ipseus software

Folks, the software dedicated to the approach I talk about on this blog can be downloaded from http://www.ipseus.com/software/ipseus.zip

This zip file contains the ISA instrument editing, data collection and analysis package called ipseus. Use the ipseus.msi file to install the software.

The zip also contains a small standalone data collection module called participate. Simply copy the 'participate' directory wherever you need it, for example, onto a USB stick.

There is also an experimental instrument display that completely randomizes the instrument when people sit it. You can enable this randomization by creating a simple text file called settings.ini into your 'participate' directory. 

The settings.ini file should contain the following text:

[RespondLayoutControl]

RandomSeed=1

[RespondLayoutControl.End]

If you want to enable the same randomization inside of the ipseus program as well, also copy your settings.ini file into the ipseus installation directory (usually 'C:\Program Files\Identity Exploration\ipseus').

Please be aware that this is a local setting only. If you need multiple people collecting data you will have to make sure that everyone makes this local change. Alternatively package everything up with your own tailored version of participate for data collection. Future versions of ipseus will allows these options to be stored with the instrument [See Addendum below], or be on-line eventually.

If you are having a workshop with Professor Peter Weinreich, then he likes to use different settings that the default ones. You can change settings from the 'Options > Settings' menu. Peter's settings are shown below:

 

I'll add more posts on instrument creation, collection and analysis in time.

Feel free to post questions or email identityexploration [at] gmail [dot] com

----------------------------
[ADDENDUM]

So there is a new version of the software with an extra tab in the Instrument screen now to save your settings with the data. Check it out!

Perceived security and security perception

I have just read a chapter on the use of Bayesian theory to direct Russian artillery bombardment, to decrypt the Enigma messages and to search for German submarines, all during World War 2.

I have also just finished reading a few chapters on the ridiculous security theatre that goes on in airports these days, which I get to act in a lot when travelling with work.

I wonder if there is a connection between the finding of u-boats in the Atlantic with finding terrorist cells? Would some form of bayesian process help analyse all the data, rather than continuing to waste time having everyone drinking all their water and remove belts & shoes.

This is all going down at PZ Myers' and Sam Harris' blogs.

I see it like this...

If 10 minutes, on average, have been added for everyone in an airport security queue, and 630 millions folk go through US airports each year, then that's an extra ~12000 man/years added to standing in a queue. Given an average for a persons life span of about 80 years, that's roughly 150 people 'die' from standing in pointless airport security queues each year.

It's been over a decade since 9/11 so that's 1500 people 'dead' over this time. Let's double that number to roughly cover the rest of the world. So 3000 people have 'died' because of extended, pointless security theatre.

I find that as terrible as 3000 people dying suddenly in one act of terrorism.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Identification Conflict

Check out this article from the Guardian

So what is the underlying psychological process going on here from the perspective of ISA and how could be picked it apart with a ipseus instrument.

There are two aspects at work. First, how do you evaluate someone, including yourself? Do you evaluate positively or negatively? Second, how much do you see of yourself in the other person?

You can share attributes that you deem negative with someone else, even though you evaluate the other positively. This is part of an identification conflict.

What's going on in that ad though is the other type of identification conflict. They are trying to link a shared attribute that would generally be deemed positive with someone who would generally be evaluated negatively.

To resolve the identification conflict you can either change your mind on which side of the fence you deem positive, which is unlikely if that attribute spectrum is backed with a strong conviction.

Alternatively, you can accept that the world is not black & white, that there is some bad in good people & some good in bad people, and not let silly emotional advertising like this have any effect.

I should invoke Godwin's rule now and mention Hitler and atheism in the same sentence now, but I won't :-)



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Characters with dimensions

When we read reviews of movies and books we often hear the phrase "the characters were very two dimensional". I assume everyone understands what is intended by this phrase at least intuitively or qualitatively? However, what's to stop us taking the statement literally and hence allowing for the possibility of quantitative measures. So, what are the dimensions of a two dimension character?

One could be a moral dimension, is the character good or bad? Another, dimension might be something like on-screen presence, which i will limit with the personality type labels introvert and extrovert. I should really go read a few books on cinema to see if there are any more genre appropriate dimensions but these will do.

Anyway, the first moral dimension has a pretty clear positive pole. No guesses which one. Welcome to tautology club! The second dimension isn't so straight forward. Our current social zeitgeist would probably have extroversion as the positive pole, but the introverts are certainly making themselves heard. Ah, bless you twitter!

Now even with just two dimensions characters could be pretty complex. Sure, we could get easy stereotypes if we stuck to the extremes of our scales ...

	Good	Bad
Extrovert	Hero	Villain
Introvert	Damsel	Henchman

... but, despite what our popular press would have us believe, things are not always black and white.

Think of the villain who turns good in the end (Megamind). Or the henchman who is really the main villain (The Usual Suspects). Or some of the literally 2D characters from Disney cartoons (Beauty and the Beast). Or any of the literally 3D characters from Pixar (Toy Story).

Even if we only have two dimensions to measure against we can still come up with very interesting personalities, or better yet, identities. Personality, relates to the long term trend characters have and it would take a pretty major event to change this (The Bourne Identity). Identity, is much more fun to look at as it encompasses so much more subtle possibilities for change based on underlying personality, past experiences, environmental circumstance and present emotional state (um, The Bourne Identity). The important part I am trying to make is that interesting characters have the ability to change over time and the really cool ones adapt to circumstances.

Me vs Me

There is only one 'me'? Nah, I am a trinity. There's the past me, the current me and the future me. In fact, I'm more a full on pantheon. There is the at work me, the at play me, the ideal me, the me if I won the lottery...

I wonder if a Fenyman diagram would be appropriate for the concept of me :-)

Anyway, I was watching this fun TED talk. I read about this sort of thing in a few places now. Richard Wiseman's books, Steven Levitt, Dan Gilbert ...

I'm not a god of course, or a god head or an Icke style son of god, but psychology does screw up the purity of maths