Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 08:06:42 EDT
From:         "CHARLES W. TUCKER" <N050024@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      HPCT AND OTHER TOPICS

                                                  CHUCK TUCKER 920930

      TOPICS: HPCT; COIN TEST; UNEXPLAINED PHENOMENA

      UNEXPLAINED PHENOMENA  WTP 920925.0900

      I believe that it is an excellent suggestion for us to write on
      phenomena that the other "behavioral scientists" can't explain.
      My major difficulty is finding a way for them to admit that they
      can't explain it since they refuse to use the notion of
      explanation and the strict criteria for an adequate explanation
      that I (should I say WE) do.  Clark and I (he more than I)
      have been trying for nearly 20 years to convince students of
      "collective behavior" that their theories and explanations and
      data and everything else are severely inadequate and in fact (or
      by fact) they have no adequate (even by moderate standards)
      explanations of civil disorders, riots, demonstrations and the
      like.  So the "trick" is to do this indirectly by showing how PCT
      explains a particular phenomena and THEN say, "Oh, by the way did
      you notice that this is a different explanation based on a
      different model then you have been using for these phenomena,
      golly gee what a surprise, maybe we have something different
      here, I wonder what it could be??" [Did you notice that your
      finger movements spelled CONTROL; did you notice that this model
      accounts for all those phenomena covered by S-R, Cognitive and
      Psychoanalytic theories]  But unfortunately when you are asking
      them to publish in their journal (Editors speak of their journal
      not the journal of the discipline) one has to use such tactics
      and can't be direct about it.  Such is the state of the
      "behavioral sciences" today.  IF YOU DISAGREE AND/OR HAVE SOME
      OTHER SUGGESTIONS ABOUT THIS MATTER I SURE WOULD APPRECIATE THEM
      AS I IMAGINE OTHERS WOULD ALSO.

      COIN TEST  WTP 920925.0900

      I tried to image what pattern would be "coins" arranged "All
      coins exactly where they are and oriented as they are" and the
      only one I can come up with is one where P is controlling for the
      relationship of the "coins" to the surface; as long as the "coin"
      is on the surface then there is "no change".  We have tried to
      eliminate that by having P arrange the "coins" in a pattern and
      name it which makes it extremely difficult for P to control for
      such a reference signal as "relationhip to the surface".  I have
      changed the game so that coins are not used to eliminate the
      "heads and tails" situation, different type coins, different
      color coins and other such variables.  I would also suggest the
      one demontrate this game with those you are asking to do it
      before they do it.  In a class I use either an magnetic board
      with letter "o" or a felt board with disks (such arrangements
      could also be used for conferences and meetings; one of my
      students found a computer program [Harvard Graphics?] which draws
      coins and did the game on the computer) for showing the game.
      There are ways, in other word, to reduce the variability of
      patterns for this game.  Of course, if you want to introduce a
      variety of variables that are possible for controlling then make
      the game more complex.

      HPCT  WTP 920926.2200

      This is a wonderful statement.  I hope that everyone will
      consider it carefully and we can have a serious conversation
      about it.

      Regards,

                  Chuck
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU