spreadsheet with fifteen million numbers. And then me 0:02:37.240 --> 0:02:38.919 and the sixty one year old brain. 0:02:38.720 --> 0:02:42.200 Are like, oh ah, trying to figure out what all 0:02:42.240 --> 0:02:45.400 that means and then to put it into real you know, 0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:47.280 to figure out really what it means and what the 0:02:47.360 --> 0:02:50.000 data tells you, and then how to write about that, 0:02:50.040 --> 0:02:52.560 and then to figure out what the other research tells you, Like, 0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:55.440 what is all the other research in this this kind 0:02:55.480 --> 0:02:59.520 of cognitive metacognitive metaperceptive, metaaccurate space. 0:02:59.600 --> 0:03:03.559 What is that tell you? And is aligned? Does it disagree? 0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:05.600 What hole are you feeling in the science? 0:03:05.680 --> 0:03:12.840 And was anything wildly more different to prove than you thought? Like, 0:03:13.040 --> 0:03:15.720 was anything harder or easier to prove or the way 0:03:15.760 --> 0:03:16.960 you had to go about it? 0:03:19.720 --> 0:03:22.560 Like the hardest part for me is not like the 0:03:22.600 --> 0:03:25.400 funny thing is And I've said this before because I 0:03:25.480 --> 0:03:28.920 really I was fucking clueless, you know, I got asked 0:03:29.120 --> 0:03:32.640 if I was. I didn't get monach, didn't stand out 0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:35.400 and go hey, we would love you to do a PhD. 0:03:35.440 --> 0:03:37.560 But I did some work for them for the brain 0:03:38.240 --> 0:03:41.920 Brain Park kind of group, which is the Neuroscience Neuropsychology 0:03:42.200 --> 0:03:45.560 Psychology Lab, and I went in to do a talk 0:03:45.560 --> 0:03:48.760 to them about just which was hilarious because I was 0:03:48.800 --> 0:03:51.360 the least qualified in terms of academic you know, I 0:03:51.400 --> 0:03:54.360 had an undergrad degree, and I'm talking to everyone who 0:03:54.400 --> 0:03:57.880 at the very least is a PhD student and you know, 0:03:57.960 --> 0:04:01.760 professors and department leaders. But they were fascinated with the 0:04:01.760 --> 0:04:05.680 way that I do my work, and because I essentially 0:04:05.800 --> 0:04:09.839 help people change, you know, physically, mentally, emotionally, practically, behaviorally, 0:04:09.880 --> 0:04:11.800 and they're like, how do you do that? What's kind 0:04:11.800 --> 0:04:15.000 of watch your protocol? And and I'm like, what's a protocol? 0:04:15.600 --> 0:04:18.880 You know a little bit, because yes, of course I 0:04:19.000 --> 0:04:23.880 have a I had, you know, a mild academic background. 0:04:23.920 --> 0:04:26.800 I had a degree in exercise science and a bit 0:04:26.839 --> 0:04:30.880 of other experience and other stuff. But you know, really 0:04:30.960 --> 0:04:33.320 it's like you're learning, You're not when you do a 0:04:33.360 --> 0:04:38.920 PhD in psychle or neuropsych you're not really learning as 0:04:39.000 --> 0:04:42.080 much about the mind as you are about how to 0:04:42.160 --> 0:04:45.960 do research at that level. And so of course I've 0:04:46.080 --> 0:04:49.919 learned more about you know, the specifics of metaaccuracy and 0:04:49.960 --> 0:04:52.039 meta perception, and I can tell you more than I 0:04:52.040 --> 0:04:54.599 could have told you five years ago. But you know, 0:04:54.680 --> 0:04:58.599 five years ago, I still understood the nuts and bolts 0:04:58.600 --> 0:05:00.719 of what I now understand to a a level. And 0:05:00.760 --> 0:05:04.600 I did that intuitively and instinctively over time, talking to 0:05:04.680 --> 0:05:08.960 thousands of people, realizing that how I see me isn't 0:05:09.000 --> 0:05:12.839 how they see me. And so it's important that I 0:05:13.000 --> 0:05:16.680 do have an insight into what the Craig experience is 0:05:16.839 --> 0:05:19.240 like for the rest of the world, not for my 0:05:19.400 --> 0:05:22.560 ego or my security, but so that I can build connection, 0:05:22.839 --> 0:05:26.560 rapport and trust, and solve problems together, and work as 0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:30.719 part of a team together, and resolve conflict, and to 0:05:30.760 --> 0:05:34.960 be an effective podcast, to teach, a coach, mentor corporate speaker. 0:05:35.000 --> 0:05:37.039 All that because if you stand in front of a group, 0:05:37.040 --> 0:05:39.600 whether it's even a group of two or three or 0:05:39.640 --> 0:05:43.400 a group of a thousand, and you've got no idea 0:05:43.760 --> 0:05:47.159 what the Craig or the Tiff or the U experience 0:05:47.240 --> 0:05:49.760 is like for the rest of the room or the 0:05:49.800 --> 0:05:54.520 podcast audience in this case, then you're guessing, and you're 0:05:54.680 --> 0:05:58.360 just as likely to create disconnection as connection. But everyone's 0:05:58.400 --> 0:06:03.279 goal is connection. Everyone's goal is understanding, you know, But 0:06:03.440 --> 0:06:06.640 you might be creating more confusion than anything. But you 0:06:06.640 --> 0:06:10.760 don't fucking know. So, But I mean it's been great 0:06:10.760 --> 0:06:14.000 for me because I'm not a natural academic, I'm a 0:06:14.000 --> 0:06:18.120 pro academic, and so to make me learn this new 0:06:18.240 --> 0:06:21.479 language and this new protocol and this new universe, like 0:06:21.520 --> 0:06:25.839 it's a fucking universe where it's my analogy was the 0:06:25.920 --> 0:06:29.440 first year, it's like going to Russia and you know 0:06:29.480 --> 0:06:32.560 that you're not dumb, but you feel dumb because everyone 0:06:32.640 --> 0:06:35.520 speaks Russian and you don't, and people are talking to you, 0:06:36.400 --> 0:06:39.760 and even three six months in you're getting you know, 0:06:39.839 --> 0:06:43.560 two in ten words, so you're piecing together what they're saying. 0:06:44.200 --> 0:06:47.000 But they literally use a language. I mean literally a 0:06:47.120 --> 0:06:50.520 language like you know, words and phrases and constructs and 0:06:50.560 --> 0:06:55.559 concepts that not only don't you use, you've never heard of, right, 0:06:55.600 --> 0:06:59.159 And so now you're learning this new language as well 0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:01.800 as learning how to do the highest level of research. 0:07:02.400 --> 0:07:04.320 And then you've got to write papers which are going 0:07:04.360 --> 0:07:08.440 to be published in academic journals and you know all 0:07:08.480 --> 0:07:12.560 of that. So it's really yeah, I've I've learned a 0:07:12.560 --> 0:07:16.280 fair bit about obviously the focus of my research, but 0:07:16.400 --> 0:07:20.320 also more I've learned about how to do a PhD 0:07:20.400 --> 0:07:22.440 and how to do that kind level of research? 0:07:23.120 --> 0:07:28.760 Were there any concepts that to you felt really obvious 0:07:28.880 --> 0:07:32.360 and easy to explain and clear, but then had you 0:07:32.760 --> 0:07:35.680 completely stumped on how do I put together any how 0:07:35.680 --> 0:07:39.200 do I have a way to research improve this point 0:07:39.320 --> 0:07:39.760 or theory? 0:07:40.480 --> 0:07:43.160 Yeah? So, I mean what you know or what you 0:07:43.240 --> 0:07:47.200 think you know does not fucking matter at all. Like 0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:50.720 I could go, oh, yeah, but I've done sixty thousand 0:07:50.800 --> 0:07:54.800 personal training sessions. That's sixty thousand conversations with thousands of 0:07:54.840 --> 0:07:58.640 people in a range of different scenarios and situations. So 0:07:58.720 --> 0:08:01.600 I've got forty years of fucking experience at the cold 0:08:01.600 --> 0:08:04.680 face of interpersonal and they're like, yeah, big deal, what's 0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:09.000 the research say, It's like, yeah, that's nice. Next it 0:08:09.040 --> 0:08:13.080 doesn't matter, Like it doesn't matter in the sense that 0:08:13.680 --> 0:08:18.400 your experience, by the way, outside of this particular world 0:08:18.400 --> 0:08:22.600 that we're talking about, it is very important. Like your experience, 0:08:22.640 --> 0:08:28.520 your ideas, your insights, your understanding, your conversations, your real 0:08:28.640 --> 0:08:36.200 world learning on a practical life kind of reality or 0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:39.840 in a practical life reality or level, it really matters 0:08:39.880 --> 0:08:44.120 because it's appliable, it's usable, it's practical, right, But in 0:08:44.160 --> 0:08:48.640 an academic environment. When you are bringing science or new 0:08:48.720 --> 0:08:52.800 research into the world, it doesn't matter what you think. 0:08:53.120 --> 0:08:56.000 It matters what you can prove and what the data says, 0:08:56.040 --> 0:09:01.000 and what the research tells us and what your experiments, 0:09:01.040 --> 0:09:04.520 for one of the better term show us. That's what matters. Now, 0:09:05.240 --> 0:09:07.560 what you think and what you've experienced and what you 0:09:07.640 --> 0:09:12.760 believe can inform your research. That is the way that 0:09:12.800 --> 0:09:17.239 you create design your studies, or the kinds of questions 0:09:17.679 --> 0:09:21.080 that you ask or the hypotheses that you form. But 0:09:22.200 --> 0:09:25.840 you know, what you think you know is irrelevant in 0:09:25.960 --> 0:09:29.120 terms of the final product. It's all about what the 0:09:29.240 --> 0:09:35.319 data says. And yeah, and really you are studying such 0:09:35.360 --> 0:09:40.640 a specific thing, you know, in it's like I've said 0:09:40.640 --> 0:09:43.560 this probably fifty times, so I apologize, But I'm studying 0:09:43.600 --> 0:09:46.400 a drop of water in an ocean of human behavior. 0:09:47.240 --> 0:09:50.119 Like there are so many variables and so many factors 0:09:50.200 --> 0:09:54.400 and so many components and jigsaw piece puzzles to the 0:09:54.720 --> 0:09:59.000 human experience from a psychological, emotional, and sociological point of 0:09:59.040 --> 0:10:02.720 view that you think, oh well, ah, I understand. Saying 0:10:02.760 --> 0:10:06.120 I understand how the mind works is like saying I 0:10:06.240 --> 0:10:08.000 understand how the universe works. 0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:09.520 Like it. 0:10:10.280 --> 0:10:14.840 I truly don't think anyone fully understands the mind. And 0:10:14.920 --> 0:10:19.000 I think I naturally, like I'm not good. I never 0:10:19.000 --> 0:10:21.320 say I'm good at anything, but I think I naturally 0:10:21.360 --> 0:10:25.600 have a reasonable grasp of human behavior and you know, 0:10:25.840 --> 0:10:28.120 metaperception and cognition, all that shit in the mind. But 0:10:28.200 --> 0:10:29.920 I still think, of all there is to know, I 0:10:29.960 --> 0:10:35.040 know nearly fucking nothing. So understanding the mind is pretty 0:10:35.080 --> 0:10:39.360 much an impossibility if we're talking about totally understanding the mind, 0:10:41.520 --> 0:10:45.599 and also even you know, interestingly proving that there is 0:10:45.640 --> 0:10:48.760 a mind, you know. And the thing with psychology is 0:10:48.760 --> 0:10:51.920 that it is. And this is going to now sound 0:10:51.960 --> 0:10:54.280 like I'm throwing my own field under the bus, but 0:10:55.200 --> 0:10:58.360 it's probably the hardest, if not the messiest, if not 0:10:58.520 --> 0:11:03.800 the most unreliable science, because you know, when we think about, 0:11:04.520 --> 0:11:06.680 like all of the stuff that I or most of 0:11:06.720 --> 0:11:09.560 the stuff that I did, was using a range of 0:11:09.760 --> 0:11:14.119 different psychometric tools for testing, you know, scales and questionnaires 0:11:14.160 --> 0:11:18.199 and all kinds of things, but it's all subjective self evaluation. 0:11:19.000 --> 0:11:20.839 And as I've said to you many times, and I'll 0:11:20.880 --> 0:11:23.400 shut up after this, but the problem with psychology is 0:11:23.400 --> 0:11:27.760 that I could listeners, I could get Tiff to complete 0:11:27.760 --> 0:11:32.679 a questionnaire which assesses her her overall let's say mental health, 0:11:32.760 --> 0:11:35.480 or it's an insight or a tool to assess mental health, 0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:40.520 or emotional health, or extraversion or introversion or conscientiousness or 0:11:41.080 --> 0:11:45.480 you know whatever, all of these different factors or traits now, 0:11:45.880 --> 0:11:48.160 and then I get all the data because Tif did 0:11:48.240 --> 0:11:52.760 this protocol and filled out all of these answers, and 0:11:52.800 --> 0:11:54.600 then I get it and I go, here's my data. 0:11:55.440 --> 0:11:57.960 And then I do the same protocol with Tiff. A 0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:01.640 week later. She's in a different headspace. She hasn't slept well, 0:12:01.679 --> 0:12:04.400 she's a bit grumpy because the dog ate the cat, 0:12:04.559 --> 0:12:07.400 and a whole lot of shit's going on. And I 0:12:07.480 --> 0:12:11.160 get completely different data from the same human using the 0:12:11.240 --> 0:12:15.880 same protocol. Now you don't get that typically in other sciences. 0:12:16.559 --> 0:12:21.160 It's like if I measure your body composition today using 0:12:21.160 --> 0:12:24.000 a reliable tool, and now I measure it tomorrow, I'm 0:12:24.000 --> 0:12:28.960 going to get the same outcome. If if you know, 0:12:29.160 --> 0:12:33.439 I if I drop some if I drop a bowling 0:12:33.480 --> 0:12:36.040 ball in a vacuum, it's going to fall at the 0:12:36.080 --> 0:12:41.040 same speed every time as is a feather. Right, there's consistency. 0:12:41.760 --> 0:12:44.800 If I go all right, anatomy. Well, that bone in 0:12:44.920 --> 0:12:47.760 the top of the it's today we call it the fema. 0:12:47.840 --> 0:12:50.560 Guess what we call it the fucking fema tomorrow as well. 0:12:51.440 --> 0:12:54.240 It's not going to be a humorous or a bloody 0:12:54.240 --> 0:13:00.360 patella tomorrow. Like, there's consistency and reliability. But in in 0:13:00.400 --> 0:13:04.520 the research of psychology, and this is not the right term, 0:13:04.559 --> 0:13:07.600 but listeners will understand it. The measurement of the mind, 0:13:08.440 --> 0:13:11.000 or the components of the mind, or the attributes of 0:13:11.040 --> 0:13:14.640 the mind, it's at best messy. 0:13:15.640 --> 0:13:20.480 If you had to allocate a percentage to the level 0:13:20.600 --> 0:13:27.240 of inconsistency around around this research because of that reason, 0:13:27.280 --> 0:13:28.600 what percentage would. 0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:32.679 You Yeah, look, I really couldn't. But I'll answer that 0:13:32.720 --> 0:13:37.080 with I'll talk around that. You know. So for example 0:13:37.720 --> 0:13:42.080 that generally speaking, my research falls into the space of 0:13:42.240 --> 0:13:47.679 self awareness, social awareness, situation. You know, it's an awareness 0:13:47.800 --> 0:13:54.120 kind of piece. Now, even in academic literature, you will 0:13:54.120 --> 0:13:59.960 not get a consensus on something as simple as self awareness. 0:14:00.000 --> 0:14:04.760 It's not like, oh, here's the definition. Everyone uses this definition. 0:14:05.200 --> 0:14:09.240 This is the go to. So depending on which field 0:14:09.280 --> 0:14:12.880 of psychology, because there's different fields of course, you know, 0:14:13.000 --> 0:14:17.440 social psychology and sports psychology and clinical psychology, and you 0:14:17.440 --> 0:14:19.520 know that all the psych work they do in the 0:14:19.600 --> 0:14:24.880 corporate space, Like, there's different areas of psychology, same field, 0:14:24.920 --> 0:14:29.160 different areas, but that'll be defined differently in different contexts. 0:14:29.240 --> 0:14:34.600 So there's a lot of convergence. So coming together in agreement, 0:14:34.680 --> 0:14:38.560 there's probably just as much, if not more, divergence of 0:14:38.800 --> 0:14:43.880 disagreement disparity, Like I don't know about that, but I 0:14:43.960 --> 0:14:47.000 will say, you know, I was talking to Chris, who's 0:14:47.000 --> 0:14:51.080 my senior supervisor, and you know that I was talking 0:14:51.080 --> 0:14:57.520 about the oldest kind of reference to self awareness that 0:14:57.600 --> 0:14:59.400 I could find anyway, is like two and a half 0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:02.240 thousand years and it's Socrates who said the beginning of 0:15:02.280 --> 0:15:05.760 wisdom is to know thyself. Right, that's self awareness. It's 0:15:05.880 --> 0:15:08.440 like and he was talking two and a half thousand 0:15:08.520 --> 0:15:12.440 years ago about basically to know yourself and understand yourself. 0:15:13.320 --> 0:15:17.120 It is an indicator of wisdom, you know, if not intelligence. 0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:19.800 And so it's been something that people have been thinking 0:15:19.840 --> 0:15:23.280 about for a long time. But you know, I truly 0:15:23.280 --> 0:15:25.400 believe and I'm not saying it because it's my research. 0:15:25.480 --> 0:15:32.359 I think, you know, it's one of many interpersonal superpowers. 0:15:32.400 --> 0:15:38.160 But if you can really understand how other people experience you, 0:15:38.280 --> 0:15:42.200 or think of you, or perceive you, and then you 0:15:42.320 --> 0:15:46.280 use that information in the right way, you use that understanding, 0:15:46.360 --> 0:15:49.720 you use that knowledge in the right way, then you 0:15:49.800 --> 0:15:54.920 can become much better at all things communication, problem solving, 0:15:55.000 --> 0:16:01.160 leadership management, friendship, parenting, because you understand stand what they're 0:16:01.200 --> 0:16:06.920 getting because we always look at the situation, conversation, negotiation 0:16:07.520 --> 0:16:11.800 through our lens, but they're not looking through that lens. 0:16:12.040 --> 0:16:14.520 So it's in our interest to, as you've heard me 0:16:14.560 --> 0:16:18.440 say many times, to walk away from our window and 0:16:18.520 --> 0:16:22.040 metaphorically try and have a peek through theirs, because it 0:16:22.080 --> 0:16:25.040 doesn't matter if we agree or disagree, but to see 0:16:25.080 --> 0:16:28.440 through their window is to have a level of awareness 0:16:28.440 --> 0:16:32.800 and understanding that you don't when you are, you know, 0:16:32.960 --> 0:16:36.920 thinking that everybody else thinks like you. We've spoken about 0:16:36.960 --> 0:16:41.920 the false consensus effect. The false consensus effect which most 0:16:41.960 --> 0:16:45.000 people are trapped in is they think that other people 0:16:45.080 --> 0:16:49.880 think like them, which is broadly not true. 0:16:51.640 --> 0:16:56.360 You have to make decisions on like when you get 0:16:56.400 --> 0:17:00.720 into researching any topic or learning about something, into podcasts 0:17:00.760 --> 0:17:03.640 and listening to experts, and now you're one of them, 0:17:04.240 --> 0:17:06.760 and so I'm interested in because you get to these 0:17:06.800 --> 0:17:11.200 crossroads where you have to make a decision on which 0:17:11.359 --> 0:17:14.640 side of the belief you're going to lean towards. Were 0:17:14.680 --> 0:17:17.680 there any of those crossroads that came up for you 0:17:17.800 --> 0:17:21.959 that you felt biased pulling you in a way, that 0:17:22.119 --> 0:17:24.320 logic was probably pulling you the other way, and we 0:17:24.840 --> 0:17:27.879 were there areas that you had to kind of I 0:17:27.880 --> 0:17:28.280 don't know. 0:17:29.160 --> 0:17:32.359 Yeah, Look, I mean there are things that I naturally, 0:17:33.160 --> 0:17:35.280 you know, I think a lot of things about this, 0:17:35.400 --> 0:17:40.359 but to be able to unequivocally prove that again using 0:17:40.480 --> 0:17:44.919 subjective assessment tools and psychometric tools that we have available, 0:17:45.680 --> 0:17:49.080 it's really not that you are standing on top of 0:17:49.119 --> 0:17:52.119 the academic you know, pullpit and screaming out to the 0:17:52.160 --> 0:17:55.160 world this, Hey everyone, I've figured it out. So all 0:17:55.280 --> 0:17:59.280 the other scientists and researchers before me, fuck them. This 0:17:59.359 --> 0:18:02.560 is how the works. You're not doing that, you kind 0:18:02.640 --> 0:18:10.720 of you're kind of telling them your best understanding of 0:18:10.800 --> 0:18:17.240 what your research tells you, and your research is informed 0:18:17.280 --> 0:18:22.199 by or guided by what you originally thought before you 0:18:22.280 --> 0:18:25.600 started the research, right, what your questions or hypotheses were, 0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:30.600 but also what other people in the field have found 0:18:30.720 --> 0:18:36.160 or not found. So when you're doing a PhD for example, 0:18:36.240 --> 0:18:40.320 especially in the psychology space, but most spaces. I've never 0:18:40.359 --> 0:18:42.960 done mine outside of psych But I assume you know 0:18:43.000 --> 0:18:48.119 your job is to build on existing science, Like what 0:18:48.160 --> 0:18:50.200 do we already know? Yeah, well, don't do that, Greg, 0:18:50.280 --> 0:18:53.000 We already know that. Or I might have a theory 0:18:53.000 --> 0:18:56.560 that contradicts a current theory and I might disprove something, 0:18:57.200 --> 0:19:02.120 or I might recognize a gap in you know, well 0:19:02.600 --> 0:19:06.119 we haven't looked at this particular thing through this lens 0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:12.560 or factoring in this variable. So we're going to do that, right, So, like, 0:19:12.960 --> 0:19:14.960 do you want me to bore you for one minute? 0:19:15.920 --> 0:19:17.919 I just bought up one of my papers. This is 0:19:17.960 --> 0:19:21.560 the working tile, right, and this is very This is 0:19:21.640 --> 0:19:25.239 quite understandable because this is just an abstract and this 0:19:25.320 --> 0:19:28.080 is very much a work in progress. So the name 0:19:28.119 --> 0:19:31.600 of this paper, don't get too excited. It's called gender 0:19:31.720 --> 0:19:35.719 and Mental health as Determinants of meta Accuracy. So what 0:19:35.880 --> 0:19:38.280 I'm doing in this particular paper is looking at the 0:19:38.840 --> 0:19:44.040 way that mental health, positive or negative, can impact a 0:19:44.080 --> 0:19:47.120 person's level of meta accuracy, in other words, how good 0:19:47.160 --> 0:19:52.399 they are at predicting how other people see them, and 0:19:52.440 --> 0:19:57.640 also the role of gender, so meta accuracy. So this 0:19:57.720 --> 0:20:01.520 is this is the world's never heard. Yes, this is 0:20:01.560 --> 0:20:04.000 the abstract. This is a work in progress. This will 0:20:04.000 --> 0:20:05.560 probably change a bit, but this is what I was 0:20:05.600 --> 0:20:10.280 working on before. And this is a five thousand word 0:20:10.320 --> 0:20:15.080 paper about twenty pages at this point. Metaaccuracy, the ability 0:20:15.119 --> 0:20:18.040 to infer how others perceive us, is a critical component 0:20:18.080 --> 0:20:23.440 of effective social functioning and interpersonal relationships. This study explores 0:20:23.480 --> 0:20:27.240 my study the intersection of mental health, gender, and metaaccuracy 0:20:27.280 --> 0:20:31.439 within close relationships, focusing on how positive and negative mental 0:20:31.480 --> 0:20:36.560 health states influence metaperception accuracy across personality traits using a 0:20:36.560 --> 0:20:41.080 partner based correlational design. Ninety diads. That means ninety pairs 0:20:41.680 --> 0:20:43.760 n equals one to eighty. That's the total number of 0:20:43.760 --> 0:20:48.199 participants that many people completed self reports, partner ratings, and 0:20:48.200 --> 0:20:52.560 metaperception assessments online. Now this is what nobody in the 0:20:52.560 --> 0:20:55.679 world has heard, and so I could be fucking myself 0:20:55.760 --> 0:20:59.600 up here. But anyway, results reveal, so this is very preliminary. 0:21:00.000 --> 0:21:04.919 Results reveal that positive mental health enhances metaaccuracy for emotional 0:21:04.920 --> 0:21:08.760 stability and openness. So, in other words, what that means 0:21:08.880 --> 0:21:13.760 is your ability to predict. So if I say to 0:21:13.760 --> 0:21:17.160 you tif one to five. How emotionally stable are you? 0:21:17.160 --> 0:21:20.840 You go, I'm a four, and I predict you're a four, 0:21:21.600 --> 0:21:28.359 then you're quite meta accurate regarding that particular trait. So 0:21:28.560 --> 0:21:35.560 to openness, right, So I'll explain it briefly at the end. 0:21:35.560 --> 0:21:39.880 With gender specific patterns, males showed greater accuracy for emotional ability, 0:21:39.920 --> 0:21:45.680 while females exhibited greater accuracy for openness and conscientiousness. So 0:21:45.720 --> 0:21:49.359 your ability to predict how other people see you tif 0:21:49.440 --> 0:21:53.679 in terms of openness and conscientiousness. Females are typically, in 0:21:53.720 --> 0:21:58.080 my research, better than that. Negative mental health, particularly stress, 0:21:58.680 --> 0:22:05.280 consistently impaired meta accuracy affecting consciousness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability. 0:22:05.320 --> 0:22:08.240 That is the prediction of those two traits in terms 0:22:08.240 --> 0:22:14.080 of accuracy, with greater susceptibility observed among females. Depressions selectively 0:22:14.119 --> 0:22:18.080 reduced emotional stability meta accuracy in male I know this 0:22:18.240 --> 0:22:23.040 is complicated. These findings unscore the nuanced interplay between mental 0:22:23.040 --> 0:22:27.320 health and gender in shaping social cognition, providing insights into 0:22:27.359 --> 0:22:32.359 potential tailored interventions to improve relational and psychological well being. 0:22:33.000 --> 0:22:37.160 Implications for theory, therapeutic practice, and future research on social 0:22:37.200 --> 0:22:41.560 perception dynamics are discussed within the paper. So that's my 0:22:42.080 --> 0:22:44.680 that's a snapshot of what the papers about. 0:22:45.440 --> 0:22:49.679 Right, it's full of fascinating. It's pretty fascinating though. 0:22:49.680 --> 0:22:53.119 Yeah, it's fucking amazing, right, And so the snap shot. 0:22:53.200 --> 0:22:58.040 And I'm still like, I'm still sifting through the analysis 0:22:58.080 --> 0:23:01.040 and the data, and so this could this could change, 0:23:01.080 --> 0:23:07.520 So don't take this as gospel. But generally speaking that like, 0:23:07.640 --> 0:23:11.400 sometimes you get data that doesn't really show anything one 0:23:11.440 --> 0:23:14.119 way or the other. It doesn't show a positive or 0:23:14.119 --> 0:23:18.000 a negative relationship, or it doesn't show a correlation between 0:23:18.040 --> 0:23:21.240 this particular thing and that particular thing, right, But what 0:23:21.520 --> 0:23:25.800 does seem to be showing up with this particular Remember 0:23:25.800 --> 0:23:29.240 this is one study in a million billion studies, So 0:23:29.359 --> 0:23:31.320 this is Craig study with one hundred and eighty people, 0:23:31.440 --> 0:23:34.640 ninety diads, ninety pairs. It seems that women are better 0:23:34.680 --> 0:23:42.840 at it. This is not a shocker. And also that 0:23:44.920 --> 0:23:49.840 also that people with more positive mental health, So people 0:23:49.840 --> 0:23:54.960 who are generally happier, more optimistic, more positive generally have 0:23:55.080 --> 0:24:00.160 greater levels of better accuracy than people who have depression, anxiety, 0:24:00.280 --> 0:24:04.320 and stress. So there's a scale called the DAS twenty 0:24:04.359 --> 0:24:10.199 one which is DAS is depression anxiety stress and the 0:24:10.240 --> 0:24:15.200 second S is scale Depression anxiety Stress Scale. So that's 0:24:15.240 --> 0:24:18.400 one of the psychometric tools that I use. But yeah, 0:24:17.800 --> 0:24:21.800 it's really interesting and you because what it does is 0:24:21.840 --> 0:24:26.320 it takes out my opinion and my emotions, and all 0:24:26.359 --> 0:24:28.919 it is is me kind of getting all of the 0:24:29.000 --> 0:24:32.880 data data that we've collected and interpreting that as best 0:24:32.920 --> 0:24:37.639 as we can. Having said that this is my and 0:24:37.680 --> 0:24:40.440 this is not about my research or anyone in particularly. 0:24:40.480 --> 0:24:43.720 But one of the problems with science, and I've said 0:24:43.720 --> 0:24:47.560 this and you and I have alluded to this many times, 0:24:47.760 --> 0:24:54.199 is that all scientists are human. All humans make mistakes, 0:24:54.840 --> 0:25:01.120 all humans have bias, all humans have emotion. Humans want 0:25:01.200 --> 0:25:06.160 to to an extent, be right right, And so this 0:25:06.240 --> 0:25:09.879 is one of the things is to produce great science, 0:25:11.400 --> 0:25:13.960 you really don't want to have an emotional investment in 0:25:14.000 --> 0:25:19.960 the outcome because if I want a certain outcome, then 0:25:20.560 --> 0:25:23.240 I'm not going to be completely objective. 0:25:24.000 --> 0:25:24.280 Right. 0:25:25.080 --> 0:25:27.919 So even when you go, well here's the objective data, 0:25:28.000 --> 0:25:32.240 this is what the computer, this is what the analytics 0:25:32.280 --> 0:25:37.360 spewed out using these different analysis programs, But then it's 0:25:37.400 --> 0:25:41.119 down to the individuals to interpret that and share that 0:25:41.160 --> 0:25:43.359 with the world. So I will say that, you know, 0:25:44.000 --> 0:25:48.040 we need science, absolutely, and science is great, but science 0:25:48.119 --> 0:25:54.480 is not perfect one because the protocols are not perfect, 0:25:55.680 --> 0:25:59.360 the execution of the research is not perfect, the research 0:25:59.480 --> 0:26:02.720 design is not perfect, and the people doing all the 0:26:02.800 --> 0:26:07.439 science are not perfect. So I always think when we 0:26:07.480 --> 0:26:13.199