5

We get a lot of questions asked by layman users along the lines of:

I have observed X, (based on which I hypothesize this might be a recurring common pattern). I don't know what to search for. Is this studied in Psychology?

These can broadly be labeled as questions and should be tagged as such. Quite frequently there is a problem with the hypothesis:

  • A clear motivation for presuming this should be studied/is relevant to study in psychology is missing. At times, the hypothesis is even missing.
  • If a motivation is included, it is not framed in Psychology or Neuroscience, with the unfortunate result a question is often based on faulty premises.

So, I have observed this to be a common pattern over the past few years. 🙂

I feel we know how to deal with it: (1) either help the OP formulating a proper question, or (2) close as 'not framed in psychology or neuroscience'.

Instead, the purpose of this post is to start creating a resource for users to be redirected to in case they ask such questions. Perhaps, at some point this could be turned into a FAQ. Therefore, answers can extend on my observations and recommendations, to discuss whether there is a better way to deal with such questions.

  • Had you noticed my mention of roughly this phenomenon in chat yesterday, or did we happen to come across this independently? In any case I think this is a good approach to try to deal with the issue, curious to see what others can contribute here. – Bryan Krause Jul 13 '18 at 15:45
  • 1
    @Bryan I did not, but we were obviously inspired by the same 2-3 questions posted recently. 🙂 Just goes to show this is quite common and noticeable. – Steven Jeuris Jul 13 '18 at 20:58
3

These are more observations than proposed solutions:

  • I think the main problem is with asking about behavior highly specific to an individual (self or acquaintance, I guess) along the lines of: likes to smoke pipe on Sundays sitting on his head. Those questions are more or less a substitute for "what's wrong with this individual", couched as terminology/concept questions. I have to admit to sometimes giving in and answering such questions... Example: "pathological nomadness".

  • A lesser evil (quantitatively) are probably questions based on (sometime highly idiosyncratic) self-help books or even popsci blogs, which may use even common terms in uncommon ways. Asking about the research equivalent of those can be hit and miss because sometimes there's no clear definition in the source invoked... and sometimes the definition turns out to be as convoluted as smokes pipe on Sundays sitting on his head. Example: "non-neediness". Another example in which I have no idea what's actually talking about (but a lot of people here at least liked the question): Gnomes/Dopey "defence mechanism".

  • Just a side note - A question isn’t necessarily off-topic just because you don’t understand the question, and therefore, talking of the ‘gnomes’ question, it wouldn’t necessarily stand that the OP is asking for a term which doesn’t exist. I am one of those who upvoted because it is a good question which will help others who may have come across the blog article in question. I personally like questions like these because it highlights possible misconceptions with regard to psychological theory and provides a chance to clear things up. – Chris Rogers Jul 23 '18 at 10:13
  • @ChrisRogers Not going to say much about that specific question, but "unclear" is a valid close reason. – Bryan Krause Jul 24 '18 at 17:08

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .