actually is was more of a why you think spirituality doesn't have anything to do with a persons state of being..
you defended by saying that conversation was a waste of your time..
which intoned a lack of knowledge..IOW you don't know..so you avoided the question.
we didn't accuse..
getting defensive?
well i can verify that you listen..
empathize( you gave me lip for misspelling in my title..so there....:b )you have to..if you didn't you wouldn't be a very good psychologist
the question still stands..would you tell a patient that the question they just asked is a waste of your time?
took me a couple days to understand this one..(still may not)
is the question..
how do you make it so a person picking out another in a line up does not pick a person just because of certain characteristics that are shared between prisoners?
distinctive characteristics?
beard,tattoos,scars? (physical?)
slouch,lean,fidgit,roll eyes? (mannerism?)
demand characteristics?
what a witness would expect a criminal to have?
"actually is was more of a why you think spirituality doesn't have anything to do with a persons state of being.."
Problem is that I answered this question already, I said that there are more parsimonious explanations that do not require another mystical dimension to explain certain psychological mechanisms and behaviour. I listed human needs theory as an example. Please explain to me how that doesn't answer your question.
"well i can verify that you listen..
empathize( you gave me lip for misspelling in my title..so there....:b )you have to..if you didn't you wouldn't be a very good psychologist"
I gave you lip because you were saying stupid things and you don't pay me money. Am I not allowed to point out when people are saying stupid things about psychology? I must have missed that rule?
"the question still stands..would you tell a patient that the question they just asked is a waste of your time?"
No that's a new question. Before you asked, would I tell a patient that they are a waste of time.
I answered that question. No.
Now you are asking a new question. Please don't make out that I'm not answering your questions.
As for your new question. Can you please give an example. I'll give a quick example of what I think you might be asking.
If the patient says something like "I'm very spiritual and my partner isn't, and he won't go to church, etc.. etc..." I would talk to the partner about accepting influence and finding common ground. That question isn't a waste of time because it's a valid issue in their relationship. Personally I would never get into a relationship with a religious person. Luckily I'm soon to be engaged to a wonderful atheist girl (if she says yes lol). But my personal view of religion is not relevent to the person's situation. With any relationship you are choosing a partner, and in doing so you are choosing a set of problems that will never be solved. For example say the husband doesn't end up with the spiritual woman that he doesn't agree with, maybe he will end up with a woman that flirts with his friends. Or maybe he will end up with a woman that spends too much money. Or maybe he will end up with a woman that hates his family. Whatever the case may be, no relationship is going to be without issues. It's how you deal with those issues which determines if the relationship will last. The partner of the religious woman needs to accept that this spiritual issues is just something he has to deal with. He may then choose to reach a compromise such as going to church once a month with her. Or letting her raise their child as Christians. If he doesn't accept influence then the relationship is doomed. Furthermore common ground needs to be reached. This might take the form of the wife admitting that she doesn't agree with everything about religion, and that the garden of eden wasn't literal, or that she understands why he is skeptical.
Anyway I could go on and on in regards to what I would say. But short answer is no I would not tell a patient their question concerning spirituality was a waste of time.
If they came right out and said something like "I'm very spiritual, what do you think of that." I would say: "my views of your spirituality doesn't matter. What makes you bring up the topic of your spirituality?"
As for what demand characteristics are, they are caused in an experiment when the participant knows the purpose of the experiment. So when choosing a target from a lineup they know that the purpose is to choose the right target, this will make the experimenter happy or the police officer happy if the right criminal is chosen. So they feel pressured to make a choice. This results in a huge amount of guessing. Guessing increases even when the target isn't in the lineup, so instead of choosing no response they'll choose to guess. This is the demand characteristic of the lineup.
I ended up making the recommendation that police present multiple lineups, so that the participant doesn't feel the pressure to guess. They will know that there is a 1 in 4 chance (with 4 lineups presented) that the target will be in the present lineup. So this might lead them to choose no response when they really don't know if the target is there or not.
Anyway that's all off topic.
