How to help antisocial kids - Forum

Private
Popstar

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:
That is the point I am trying to make, that they made a very whole hearted study on this, yet the results showed something different.

if they take teenage kids who have been raised in an anti-social environment, placing them in a group of non-anti-social kids wont magically repair them

I am not really sure this is what they actually did. You have to aknowledge the age from when they were picked up, It is a difference between being helped from age 5 and age 10. (Too bad, I don't know the age but I think they arrange i different ages)

yes, the age part affects the outcome of the results SIGNIFICANTLY. not divulging the age of the participants they are testing diminishes the legitimacy of the test results a lot. it doesnt have anything to do with alpha or beta dynamics – it DOES however have everything to do with at what age you start receiving continuous love and support from the people around you.

Cult
Youtube star

cult wrote:

Snusmumrikken wrote:
Make them prosocial!! 🥰

Junia
Youtube star

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:
if they take teenage kids who have been raised in an anti-social environment, placing them in a group of non-anti-social kids wont magically repair them

I am not really sure this is what they actually did. You have to aknowledge the age from when they were picked up, It is a difference between being helped from age 5 and age 10. (Too bad, I don't know the age but I think they arrange i different ages)

yes, the age part affects the outcome of the results SIGNIFICANTLY. not divulging the age of the participants they are testing diminishes the legitimacy of the test results a lot. it doesnt have anything to do with alpha or beta dynamics – it DOES however have everything to do with at what age you start receiving continuous love and support from the people around you.

according to wikipedia they were 5-13

But I don't think you fully understand the point of the study. The study was not to make a remarkable change from the beginning. It was to test the ideas of fixing a problem from the above with different methods.

Private
Popstar

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:
I am not really sure this is what they actually did. You have to aknowledge the age from when they were picked up, It is a difference between being helped from age 5 and age 10. (Too bad, I don't know the age but I think they arrange i different ages)

yes, the age part affects the outcome of the results SIGNIFICANTLY. not divulging the age of the participants they are testing diminishes the legitimacy of the test results a lot. it doesnt have anything to do with alpha or beta dynamics – it DOES however have everything to do with at what age you start receiving continuous love and support from the people around you.

according to wikipedia they were 5-13

ok and what were the results regarding the different age groups? how long did they live at the youth facilities? did they have to check back in after they exited the program? if they came from low income or criminal backgrounds, did they receive help after exiting the program? there are a lot of unknown factors here skewing the results of this program, not meaning that the program didn't necessarily help, but that it didn't help long term - which has also been proven, fx regarding danish julemærkehjem, where overweight children go to live and receive nutritional education, support, and exercise programs for about 3 months. when they go home, they of course go home to their old environment, where their parents havent had the same kind of education, and since they are children, they are unable to enforce the knowledge they learned at the julemærkehjem, at home. which is why after approximately a year, they gain back the weight they lost, and there is no improvement.

Junia
Youtube star

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:
yes, the age part affects the outcome of the results SIGNIFICANTLY. not divulging the age of the participants they are testing diminishes the legitimacy of the test results a lot. it doesnt have anything to do with alpha or beta dynamics – it DOES however have everything to do with at what age you start receiving continuous love and support from the people around you.

according to wikipedia they were 5-13

ok and what were the results regarding the different age groups? how long did they live at the youth facilities? did they have to check back in after they exited the program? if they came from low income or criminal backgrounds, did they receive help after exiting the program? there are a lot of unknown factors here skewing the results of this program, not meaning that the program didn't necessarily help, but that it didn't help long term - which has also been proven, fx regarding danish julemærkehjem, where overweight children go to live and receive nutritional education, support, and exercise programs for about 3 months. when they go home, they of course go home to their old environment, where their parents havent had the same kind of education, and since they are children, they are unable to enforce the knowledge they learned at the julemærkehjem, at home. which is why after approximately a year, they gain back the weight they lost, and there is no improvement.

Please dear, I am simply reciting a very well respected study and take it as it is. I haven't digged that deep into it to answer all of your objections.
What I can answer is this. This is a follow up study. This is when they take a look AFTER the study was constructed. How long it took? I don't know how many years, but we are talking about years now, probably during the rest of their childhood.

Private
Popstar

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:
according to wikipedia they were 5-13

ok and what were the results regarding the different age groups? how long did they live at the youth facilities? did they have to check back in after they exited the program? if they came from low income or criminal backgrounds, did they receive help after exiting the program? there are a lot of unknown factors here skewing the results of this program, not meaning that the program didn't necessarily help, but that it didn't help long term - which has also been proven, fx regarding danish julemærkehjem, where overweight children go to live and receive nutritional education, support, and exercise programs for about 3 months. when they go home, they of course go home to their old environment, where their parents havent had the same kind of education, and since they are children, they are unable to enforce the knowledge they learned at the julemærkehjem, at home. which is why after approximately a year, they gain back the weight they lost, and there is no improvement.

Please dear, I am simply reciting a very well respected study and take it as it is. I haven't digged that deep into it to answer all of your objections.
What I can answer is this. This is a follow up study. This is when they take a look AFTER the study was constructed. How long it took? I don't know how many years, but we are talking about years now, probably during the rest of their childhood.

well, you are reciting jordan peterson's take on a study, and that's my point - before you stand behind a person's opinion or take on something, you should have looked into it yourself. you disregard the objections of the people commenting on your post, but you dont actually understand why they are objecting, because you are unable to answer any of the questions im posing here. if you dont know enough about this study to answer my questions, how could you have a stance on it, let alone a stance that is firm enough to object to other people's comments regarding this?
my point is just that it's good to be critical of things before you decide to take a stance and support them on social media - even on a small page such as vp. research jordan peterson some more, but more importantly, research the things he bases his opinions on, to understand why people on here disagree with jordan peterson. get other perspectives on the same topics as well, to broaden your understanding of it.

Private
Popstar

Rouya wrote:
also you cant just "take it as it is" with anything in life - you have to be critical and think for yourself

Junia
Youtube star

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:

Junia wrote:

Rouya wrote:
ok and what were the results regarding the different age groups? how long did they live at the youth facilities? did they have to check back in after they exited the program? if they came from low income or criminal backgrounds, did they receive help after exiting the program? there are a lot of unknown factors here skewing the results of this program, not meaning that the program didn't necessarily help, but that it didn't help long term - which has also been proven, fx regarding danish julemærkehjem, where overweight children go to live and receive nutritional education, support, and exercise programs for about 3 months. when they go home, they of course go home to their old environment, where their parents havent had the same kind of education, and since they are children, they are unable to enforce the knowledge they learned at the julemærkehjem, at home. which is why after approximately a year, they gain back the weight they lost, and there is no improvement.

Please dear, I am simply reciting a very well respected study and take it as it is. I haven't digged that deep into it to answer all of your objections.
What I can answer is this. This is a follow up study. This is when they take a look AFTER the study was constructed. How long it took? I don't know how many years, but we are talking about years now, probably during the rest of their childhood.

well, you are reciting jordan peterson's take on a study, and that's my point - before you stand behind a person's opinion or take on something, you should have looked into it yourself. you disregard the objections of the people commenting on your post, but you dont actually understand why they are objecting, because you are unable to answer any of the questions im posing here. if you dont know enough about this study to answer my questions, how could you have a stance on it, let alone a stance that is firm enough to object to other people's comments regarding this?
my point is just that it's good to be critical of things before you decide to take a stance and support them on social media - even on a small page such as vp. research jordan peterson some more, but more importantly, research the things he bases his opinions on, to understand why people on here disagree with jordan peterson. get other perspectives on the same topics as well, to broaden your understanding of it.

My dear, "think crticially" works fine, but when youre basically loaded with information 24/7 day to day, you simply do not have the time to investigate it all from bottom scratch. If I would seriously do that like a real psychologist, I would almost never be able to share anything on vp or social media because I would spend all my time investigating stuff. I did however search about it except from Petersons mouth, and they said the same things as he did, also I watched an interview from the author of the study itself that explained the same things.

But ok, I did read a paper on this recently, and it said this.
"The average age of the boys at the start of treatment was 10.5."
" When theprogram terminated in 1945, boys in the treatment group had been visited, on
the average, two times a month for 51/2 years."
"The general impact of treatment appeared to have been damaging. Nevertheless, some subgroups of those who received treatment might have been helped.Beneficial effects might have resulted from starting treatment when the child was
particularly young, from providing more frequent help, or from treatment being
available over an especially long period of time. None of these possibilities
received support. Nor was there evidence to show that some particular variation
of treatment had been effective. Moreover, when comparisons were restricted to
those with whom a counselor had particularly good rapport or those whom the
staff believed it had helped most, the objective evidence failed to show that the
program had been beneficial."