Jordan Peterson tells you why Social Scientists are terrified of factor analysis

So here’s the loose theory, and you’ve got to get this exactly right to understand this properly you got to get it exactly right, and it’s really important because In so far as you guys are interested in psychology, especially in the experimental end of psychology measurement is everything and so much of what psychologists Publish and write about is incorrect and the reason it’s incorrect is because they do not have their measurements properly instantiate it It’s a massive problem, especially in Social Psychology. In fact it’s probably a fatal problem in that most of the things that social psychologists measure don’t exist and Social psychology has been rife with scandals for the last four or five years and and there’s good reason for it But a big part of the problem is is that the measurement that… People are not stringent and careful enough about their measurements, so we’re gonna walk through this very very carefully So I’m gonna set forward a set of propositions, and you have to think about them because each of them are their axiomatic So you sort of have to accept them before you go on to the next step and there’s certainly room to question them But here’s the bare bones of the psychometric a model of personality, so we’ll call it Roughly the big five model and the reason it’s called the big five model is because the psychometric Investigations have indicated that you can specify human personality along five basic dimensions you might ask well What exactly is personality and well that’s partly what we’ve been trying to wrestle with the entire course so far and I would say Or what exactly is a trait? think of a trait as an element of personality And I think the best way to think about a trait is as a sub personality So you’re you’re made up of sub personalities that are integrated into something vaguely resembling a unity but the unity is is Diverse… there are.. there are… there are.. there are describable… Stable elements that characterize you that are elements of your being so for example here’s here’s some common ones I might say well, are you social or or would you rather be alone? So here here’s a good question for you to Define decide whether you’re extroverted or introverted It’s pretty straight forward because that’s that’s the first major dimension basically if you take any set of questions about Any any set of questions that could be applied descriptively to a human being? and you subject them to a Statistical process called factor analysis, you can determine how they group together So what I would be interested in let’s say I ask you a hundred questions Let’s say I asked a hundred questions of you and a hundred other people what I would find was that reliably if some person answered question ‘A’ say on a scale of one to seven Six or seven there would be other questions in the set of questions that they also tended to answer on the upper end of the scale or Reliably if they answered one question at the top of the scale, they’d answer another question at the bottom that’s a pattern of covariation so you’re looking for how the Questions covary across large numbers of people so let’s say here’s a stupid example, but it’s really it’s really straightforward easy to understand I might say How often do you smile one to seven? How often are you happy one to seven well what you’d find obviously is that? people who tended to answer that they smiled a lot would also tend to answer that they were happy a lot and so smiling and happy are not exactly the Same thing which is why we’d have two different phrases to describe them But they’re close enough so that they seem to be reflective of some underlying structure, and so that’s what a factor Analysis is does it allows you to take a large set of questions to administer it to a large number of people and then to Statistically analyze it looking how the questions relate to one another across the entire group so that you can infer What the underlying structure is Here’s the question in some sense if I ask you a hundred questions how many questions am I really asking you? Because you might say well, are you? Do you smile a lot? Are you happy? Do you wake up eager to start the day? you say well is that one question Asked three ways or is it three separate questions and the answer is well if the answer is Reliably co-vary then it’s reflection of an underlying single dimension now Obviously those questions are slightly different Now but they’re they’ll relate to one another stabily and so you can infer out the central Stable Factors now it might be the case so here’s here’s an example Because you might ask how many stable underlying dimensions are there in any set of questions if I ask you? questions that relate to your capacity to manipulate abstractions, I’ll find that there’s one factor, so imagine you had an infinite library of Problem-solving questions doesn’t matter what they are capital of, Georgia Here’s a sequence two four six eight ten what’s the next number? Here’s five patterns? Here’s and and they Transform Predictably across the Pattern array. Here’s five alternatives that the next pattern might be pick that one Here’s ten words. Tell me what they mean anything like that Here’s a mathematical operation compute it, anything like that imagine you had a very large library of questions like that Okay an infinite library and you took random sets of a hundred questions from that library and you gave that Those sets (of questions) to a thousand people What you’d find was that? People who and and the score say you gave them a hundred questions And then you summed across all the items to see how well they did what you’d find was that people who did very well on one set of items would do very well on another set of items and Very well on another set of items and
that would be the same for people who did badly if they did badly on any one of the sets of randomly chosen items of Abstraction they do badly on the rest. That’s basically IQ that’s all there is to it, so it What IQ does is correct that for age but other than that? That’s all there is to it and the thing that’s interesting about Those random sets of abstract problem solving questions. Is there’s one Dimension that’s it intelligence has one dimension And it’s one of the most terrifying statistics that are known to social scientists And IQ is a an extraordinarily powerful predictor of long-term success Especially in complex jobs and the reason for that, it’s quite straight forward Most complex jobs throw random sets of complex problems at you That’s what that’s that’s their definition So for example if you’re working as a lawyer on complex on complex court cases you have to be able to read very quickly You have to be able to abstract you have to be able to problem solve you have to be able to formulate arguments, and you have to do that? repeatedly in Different ways across very large spans of time and so the fact that your ability to solve any set of random Problems is a really good predictor of your ability to solve any set of random legal problems It’s more or less self-evident that that would be the case But the but the thing is the thing that makes IQ so damn powerful And it’s one of the personality traits Roughly speaking the thing that makes IQ so powerful is you can basically get a decent measure of it in 20 minutes It’s very terrifying anyways, we’ll go into IQ and some depths as we progress through the course But you get one dimension out of out of a factor analysis of IQ now in the personality domain We’re using descriptive items, you don’t you get five dimensions?

  1. I like the 500 question psych. test to work in American nuclear power installations. Most questions asked 3 or 4 ways. Best part is not to analyze what you say they are analyzing what you lie about. I'm 60 which means I was born in the 50s. They ask if you ever smoked marijuana. Do you like how it made you feel. Whole bunches of stuff. Do you look at your poop.Weird stuff but enough to statistically analysis how much your lieing. 60 percent smoked weed, everyone looks at their poop unless you have major hangups. However have you molested children is not a funny question!

  2. Right from the very beginning,,, he leads you all astray social psychology is not a measurement…. IT'S AN INTERPRETATION AND PREDICTIVE MODEL THAT ISN'T MATHEMATICAL. You can try to apply mathematics to anything. Like a gambler playing the pony's. Using all the data, and past outcomes, to try and divine the future or predict the most likely outcome. BUT ANYTHING THAT CANNOT BE REPEATED, WITH THE PREDICTIVE OUTCOME BEING 100% ACCURATE FOR ANY PERSON, IT ISN'T MATH. Okay… I love Peterson. Because he's right more than he's wrong, and he's brilliant, well read, knowledgeable and very, very clever and persuasive. But he is as dangerous as he is brilliant. But from the beginning, he gets you to accept something that isn't true here. And it's the setup to the part where he ALLOWS you to think you have free will and are answering a question later on but with the understanding and acceptance of his primary, premise. Which happens to be wrong.

  3. I love it when people try to discredit I.Q test. all it means is that either they don't understand what a I.Q test is, or they do understand but are angry about the fact that the quoeficient of human inteligence can be reduced to simple numbers so easily

  4. I think I might have to get my 11 year old daughters IQ tested after catching her watching this morning. I then checked to see the rest of her view history. She has became a Jordan Peterson fan right under my nose.

  5. …but why exactly would this terrify a social scientist? This might terrify a social constructivist which is not equitable to social scientists in general.

  6. I do have to say there's a caveat in the IQ determinism theory. IQ is an aggregate "score" of intelligence that is the result of many different mental processes and abilities, similar to how a credit score works. It pulls from tons of different data and averages it all out to put it in simplest terms. This means that people who are exceptionally good at one type of cognitive process but shit at others may end up with an average IQ. Basically what I'm trying to say is don't let the score determine your life. Do a self-analysis, use unbiased peers and coworkers to cross-reference your own intuitions about what you're good and what you aren't. Then capitalize on what you're best at, regardless of the score. Just because over an enormous sample size, higher IQ = more success doesn't mean there aren't plenty of outliers.

  7. So Dr. Peterson, what you're saying is IQ can't be measured and you want to discriminate against the less intelligent?

  8. the problem with IQ tests is that if you exercise enough you can score higher results. If you know the trick or the logic behind certain patterns, if you have already done it before, your IQ score will be much higher.

  9. John 6:47 "verily, verily I say unto you, he that believes in me has everlasting life."-Jesus. Jesus the Messiah died for the remission of sin, including yours, was buried, and rose form the dead 3 days later, Simply believe in this and you have everlasting life.

  10. The title of this vid is so stupid. Why would anyone be 'terrified" of factor analysis? Click bait title. Besides this one clip adds nothing to any subject except for maybe an introduction to factor analysis. Just plain silly.

  11. The usual mathematical test for "dimension" is orthogonality.or put in a more prosaic way independence. Roughly this means that the two dimensions don't "influence" each other.
    In mechnics force vectors can be resolved into three mutually independent components (to be orthogonal they need to be at 90degrees to each other) east/west, north/south and up/down.

  12. Babble. More than 50% of Americans would murder an innocent human being IF a person they perceived as an authority figure told them to do so.

  13. The title is wrong. Psychologists are not social scientists. That are different fields of expertise and the former just borrows some research methods from the later. So the described method belongs to social sciences, but the problem and the people researching it are psychologists obviously.

  14. SJW: Doctorate in Bullshitology, majoring in stupidism and infantism. Experts in triggered emotional safe space continuum.

  15. "Terrified" LMAO. Dude, you learn this stuff in an undergrad degree and researchers that use quantitative methods are well aware of these issues. Peterson is just OTT: he has to "entertain" his undergrads.

  16. Well, I've been treated as a black sheep when studying social psychology and saying that what they say is absolute bs (done technical university prior to that)

  17. I used to like P .J but he is a bit depressive after a while , just lighten up, go for a jog, ski some mountain, listening to him after a while, u will feel like jumping of a God damm bridge.

  18. Jordan Peterson has high functioning psychopathologies, at the very least he is a Communal Narcissist, mixed Narcissist, and typical of professional sociopaths that can recognize psychopathologies in others and not in themselves. Peterson never talks about emotional intelligence, which is humanities best gift as Ethical Intelligence; he is somewhat devoid of sincere empathy and ties his skateboarding verbiage with just the logics of intelligence, pouts the missing superiority of males, thus being victimized and downtrodden. No ecological concerns, no shame, no guilt, no humility, no need for self-esteem, no balanced geopolitical awareness, no emotional intelligence, and thus psychopathy. Right-wing fascist elitist control through and through. Just my opinion for now, but the more videos I see of his, the more of what I say makes sense. He is a pseudo scientist with his own political narcissistic misogynistic agendas. See how many of the following traits for psychopathy in Peterson that you can see in the following test, which basically demonstrates the lack of Emotional Intelligence. The twenty traits assessed by the Hare PCL-R score are:
    glib and superficial charm
    grandiose (exaggeratedly high) estimation of self
    need for stimulation
    pathological lying
    cunning and manipulativeness
    lack of remorse or guilt
    shallow affect (superficial emotional responsiveness)
    callousness and lack of empathy
    parasitic lifestyle
    poor behavioral controls
    sexual promiscuity
    early behavior problems
    lack of realistic long-term goals
    failure to accept responsibility for own actions
    many short-term marital relationships
    juvenile delinquency
    revocation of conditional release
    criminal versatility
    Read more:
    Why Women Are Smarter Than Men – Forbes…/why-women-are-smarter-than-men/
    Jun 21, 2016 – Women outscore men in critical aspects of intelligence. … for 58% ofperformance in all types of jobs, and 90% of top performers are high in EQ, which is Ethical Emotional Intelligence.

  19. They do not have the measurements properly instantiated! … anyway, women symbolize chaos. The data is clear on this one.

  20. These questions are often times formulated so generally that I can't answer them properly. "Are you social? " well that depends on the situation I'm in. Also what they probably want to know is not always what they ask for. Here they probably want to know if I like being social not if I am.

  21. True , but sadly enough. – Jungian psychologist doesn’t realize that unfalsefiable theories are worse.. they are not Even wrong , he should clean his own room first so to speak

  22. The problem today is that high IQ people rationalize themselves as superior in every way to other people, never mind that intelligence is a god given ability and a gift like good looks or being born into money. These gifted people tend to form groups which benefit only themselves and use their ability to exploit other less fortunate people. Then they can't understand the resentment that their actions cause and feel themselves victims of prejudice which in reality is a result of their own prejudice. Will mankind ever rise beyond his own human nature for self preservation?

  23. I really like Jordan Peterson as a psychology lecturer. I wish he would bring this voice into his conservative public intellectual game.

    COMMUNIST: 45 COMMUNIST GOALS "On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert
    S  Herlong  Jr. of Florida read a list of 45 Communist
    goals into the Congressional Record. The list was derived from researcher Cleon
    Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist.” These principles are well worth
    revisiting today in order to gain insights into the thinking and strategies of
    much of our so-called liberal elite. "This is an assault on the American
    way of life that has been in play for decades. Vote these bastards out of
    office before it's too late. The entire list can be read online, PDF.

  25. He conveniently neglects to mention the as yet quantified determinant of Nun induced TBI in assessing IQ in catholic schoolboys. It's called the Sr. Mary Hamfist effect. look it up.

  26. And social psychologists are perniciously erroneous where political agendas have infected the conventional standards of scholasticism like a pathogen.

  27. but WHO makes up the questions? and based on what premises? and are people who respond to the questions sufficiently self-aware to answer accurately? and no matter what score in what sort of test, to what degree do the results give a true summation of a whole, unique human being? I wonder….

  28. So I suspect folks that have high IQ are aware of that fact. Additionally I suspect that are aware that they are able rate the IQ of others very quickly. When you are in grade school the athletes and the attractive people can be very arrogant and openly exclude other. In adult life this behavior is similarly manifested in those with high IQ. Very intelligent people can be amazingly dismissive and arrogant. Think of the straight A college student who is unwilling to assist a peer who might benefit from shared understanding. Think of the corporate executive with the closed door policy. Who relates only to his perceived peers or the board of directors. The high ranking military officer is “ideally” just the opposite. The general must regard the private soldier first in his considerations. People with high IQ are aware of it. And if high IQ is paired with a lack of empathy or a predatory personality, you end up with an individual capable of selecting his next victim.

  29. Those students are just dumb idiots who got there because parents paid it. No one Is really brilliant or listening to him. The class should be composed of engaging students questioning some of his dogmas and making arguments. Well it's same about the kids on YouTube here.

    No one really can know your real IQ unless you really engage into the test, but still you can be not mentally prepaired or be not on the right mental wave, you can always workout your brain to get more accurate IQ. Also IQ does not predict the success in your life, that depends on many other factors such as effort and high mental activity or capacity or unfortunately social skills. This man is contradicting himself when he talks about competitive progressive man in the hierarchy and about psychopaths. He describes psychopaths in the same way, In fact psychopaths are only and mostly just low IQ individuals with unexplainable psychotic states when their behaviour changes instantly with no rational reason. Yet that doesn't mean that it is not explainable when you alone can't understand it, that means that you are just dumb like most of the humanity race on our planet. Psychopaths are not evil geniuses who don't care about emotions or manipulators. Also most of the people tend to insult very special people with such and other names.

    And your character can be easily changed by own effort but improving your logical thinking is much way harder.

  30. Oh shoot, this makes perfect sense when he explains it. Dumb people will eventually be automated out of all work.

  31. Intelligence has many different states… biology effects intelligence in a huge way… you could be top of the class and ahead of everybody statically but then lose your hand in an accident. Your brain is going to struggle, for the rest of your life with the questions of why….. how did this happen.

  32. This is the main problem with the DSM. Disorders are implied subjectively and not subject to objective Measurement. Further, there is no Criteria for Ordered Behavior, thus the system is irrational as Antithesis is not part of the analytic framework. I'm not saying DSM is without value. I am saying it has serious flaws in terms of Reasoning and how it is most often Presented as a fully Rational System which it is not.
    I'm not a Shrink. I'm a Data Analyst who has made Billing Systems using DSM 4&5 and big teams of top Psych people.
    The Billing system is still being used to pay Claims.

  33. It scares social scientists because personality tests obviously imply that there is more dimensions when it comes to personality then it comes to IQ which apparently is “1 dimensional”… no wonder the genius program is called MENSA, that’s Spanish for dumb, (feminine version; male = menso) the irony… lol

  34. Does anyone else listen to JP in x0.75 speed so that you can actually take in what he says? … or is it just me?

  35. I love factor analysis!!! And I'm trained in experimental psych. It is the best tool to dig deep into the data.

  36. I wish Jordan could calm down and stop yelling.  Jordan, the information you shares is NOT (sorry for yelling) more understandable because you yell.  Reminds me of folks who speak their language louder to folks who speak another language with the belief that will help the other person understand what they are saying.

  37. Having watched quite a few outtakes on YouTube from J P's lectures now, I find some of them, like this one, confusing. There is simply too much going on in his mind, and because he lets all of it out at the same time, one can't keep up with him. I found myself pondering several of the things he mentioned early in the presentation, and naturally I lost track of what he was actually discussing as well as the direction he was heading in. And then I immediately became even more distracted, as I struggled to pick up the "red thread" again to follow the discussion to its conclusion. As this is YouTube, I can luckily re-load the video and watch it a second time. But what would it be like to attend his lectures live? While I can't deny J P's brilliance, I think, sometimes, he should just slow down a bit.

  38. [Understatement of the day, sponsored by Adml Akhbar]. "Many people died to bring you this infor….maaaaaa…tion!"

    Sorry but IV just been meditating on the role of IBM in WW2 era Germany and the role of Silicon Valley and your phone in the coming kull/genocide. Fucking Social Scientists talk nice but they are as for hire as any whore or executioner.

  39. Have put off getting IQ tested until now. Neither high, low, nor middling are results that I’d like to be made aware of. In my opinion, Progress Towards Meaningful Life Goals is a better pseudo-metric to hold before oneself (because it is under your influence, and can be readily improved upon at any given time in your life journey). High IQ/Low IQ feels so… deterministic. Hate that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *