Halo 2 Forum > Off-topic > Debate Forum
 
 
Display Modes Thread Tools
zyphex
Level 25
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 888
Subtract from zyphex's ReputationAdd to zyphex's Reputation zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000
Send a message via AIM to zyphex
#11
09-07-2013
Default

Quote:
Instead, it appears that poverty itself reduces cognitive capacity. We suggest that this is because poverty-related concerns consume mental resources, leaving less for other tasks.
Does it really reduce cognitive capacity? Or is it just that the cognitive capacity available for non poverty-related concerns is reduced since more of it has to be allotted to financial concerns?

Who would have thunk that the cognitive abilities for each individual are scarce resources...

I'm just unsure of the paper's claim. If it's simply that cognitive abilities are scarce and we have to allocate our cognitive energy, then I don't really find this to be shocking. But if the claim is that poverty reduces actual cognitive capacity over time (for all, not just non-poverty related, concerns), then I'm not sure this experiment, as described, could really test that, and the fact that the same farmers, when rich, performed better indicated that poverty doesn't reduce total capacity, but reduces the amount of cognitive capacity that can be dedicated to non-poverty related concerns (which shows scarcity, not an absolute reduction in capacity brought on by poverty).

Quote:
Some participants were presented with “easy” scenarios (a $150 car repair), while others were presented with “hard” scenarios (a $1500 car repair). After being presented with either four “easy” or four “hard” scenarios, researchers tested participants’ cognitive function, using two metrics; Raven’s Progressive Matrices, which measures “fluid intelligence” and is used in IQ tests, and a spatial compatibility task, which measures cognitive control (3).

For their analysis, the researchers divided participants into two groups, “rich” and “poor.” They did so by computing the median effective household income, which takes into account total household income and number of people in the household. Participants whose effective household income landed above the calculated median were considered “rich”, while those whose fell below were considered “poor.”

The authors found that in the “easy” condition, when financial concerns were presumably low, both rich and poor participants performed the cognitive tasks equally well. However, in the “hard” condition, when financial concerns were more salient, poor participants performed significantly worse than rich participants. The authors suggest that the “hard” condition evoked greater financial concerns in poor participants, than it did in the rich, which left the poor with less mental resources for the cognitive tasks, and lead to diminished performance.
But what they seemingly did not do, and should have done, is had 2 more control groups. One group rich, and one group poor. For these groups, they should have refrained from asking the "financial concerns" questions to these groups and simply tested cognitive capacity. Then, they should have seen if these results were significantly different than the other groups tested.

Edit: This criticism is based on reading the abstract and one of the articles, not the piece itself.
GT: Zyphex

Last edited by zyphex; 09-08-2013 at 12:21 AM.
PM
1 authentic experience
PM's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location:  
Posts: 12,409
Subtract from PM's ReputationAdd to PM's Reputation PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000
#12
09-09-2013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zyphex View Post
Does it really reduce cognitive capacity? Or is it just that the cognitive capacity available for non poverty-related concerns is reduced since more of it has to be allotted to financial concerns?

Who would have thunk that the cognitive abilities for each individual are scarce resources...

I'm just unsure of the paper's claim. If it's simply that cognitive abilities are scarce and we have to allocate our cognitive energy, then I don't really find this to be shocking. But if the claim is that poverty reduces actual cognitive capacity over time (for all, not just non-poverty related, concerns), then I'm not sure this experiment, as described, could really test that, and the fact that the same farmers, when rich, performed better indicated that poverty doesn't reduce total capacity, but reduces the amount of cognitive capacity that can be dedicated to non-poverty related concerns (which shows scarcity, not an absolute reduction in capacity brought on by poverty).



But what they seemingly did not do, and should have done, is had 2 more control groups. One group rich, and one group poor. For these groups, they should have refrained from asking the "financial concerns" questions to these groups and simply tested cognitive capacity. Then, they should have seen if these results were significantly different than the other groups tested.

Edit: This criticism is based on reading the abstract and one of the articles, not the piece itself.
is that- is that really how you understood this article ? lo, ornery laughin
PM
1 authentic experience
PM's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location:  
Posts: 12,409
Subtract from PM's ReputationAdd to PM's Reputation PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000
#13
09-09-2013
Default

PM
1 authentic experience
PM's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location:  
Posts: 12,409
Subtract from PM's ReputationAdd to PM's Reputation PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000
#14
09-09-2013
Default

zyphex
Level 25
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 888
Subtract from zyphex's ReputationAdd to zyphex's Reputation zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000 zyphex IS OVER 9000
Send a message via AIM to zyphex
#15
09-10-2013
Default

^^^Shitposting

Another case of PM having nothing substantive to contribute, but posting anyway.

Edit: On second thought, those kids are pretty cute.

#notsureiftrolled
GT: Zyphex

Last edited by zyphex; 09-10-2013 at 05:25 AM.
davobrosia
Ask Z for $50
davobrosia's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 22,593
Subtract from davobrosia's ReputationAdd to davobrosia's Reputation davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000
Send a message via AIM to davobrosia
#16
09-10-2013
Default

Don't threadshit my fucking threads.


zyphex, what you point out is a seemingly valid concern. If your criticism is valid and true (I haven't read the study thoroughly enough), my response would be that poverty's consuming limited cognitive resources may induce a negative externality on the population as a whole, undermining the liberating power of free enterprise (I truly believe this is a true thing--see here for a brief rundown*). In other words, it may be beneficial for those with already-entrenched wealth and capital to keep the poor dumb so they have to toil away and don't have any real bargaining power in getting a better lot (because they are not only constantly exhausted and unable to save, but also because shouldering the cognitive load of poverty makes it that much harder to do anything about it); but even if you don't grant the truth of this common (anecdotal) account of what it's like to be very poor, it may still be the case that this dampening effect, or permanent cognitive reduction, or poverty-induced reduction in cognitive ability (i.e., possibly mutable and temporary) is bad overall for "The Economy" etc. etc.


And yeah, they could've used a control group, and a followup may be in the pipeline, or it may have been a funding issue. Hard to say at the moment; I'll check on all that later.



*tl;dr: Capitalism is the radical decoding and deterritorialization of the material flows that previous social machines had zealously coded on the earth or the body of the despot. Production is credited to the “body” of capital, but this form of recording works by the substitution of an “axiomatic” for a code: in this context an “axiomatic” means a set of simple principles for the quantitative calculation of the difference between flows (of deterritorialized labor and capital) rather than elaborate rules for the qualitative judgments that map flows onto the socius. Capitalism's command is utterly simple: connect deterritorialized flows of labor and capital and extract a surplus from that connection. Thus capitalism sets loose an enormous productive charge—connect those flows! Faster, faster!—the surpluses of which the institutions of private property try to register as belonging to individuals. Now those individuals are primarily social (as figures of capitalist or laborer) and only secondarily private (family members). Whereas organs of bodies were socially marked in previous regimes (as belonging to the clan and earth, or as belonging to the emperor, as in the jus primae noctis), body organs are privatized under capitalism and attached to persons as members of the family. In Deleuze and Guattari's terms, capitalism's decoded flows are reterritorialized on “persons,” that is, on family members as figures in the Oedipal triangle.
Spoiler!
Cursed Lemon
Darren Helm's Bitch
Cursed Lemon's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 14,766
Subtract from Cursed Lemon's ReputationAdd to Cursed Lemon's Reputation Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000 Cursed Lemon IS OVER 9000
Send a message via AIM to Cursed Lemon Send a message via MSN to Cursed Lemon Send a message via Yahoo to Cursed Lemon
#17
09-10-2013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PM View Post
is that- is that really how you understood this article ? lots of laughs
sar·don·ic
särˈdänik
adjective

1. Grimly mocking or cynical.

"Starkey attempted a sardonic smile"

synonyms: mocking, satirical, sarcastic, ironical, ironic; More


Elmo <3
davobrosia
Ask Z for $50
davobrosia's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 22,593
Subtract from davobrosia's ReputationAdd to davobrosia's Reputation davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000 davobrosia IS OVER 9000
Send a message via AIM to davobrosia
#18
09-10-2013
Default

Stop threadshitting pls ty
Spoiler!
Lucky
Archivist
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lockout
Posts: 5,070
Subtract from Lucky's ReputationAdd to Lucky's Reputation Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000 Lucky IS OVER 9000
Send a message via AIM to Lucky
#19
09-10-2013
Default

PM
1 authentic experience
PM's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location:  
Posts: 12,409
Subtract from PM's ReputationAdd to PM's Reputation PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000 PM IS OVER 9000
#20
09-10-2013
Default

>near 2014
>not at all 1912

the organization has changed a bit (sentence added to avoid outright shitposting)

Last edited by PM; 09-10-2013 at 09:57 PM. Reason: xb
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off