![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 62 to 86 of 152. Go back in thread:
Posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on February 27, 2007, at 11:43:40
In reply to Impressed and bedazzled!!!!! » Llurpsie_Noodle, posted by zazenduckie on February 26, 2007, at 22:48:40
> What is "improved outcome" and how are you measuring it?
That's the million dollar question. My personal favorite measure is improvement on the babbleometer scales. Dr. Bob was smart to select Babbleometer scales like the CES-D that are widely reported in the literature, and that people in the mental health field know well.
>
> I like that regression thing too like we could ask everyone who they were in past lives and see if they sort themselves out by historical era like do all the Cleopatras and Egyptians mostly post to each other and are all the admin regulars 18th century rationalists or the psych board 19th century romantics etc etc etcMy pick for 19th century romantic is probably Honore or Racer- although Honore is also dangerously close to being part of Dada.
Personally I'd like to regress to the womb. I believe my mom took me to France when I was prenatal. That sounds pretty good, huh?
> I'm glad you're feeling sparklier :)
You noticed! well, I'm glad too. really glad. starting to feel more llurpsie and less limp noodle.
happy day to you zazenduckie :)
-Ll
>
>
> > I think we should use heirarchical linear modelling to examine whether posters who identify with one particular "board" on babble show improved outcome relative to other posters.
> >
> > poster nested within board repeated measures, of course. that will let us look at outcomes for people who participate on different boards. Are there group differences, or do individuals account for most of the variability in outcome.
> >
> > can you tell I've been stuck in statistics land too much?
> >
> > (((((((data)))))))
> >
> > but Dr. bob, before analyses can be run, we gotta get data.
> >
> > welcome back, by the way. I missed you. and please change the picture. it makes me feel dizzy?
> >
> > what are the Dependent Variables? what are the Independent variables. I LOVE me some statistics. Data don't lie. people do. If dependent variables are not quantified yet, then they will need to be coded. I think that this would be a real boon to the literature. I don't know how to write up a case report (unless it's my own, in which case I'd say psychobabble is a good thing)
> >
> > now I'm just procrastinating
> >
> > ((((((student SPSS)))))))
> >
> > I just splurged and got an upgrade to do advanced regression, mixed and linear models. now I'm super-woman. don't mess with me!
> >
> > -Ll
>
>
Posted by vwoolf on March 24, 2007, at 10:17:10
In reply to Re: what research to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on January 12, 2007, at 2:09:25
I'd be interested in working on 2a, 2d, 2f, i.e. surveys.
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
In reply to Re: what research to work on, posted by vwoolf on March 24, 2007, at 10:17:10
> I think I'd enjoy working on
> 1a
> 2abc[d]fgh
> 3a
> 4a
> 5c
> 7a
>
> Llurpsie_Noodle> > You could look at the role of those who post frequently and what types of frequent posters there are ... or how they do or don't sequester themselves or show interest in one or several different boards.
>
> #1.
>
> > How or why people started posting after lurking, or withdrew to luring is also sort of an interesting question.
>
> #2.
>
> > There are lots and lots of topics re: group dynamics that I find very interesting. Eg why are there periods of very few posts, and other times of many posts? Is the board beginning to decline in attracting interest by posters? if so, why?
> >
> > Honore
>
> #1, too.> If we do any kind of survey [#2], I don't mind keeping track of the responses. And I still have my student version of SPSS, so as long as there aren't more than 1500 answers to a survey (I doubt there would be), then I can even run whatever statistics we want in seconds.
>
> thuso> I'd be interested in working on 2a, 2d, 2f, i.e. surveys.
>
> vwoolfOK, it looks like there are 5 of us and we'd all be interested in working on a survey. I do think that would be a good way to start. The particular topics that were mentioned were:
a. how people define their disorders or illnesses-psychological, biological, combination, neither etc.
c. level of participation/lurking
d. number of symptoms/level of functioning
f. what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physiciansCan we decide on one of those?
Bob
Posted by zazenduckie on March 27, 2007, at 20:46:37
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
You seem to have overlooked me :(
Was that intentional?
I feel hurt and confused.
You have not acknowledged my latest input. Or answered my questions.
Am I counted among your "5" who are participating? Perhaps the server deleted my name? Please clear this up. Thanks :)
> > I think I'd enjoy working on
> > 1a
> > 2abc[d]fgh
> > 3a
> > 4a
> > 5c
> > 7a
> >
> > Llurpsie_Noodle
>
> > > You could look at the role of those who post frequently and what types of frequent posters there are ... or how they do or don't sequester themselves or show interest in one or several different boards.
> >
> > #1.
> >
> > > How or why people started posting after lurking, or withdrew to luring is also sort of an interesting question.
> >
> > #2.
> >
> > > There are lots and lots of topics re: group dynamics that I find very interesting. Eg why are there periods of very few posts, and other times of many posts? Is the board beginning to decline in attracting interest by posters? if so, why?
> > >
> > > Honore
> >
> > #1, too.
>
> > If we do any kind of survey [#2], I don't mind keeping track of the responses. And I still have my student version of SPSS, so as long as there aren't more than 1500 answers to a survey (I doubt there would be), then I can even run whatever statistics we want in seconds.
> >
> > thuso
>
> > I'd be interested in working on 2a, 2d, 2f, i.e. surveys.
> >
> > vwoolf
>
> OK, it looks like there are 5 of us and we'd all be interested in working on a survey. I do think that would be a good way to start. The particular topics that were mentioned were:
>
> a. how people define their disorders or illnesses-psychological, biological, combination, neither etc.
> c. level of participation/lurking
> d. number of symptoms/level of functioning
> f. what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physicians
>
> Can we decide on one of those?
>
> Bob
Posted by zazenduckie on March 27, 2007, at 21:03:19
In reply to Dr Bob you forgot me again » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenduckie on March 27, 2007, at 20:46:37
Bob several other people besides me have also expressed interest and you left them out too. Not even a word of thanks.
I am really shocked. I know I shouldn't be.
Posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on March 27, 2007, at 21:12:28
In reply to Civility?, posted by zazenduckie on March 27, 2007, at 21:03:19
Zazenduckie,
I feel just awful that Bob seems to have overlooked you. I didn't though. I read everyone of your posts to this thread with interest. I think you have good ideas, but I'm not the boss around here...thank you for speaking up for yourself. You're not the only one who was overlooked either. I think only one of my roughly 30ish ideas made it into Dr. Bob's list. so many interesting questions. so little time...
If you think Dr. Bob has forgotten you, please know that there was a bottle of wine ordered at the last babble-get-together and the bottle had a duck on it, and we all thought of you.
well, sorry if it's a small consolation prize. I just don't know what to say.
-Ll
Posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on March 27, 2007, at 21:16:04
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
> a. how people define their disorders or illnesses-psychological, biological, combination, neither etc.
> c. level of participation/lurking
> d. number of symptoms/level of functioning
> f. what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physicians
>
> Can we decide on one of those?
>
> Bobthe short answer is "no" the long answer is I'd be interested in too many things to start anywhere in particular. Call me "flexible"- I think they are all good issues deserving empirical investigation.
Posted by zazenduckie on March 27, 2007, at 21:44:56
In reply to Re: Civility? » zazenduckie, posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on March 27, 2007, at 21:12:28
>
> thank you for speaking up for yourself. You're not the only one who was overlooked either. I think only one of my roughly 30ish ideas made it into Dr. Bob's list. so many interesting questions. so little time...
>
http://dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/710014.htmlWell idea (a) is a direct quote from a post of mine. So my idea made it but bob for reasons known to him and possibly his therapist ;-) left me out.
> well, sorry if it's a small consolation prize. I just don't know what to say.
>
LLurpsie I didn't think of it as a "prize". Is that how you see it? That you won a prize by being chosen by Bob? I thought we were volunteering to help Bob not that we were competing for his favour. I wouldn't want to be in that competition. I thought it was just something for anyone who was willing to help out. I don't understand why Bob wants to exclude people. It's like when he had three volunteers to be deputies and after the fact he announced that he was going to select two after they trained! Seems like a pattern here! Please at least do me the favor of voting for someone else's idea not mine (a). I don't think my ideas should be invited to the party without me!
Posted by Honore on March 28, 2007, at 3:28:17
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
I guess if I were to choose one of the topics listed, I'd go with c) the reasons for lurking versus participation, or how/when/why posters move from one to the other, and possibly back again.
Honore
Posted by madeline on March 28, 2007, at 6:24:22
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
I would be interested in helping on the med board survey - I don't know if you included me or not in the list.
Maddie
Posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on March 28, 2007, at 7:20:03
In reply to Re: Civility? » Llurpsie_Noodle, posted by zazenduckie on March 27, 2007, at 21:44:56
>
> >
> > thank you for speaking up for yourself. You're not the only one who was overlooked either. I think only one of my roughly 30ish ideas made it into Dr. Bob's list. so many interesting questions. so little time...
> >
> http://dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/710014.html
>
> Well idea (a) is a direct quote from a post of mine. So my idea made it but bob for reasons known to him and possibly his therapist ;-) left me out.
Good to know. One of my profs is fond of saying that the smartest people can't remember where they got their ideas...>
> > well, sorry if it's a small consolation prize. I just don't know what to say.
> >
> LLurpsie I didn't think of it as a "prize". Is that how you see it? That you won a prize by being chosen by Bob?Barf. I don't want to be "picked by" anyone.
Please allow me to rephrase
"I'm sorry if it's a small consolation"
>I thought we were volunteering to help Bob not that we were competing for his favour. I wouldn't want to be in that competition.nor would I
>I thought it was just something for anyone who was willing to help out. I don't understand why Bob wants to exclude people. It's like when he had three volunteers to be deputies and after the fact he announced that he was going to select two after they trained! Seems like a pattern here! Please at least do me the favor of voting for someone else's idea not mine (a). I don't think my ideas should be invited to the party without me!
Can you crash the party? If Bob's invitation were that exclusive I doubt he would have posted it publicly. I think he wants feedback at this point. I'm sorry that I've never gotten to know you personally Zazenduckie, and so don't know if you've ever worked on a survey or research project before. Like most projects there are some phases when broad input from a variety of people is helpful and then there are other phases where more concentrated effort by a few people helps move things along faster. I hope that Dr. Bob was trying to communicate that he's ready to actually start working on something, and that the brainstorming phase is coming to an end.
I'm going to get back to working on the references in the text of my dissertation. I *do* try very hard to give people credit for their original thoughts, and I think it's a mistake for Bob not to adopt some time of reference system for this phase of brainstorming.
According to some posters, ideas should be given credit where credit is due (Zazenduckie, 3/27/07, admin; Llurpsienoodle, 3/28/07,admin)
kind of like that? (knowing of course that I left out the references from January and February when your ideas were "inadvertently?" misappropriated without due credit. this bibiliographer is sleepy.
later,
-Ll
Posted by zazenduckie on March 28, 2007, at 13:00:44
In reply to references » zazenduckie, posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on March 28, 2007, at 7:20:03
Like most projects there are some phases when broad input from a variety of people is helpful and then there are other phases where more concentrated effort by a few people helps move things along faster. I hope that Dr. Bob was trying to communicate that he's ready to actually start working on something, and that the brainstorming phase is coming to an end.Well brainstorming is my talent so perhaps my work is done here.
>>
> According to some posters, ideas should be given credit where credit is due (Zazenduckie, 3/27/07, admin; Llurpsienoodle, 3/28/07,admin)
PLEASE PLEASE NO that isn't the point at all. (Although a mention of zazenduckie would surely add luster to any academic effort!!!)
Nevermind. I'm far too idealistic or out of touch or something.Thanks for reading my post and replying. And thanks for offering to help Bob! That was very generous of you. I hope you enjoy it.
Posted by Llurpsie_Noodle on March 28, 2007, at 13:28:06
In reply to Re: references » Llurpsie_Noodle, posted by zazenduckie on March 28, 2007, at 13:00:44
I guess I misunderstood you. I'm sorry.
I'm writing zazenduckie into a draft of my dissertation. look how it glows :)
-Ll
Posted by zazenduckie on March 28, 2007, at 18:25:21
In reply to Re: more research here, posted by wishingstar on December 1, 2006, at 15:15:56
Did you overlook another volunteer Bob?
>
> I dont have any particularly bright ideas on research topics at this moment, but I'd like to volunteer to be involved in this if you do decide to do any work regarding the boards.
Posted by wishingstar on March 31, 2007, at 18:36:45
In reply to what about wishing star? dr bob?, posted by zazenduckie on March 28, 2007, at 18:25:21
Posted by vwoolf on April 12, 2007, at 11:02:02
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
I think that of the four surveys, it might make most sense to choose one that specifically investigates the nature of online support groups. This could be an investigation either into the kind of users and their mental health, or into their reasons for using the site. Or both. So possibly d. i.e. "number of symptoms/level of functioning" or f, i.e. "what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physicians". I would find both of these extremely interesting.
Posted by Honore on April 21, 2007, at 10:41:07
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by vwoolf on April 12, 2007, at 11:02:02
Are we still planning to do research?
Has anything been done in this area?
I'd still like to be involved.
Honore
Posted by zazenducke on April 22, 2007, at 0:09:13
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2007, at 16:27:31
Bob if you intend to use these professional young women to meet your need for research, you need to take this thread off the board and conduct that research in private. I am sure you know that it is possible to figure out who some posters are by the posts which you refuse to remove.
And if you take these women to professional meetings with you won't you be outing them to their potential future colleagues?
It would be fun to watch yall working here on the thread but I don't think it is a good idea at all!
Why didn't you think of this yourself?
Posted by LlurpsieNoodle on April 22, 2007, at 9:16:19
In reply to Privacy concerns Bobbo » Dr. Bob, posted by zazenducke on April 22, 2007, at 0:09:13
yes,
I'm kind of concerned about how I could possible end up with an acknowledgement of my participation in this research without identifying my IRL identiybabblers would know my IRL and
IRL would know my babble identity.this concerns me too zazenducke.
i wonder what's got bob so busy that he lets this sit on the back burner for so long.
well. maybe he's jut waiting for someone to take the first step?
I dunno
-Ll
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 1, 2007, at 8:20:25
In reply to Re: Privacy concerns Bobbo » zazenducke, posted by LlurpsieNoodle on April 22, 2007, at 9:16:19
> I'd be interested in too many things to start anywhere in particular. Call me "flexible"- I think they are all good issues deserving empirical investigation.
>
> Llurpsie_Noodle> I guess if I were to choose one of the topics listed, I'd go with c) the reasons for lurking versus participation, or how/when/why posters move from one to the other, and possibly back again.
>
> Honore> I would be interested in helping on the med board survey
>
> Maddie> I think that of the four surveys, it might make most sense to choose one that specifically investigates the nature of online support groups. This could be an investigation either into the kind of users and their mental health, or into their reasons for using the site. Or both. So possibly d. i.e. "number of symptoms/level of functioning" or f, i.e. "what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physicians". I would find both of these extremely interesting.
>
> vwoolfI agree, they're all good issues, but we do need to start somewhere. If we consider (a) eliminated, that leaves:
c. the reasons for lurking versus participation, or how/when/why posters move from one to the other, and possibly back again
d. number of symptoms/level of functioning
f. what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physiciansMaddie, what do you think? Thuso, are you still here?
--
> You seem to have overlooked me :(
>
> Was that intentional?
>
> I feel hurt and confused.
>
> zazenduckieSorry, but you didn't say you were willing to work on any of the proposals on the list:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061228/msgs/721552.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070123/msgs/727958.html--
> I'm kind of concerned about how I could possible end up with an acknowledgement of my participation in this research without identifying my IRL identiy
>
> babblers would know my IRL and
> IRL would know my babble identity.
>
> Llurpsie_NoodleHmm, good question. I guess you could be acknowledged just as Llurpsie_Noodle and if someone IRL asked who you were, it would be up to you whether you disclosed that to them. But either way, I could confirm that you were one of the contributors...
Bob
Posted by Declan on May 1, 2007, at 14:37:14
In reply to This board, she is a woman?, posted by zazenduckie on January 27, 2007, at 16:03:23
An obvious difference not mentioned in the article is that men will generally not reach out for help whereas women will
Posted by Declan on May 1, 2007, at 14:43:18
In reply to This board, she is a woman?, posted by zazenduckie on January 27, 2007, at 16:03:23
>There has been a slight increase in male posters since the first year you report statistics. What would account for that?
Changes in male identity and sexuality.
Posted by zazenducke on May 3, 2007, at 8:37:19
In reply to Re: This board, she is a woman? » zazenduckie, posted by Declan on May 1, 2007, at 14:43:18
I also forgot that women are twice as likely as men to be depressed. That's pretty much the same as people registering.
Posted by thuso on May 5, 2007, at 22:12:33
In reply to Re: what survey to work on, posted by Dr. Bob on May 1, 2007, at 8:20:25
> I agree, they're all good issues, but we do need to start somewhere. If we consider (a) eliminated, that leaves:
>
> c. the reasons for lurking versus participation, or how/when/why posters move from one to the other, and possibly back again
> d. number of symptoms/level of functioning
> f. what factors cause people to post here rather than discuss med problems with their pdocs or other physicians
>I like (c) and (f). Those are two topics I'd have a lot to say about and I'm sure others would also.
> Maddie, what do you think? Thuso, are you still here?
>I'm still here. Been down and out because of 2 surgeries. Well, there's that and also the fact that I am one of those who would fall under (c). :-)
Posted by Honore on May 6, 2007, at 10:07:14
In reply to Re: what survey to work on » Dr. Bob, posted by thuso on May 5, 2007, at 22:12:33
Well, not that I'm trying to vote twice, since I already voted. But I'm still more up for c) than the other two. I'll work on any of them, of course.
Is any progress being made on deciding on one rather than the others? Is there any timetable for getting out of ... I mean getting down to work?
Honore
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.