Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#81

Post by sn9 »

meesterdude wrote: post #47

I'm all for replication and ensuring scientific accuracy - but this does not change my perspective of ego-depletion. I have observed it in myself, time and time again. If not it directly, something similar enough. Even at a glucose level, various studies have shown relation between our blood sugar and ability to tolerate frustration and make decisions. So while the accuracy of ego-depletion may be in question, I can…

Just because you've observed a behavior in yourself doesn't mean it's inevitable.

Also, look up the nocebo effect.

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#82

Post by tinymollusk »

haberman wrote: post #44
tinymollusk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, this is an interesting statement because it highlights the difference between true and useful. For several years, since I read the book Willpower (an intro piece to ego depletion), I've meditated on the idea. I've decided that even if it's not scientifically true, it can be useful to me. Some may see it as self-help tripe ("Eat your frogs in the morning!"), but it's a useful mental model for me to push myself…

I personally believe that a lot of religion falls onto the "useful" side of this divide. Which is why I have no reason to go out of my way to tell people that I think their religion is not literally true. If it works for them, great. I think this also applies to beliefs like the 10,000 hour hypothesis. I strongly doubt it is true, but some people really like it as a motivational tool. I have no reason to burst their…

I have similarly softened towards people's religious and spiritual beliefs as I've aged.

Personally, I only get mad when someone tries to claim their belief is objectively true, or tries to proscriptively generalize it for others.

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#83

Post by tinymollusk »

crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #35
tinymollusk wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think we could adapt that concept to subjective experiences? As I've gotten older (and learned to manage my mental state better), I've found great benefit from separating "scientifically true" and "useful to lead a good life". I suppose that makes me a hypocrite in the same way that devoutly religious scientists are. But it makes my life more fulfilled, I experience less anxiety, etc. It's an interesting r…

I think one thing that needs to happen is a wider adoption of the pragmatic view described here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/structure-scientific-theo... Mainstream approaches to science are obsessively objective, denying the fact that everything we do is a subject experience. So many people learn the idea that things can only be true or false, as opposed to things being dependent on the lens through which the…

This looks very interesting, thanks!

I agree about the usefulness of such a framework. Subjective experiences draw optimizations (self-improvement), so by observing, we naturally are changed. This does not assume improvement; for that, we have to combine change with a fitness function.

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#84

Post by nurettin »

robterrin wrote: post #38
nurettin wrote: post #36

Not disputing the paper or the scientific method applied here, but how is "bayesian factor" different than p-values?

This might answer your question: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/avoi...

I don't see "Bayesian factor" in there.

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#85

Post by nurettin »

tmalsburg2 wrote: post #76
nurettin wrote: post #36

Not disputing the paper or the scientific method applied here, but how is "bayesian factor" different than p-values?

In a nutshell: If the p-value is below some conventional threshold (in psychology it's usually 0.05), you can conclude that the null-hypothesis (no effect) is likely wrong and that something else must be the case. However, if p is above the threshold you can't conclude anything, because that means that there is either no effect or that the data was not sufficient to show the effect. So the p-value method (formally kn…

That makes a lot of sense, but can't you model two null hypotheses using the same data in some clever way?

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#86

Post by dwaltrip »

travjones wrote: post #74
danschumann wrote: post #32

According to marines, will power depletion is bs. This is anecdotal, sure, but I believe in momentum. If you have momentum, at some point, you don't want to fail at any will power task, because you are on a winning streak.

Interesting. There is actually a concept from behavior analysis called "behavioral momentum." [1] 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_momentum

Reminds me of how the hardest part of many tasks is simply getting started.

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#87

Post by percival_krusen »

danschumann wrote: post #32

According to marines, will power depletion is bs. This is anecdotal, sure, but I believe in momentum. If you have momentum, at some point, you don't want to fail at any will power task, because you are on a winning streak.

There are several reasons I am a skeptic of accounts of willpower from elite military sources:

* Military life has social aspects -- like powerful authorities and close knit teams -- that may affect willpower. Advice on improving your own willpower often includes accountability techniques with other people.

* More on social effects: anecdotes from soldiers include transcendent experiences of groups bonding over common survival interests and outgroup hostility. The kind of cohesion experienced by a platoon stranded in a hostile Afghanistan valley probably isn't possible in your Weight Watchers group.

* More generally, note that a military is an organization whose success relies on convincing people to act against their own interests. I assume they have plenty of tricks they use to modify soldier behavior. That doesn't mean those tricks will translate easily for us civilians.

* People that make it onto elite military teams probably already have abnormally high willpower. Just because Michael Jordan says it's easy to dunk a basketball doesn't mean it will be easy for you to dunk a basketball. It just means Michael Jordan is an outlier.

* Publication bias (of a sort) and/or lying. Who wants to be the Navy SEAL that says, "yeah there's a point at which I wimp out just like normal people"? Such a person would be tempted to keep their mouth shut or lie about their opinion.

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#88

Post by phkahler »

jnordwick wrote: post #46
phkahler wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Steve Jobs is often used as an example because he wore the same outfit to work every day, purportedly so he would not have to waste any crucial willpower early in the day on such a trivial task as choosing what to wear. That was to free up time and free himself from an extra decision. Mental exhaustion is not the same as ego depletion. The later claims that "self control" is a limited resource, but picking your ou…

You have no idea how i really want to dress at work.

I almost qualified my statement with an exception for people like you ;-)

Re: Bayesian analysis of ego-depletion studies favours null hypothesis

#89

Post by inimino »

mizzao wrote: post #23
krashidov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is reassuring. Every time someone told me this I figured it had to be bullshit. I think people used it as an excuse to make bad decisions.

...and you're exemplifying confirmation bias right there, which is the whole reason this happened in the first place.

Having an opinion that is later vindicated is not the same thing as confirmation bias.
Post reply on HN