• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Studying Psychology

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
I studied psychology at under-graduate level

I did one module in it on a degree program with six modules

On the whole I enjoyed it

I liked the Freudian bits and the social psychology bits

But not the stats side of it all - the p-value, t-value, normal distribution, SPSS etc.

So for me it had its highs and lows, I'd have got a higher result without all the stats bits

Although the stats are important to it, what with Psychology being a science and all

Has anyone else here studied psychology?

How did you find it?

I found it challenging and on the whole enjoyed it, except for the stats bit

I'm glad I didn't do a degree exclusively in it though
 

Erebus

Well-Known Member
I studied it at college (In the UK, college falls between high school and university) so by this point my knowledge of it is probably woefully out of date.

I found it interesting, though I've always struggled with things like names, dates and numbers. While I grasped the theories quickly, I suspect that my difficulty remembering details would have made me unsuitable for pursuing it at a higher level.

Oddly enough, psychology still came up quite a bit as I studied literature. For some reason, you're expected to offer Freudian analysis of the symbolism within texts when you get to university. I always found that a little odd since, while he accomplished some great things, his theories regarding symbolism have almost entirely fallen by the wayside. Having studied psychology previously, it certainly made some of my later education easier but it also left me asking, "Why Freud?"
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
I studied cognitive psychology as part of a program called Science of the Mind which ran for a full year in my undergraduate studies. We had an optional statistics course which I opted out of. I love math but somehow statistics didn't seem right.

For my master's program I had an academic advisor who was a Jungian trained analyst. I took a couple of his courses.

I've kept dream journals off and on for many years and feel like I have a skill at dream interpretation. I've read a bit of Jung and the Jungians having been drawn to that via Joseph Campbell's comparative mythology.

I also have studied Jungian typology and even read a introductory textbook on personality development which was a review and introduction to the major developmental theorists including Freud, Jung, Piaget and others.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I studied engineering, and we did statistics as a part of mathematics in one year. In the exam we had the option of a few questions relating to statistics and one could ignore these and still pass since there were sufficient questions elsewhere. Apparently most of the rest of the class were glad about this and did indeed ignore them. I found statistics quite easy so I perversely answered them but I could have done as the others since maths was one of my best subjects. :D All long since gone now.

I had an amateur interest in psychology and psychiatry, as a youth and ever since, but mostly it was not structured so hardly could be called studying. I often just read books that were topical or controverial, like those by R D Laing, Art Janov, Thomas Szasz, or Robert Ornstein, although I did read Freud and much of the more mainstream material, like John Bowlby, Howard Gardner, Eric Berne, Richard Gregory, Dorothy Rowe, etc. I have read quite a few books by the current crop too - Pinker, Dennett, Bloom, etc., since I tend to find psychology has the more interesting material for some reason. :oops:

Looking back, although I have always liked engineering, I think I could have done psychology since I've always found most of it interesting enough and more than much else. I could also perhaps have sorted out my own personal problems, so a double whammy. :D
 

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
Has anyone else here studied psychology?

I got my BA in it. I love learning about the different psychologists and the things they bring to the table. I did not enjoy the Statistics classes either but I am glad I got through them with good grades. I got my Master's in Social Work and sometimes I wish I had taken Psych instead.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I took psychology as an elective subject my first year at uni, unfortunately i dropped it in the second year
 

anna.

but mostly it's the same
I got my BA in it. I love learning about the different psychologists and the things they bring to the table. I did not enjoy the Statistics classes either but I am glad I got through them with good grades. I got my Master's in Social Work and sometimes I wish I had taken Psych instead.


I also have a BA in psychology. My plan was to get a Master's in Social Work but life got in the way.

Behavioral stats was definitely a challenge, trying to understand SPSS wasn't much easier, but I loved, loved cultural and social psychology, was fascinated by the psychology of prejudice and discrimination, yet also loved cognitive and neuropsychology.

I remember one instructor saying she chose research psychology rather than clinical psychology because she liked brains, not people. :)
 

anna.

but mostly it's the same
I'm glad I didn't do a degree exclusively in it though

I was well into getting a degree in English when I took a psychology class to fulfill a science requirement. I promptly switched to a degree in psychology and never looked back. That psy class was life-changing. The instructor told us we wouldn't be the same person after class as we were when we walked into class 50 minutes earlier - and he was right.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
My daughter has completed her MA in Industrial Psychology in May, 2019 from an Indian University and is now working as HR Executive in a small software firm.

She is creative type. She can sing and paint well, though not professionally trained. She does small modelling assignments. So, it is obvious that she finds her job ‘killing’.

Assuming that the subject of Psychology can be creative, especially in the domains of ‘Training and Development’, what may be her options for some higher studies — in form of some useful diploma or certification? Online courses?

Thanks in advance for any information.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
My daughter has completed her MA in Industrial Psychology in May, 2019 from an Indian University and is now working as HR Executive in a small software firm.

She is creative type. She can sing and paint well, though not professionally trained. She does small modelling assignments. So, it is obvious that she finds her job ‘killing’.

Assuming that the subject of Psychology can be creative, especially in the domains of ‘Training and Development’, what may be her options for some higher studies — in form of some useful diploma or certification? Online courses?

Thanks in advance for any information.

I wonder if she would be interested in teaching through running corporate training programs? Some of the best corporate trainings I have taken are those based on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Crucial Conversations both of which have a very strong basis in personal psychology.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
I wonder if she would be interested in teaching through running corporate training programs? Some of the best corporate trainings I have taken are those based on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Crucial Conversations both of which have a very strong basis in personal psychology.

Thank you very much. Exactly that is what interests her. Do you know of some recognised online resource/s. Thanks in advance.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I have a BA in it. The coursework I didnt find hard, statistics wasnt too bad, other than I had to do them all by hand, no SPSS, so I had to remember what do for what for the different values and I did average in that class. I was also very under prepaired in knowing all sorts of different types of medications, especially non-tropic which I've had to learn many of them on the job.
But, for me, it has helped to fill in many gaps in my understanding on human interactions and socialization, and I've found that being mentally ill myself often has clients opening up and trusting me in ways they don't other case managers (especially because I'm often open about my own mental illnesses with my own clients). I am getting at least my MA, but at the BA level I really do wish it paid more, cause it's tons of stress and loads of responsibilities (including being on call) for little pay (right at the federal poverty line, and I worked with kids, adults, and outside service provider for DCS - I make way more money driving lyft now).
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
And it's great when you can watch people make improvements. Sometimes they take big steps, and for some even small steps are big. It's very rewarding, even if many clients don't really participate in their treatment that much.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I studied psychology at under-graduate level

I did one module in it on a degree program with six modules

On the whole I enjoyed it

I liked the Freudian bits and the social psychology bits

But not the stats side of it all - the p-value, t-value, normal distribution, SPSS etc.

So for me it had its highs and lows, I'd have got a higher result without all the stats bits

Although the stats are important to it, what with Psychology being a science and all

Has anyone else here studied psychology?

How did you find it?

I found it challenging and on the whole enjoyed it, except for the stats bit

I'm glad I didn't do a degree exclusively in it though

I have a B.Ed. We had to do undergraduate stuff in both behavioral and developmental psychology. I've been a lifelong student via observation ever since. It has been a helpful aid in understanding how people tick, and then using that in a self-reflecting process to understand what makes me tick.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Myers Briggs is hogwash. It's best left forgotten, as science does not support it.

I disagree. I'm not sure how well science can try to prove or disprove such things.

I believe that the Myers-Briggs typology confirms fairly well with Gerald Edelmans view of the large scale structure of re-entrant connections in the brain with a perceptual layer and a higher order layer.
Also Antonio Damasios understanding of Thinking vs Feeling in the brain aligns well.
Bias in terms of a preference for one vs another large scale neural pathway may be seen in most people's "handedness".

Given that Jung's theory of personality is phenomenological and rooted in human psychology and aspects of neural function not fully understood, it seems unlikely that science experiments will be very definitive in this area.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I disagree. I'm not sure how well science can try to prove or disprove such things.
I assure you, its hogwash.
Myers–Briggs Type Indicator - Wikipedia
. The validity (statistical validity and test validity) of the MBTI as a psychometric instrument has been the subject of much criticism.
...
Psychometric specialist Robert Hogan wrote: "Most personality psychologists regard the MBTI as little more than an elaborate Chinese fortune cookie ..."[54]
...
A 1996 review by Gardner and Martinko concluded: "It is clear that efforts to detect simplistic linkages between type preferences and managerial effectiveness have been disappointing. Indeed, given the mixed quality of research and the inconsistent findings, no definitive conclusion regarding these relationships can be drawn."[6][53]
...
Thus, psychometric assessment research fails to support the concept of type, but rather shows that most people lie near the middle of a continuous curve.[.
...
The 1991 review committee concluded at the time there was "not sufficient, well-designed research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs".
...
the MBTI does not use validity scales to assess exaggerated or socially desirable responses.[
...
The terminology of the MBTI has been criticized as being very "vague and general",[74] so as to allow any kind of behavior to fit any personality type, which may result in the Forer effect, where people give a high rating to a positive description that supposedly applies specifically to them.[
...
The failure of the scale to disentangle Introversion and Neuroticism (there is no scale for neurotic and other psychopathological attributes in the MBTI) is its worst feature, only equalled by the failure to use factor analysis in order to test the arrangement of items in the scal
...
The test-retest reliability of the MBTI tends to be low. Large numbers of people (between 39% and 76% of respondents) obtain different type classifications when retaking the indicator after only five weeks
...
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Given that Jung's theory of personality is phenomenological and rooted in human psychology and aspects of neural function not fully understood, it seems unlikely that science experiments will be very definitive in this area.
Except we do have some good personality tests, and Jung, much like Frued, has been largely discarded amd debunked.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
I disagree. I'm not sure how well science can try to prove or disprove such things.

I believe that the Myers-Briggs typology confirms fairly well with Gerald Edelmans view of the large scale structure of re-entrant connections in the brain with a perceptual layer and a higher order layer.
Also Antonio Damasios understanding of Thinking vs Feeling in the brain aligns well.
Bias in terms of a preference for one vs another large scale neural pathway may be seen in most people's "handedness".

Given that Jung's theory of personality is phenomenological and rooted in human psychology and aspects of neural function not fully understood, it seems unlikely that science experiments will be very definitive in this area.

Except we do have some good personality tests, and Jung, much like Frued, has been largely discarded amd debunked.

Well. I have not seen any evidence that either Jung or MBTI is largely discarded.
 
Top