-

-
Visit TOUK main site
Showing posts with label groups. Show all posts
Showing posts with label groups. Show all posts

Sunday, 14 October 2007

Personality research & links

Some Links are listed below. You might also search at www.google.com or any of the main search engines for:

Logical fallacies
Cognitive dissonance
Crowd behaviour
Group behaviour
Mental influence
Hypnosis
Subconscious
Hive Mind
Control freaks
Narcissism
Mind control
Cults
Cult dynamics
Egregores
Psychology
Sociology
Social Psychology
Critical Psychiatry
Psychological Reversal
Psychological Profiling
Obsession
Psychometric Testing
Catastrophe Theory
Systems Theory
Psychosynthesis
Dissociation or DID
Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP)
Motivation

Follow where it leads you; see whether you change your mind on anything, or confirm your beliefs.



It is said that, in order to change one’s behaviour, one’s beliefs must change first.
Do they? HOW? Does one ALWAYS know about it?



Some of these lead to online personality testing - Don't believe it all!

http://library.stmarytx.edu/acadlib/subject/psych/prsnlty.htm
St Mary's University, Blume Library: Personality Tests & Resources

http://www.queendom.com/tests/personality/index.html
Online personality testing

http://www.ylcf.org/you/
Click on Personality Types for a list of tests, books, articles

http://www.issid.org/issid.html

http://heraclite.ens.fr/~roy/GDR/moral_significance.htm

http://www.philosophy.ucf.edu/pi.html
Site of Shaun Gallagher

http://www.socialpsychology.org/social.htm
Go to the Links Page

http://www.workingpsychology.com/intro.html
An Introduction to Social Influence

http://www.ctyme.com/bwash/bwash.htm
Dick Sutphen's 'The Battle for Your Mind'

http://intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/welcome.php
Website of Stephen Downes on logical fallacies

http://www.apa.org/books/4318830s.html
Chapter of a book on cognitive dissonance, self-image, behavioural consistency etc.

http://www.reversaltheory.org
Reversal theory

www.enio.aaanet.ru/indexe.html
Downloadable chapters on Eniology
Main site
http://www.eniology.org/E_Enibook/e_ebook00.htm

http://maxwell.lucifer.com/virus/alt.memetics
Memetics, memes


'Secrets of Stage Mindreading' by Ormond McGill
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1904424015/t/026-3367497-5893224
Crownhouse Publishing ISBN 1904424015
If you thought ALL stage mindreading or influence were trickery

http://www.tranceworks.com/stage.htm
List of books on stage hypnotism & magic

http://www.csj.org
AFF site with information & resources on cult influence

http://www.caic.org.au/zpsyche.htm
Cult Awareness & Information Centre, Australia.
Psychological issues of involvement in cults/general persuasive techniques; exit counselling.

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/e00.html
Apologetics Index searchable resources on cults

http://www.robibrad.demon.co.uk/bibcult.htm
Cults & sects bibliography

Article on 'Cults, groups, indoctrination, exiting' on next page, click on Older Posts

Profiling - the company we keep?

Although there does seem validity in personality profiling or evaluation for some people, some actions, some situations, or just sometimes - sociological or environmental factors may overtake the individual approach or need consideration as playing a potentially significant part.

That's a sweeping statement which I'll draw in a little by mentioning a book 'Profiling the Criminal Mind: Behavioral Science & Criminal Investigative Analysis' by Dr Robert J Girod Sr. It is an introductory book outlining main themes and theories about profiling and investigation of crime from the author's experience, also mentioning the work of many others with wide-ranging views, experience and expertise.

Several chapters mention the kind of situation that people are in, such as groups they belong to where the 'group cause' could be a motivating factor in criminal or other activity. Some of the subtitles from the CONTENTS list are:

Gang motivated murder
Criminal competition homicide
Group cause homicide:
Cult murder
Extremist murder
Group excitement murder
Peer/group pressure
Group retaliation
Child/adolescent pornography
Historical child/adolescent sex rings
Multidimensional sex rings
Group cause sexual assault

The Nature of Cults:
Attributes
Attitudes
Characteristics
What are Cults

The list continues and some aspects clearly may also come under individual behaviour.

Another useful book is 'Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool' by Ronald M. Holmes & Stephen T. Holmes. There are many more, some quite expensive and some intended more for academics or for those working in the field.

My point (lest you think I wander or wonder aimlessly) is I am strongly inclined to think that sadistic, violent or extreme behaviours are probably things that most people are capable of, especially when under extreme stress or in extreme circumstances. That includes the company we keep, or are somehow inveigled into keeping.


In other words I suggest almost a continuum of behaviour, the extremity of which is shocking but where other factors can sometimes render the shock factor insufficient to prevent our involvement, willing or unwilling, witting or unwitting.



Those extreme behaviours could therefore be like
an extension of 'normal people's normal behaviour'.

That is some sobering thought. Maybe I got it all wrong ...

But then I came across John Sweeney's book 'Purple Homicide: Fear and loathing on Knutsford Heath' where in the Epilogue he outlines some theories of cult behaviour and extremes such as suicide by members of a group or cult:


Page 260:

"Ashley Grossman is Professor of Neuro-endocrinology at Bart's Hospital in London. He saw a comparison between those who build and reinforce a system of lies and mass suicide cults. 'All of us from time to time tell lies. If the lie is outside the structure, then we can handle that. But if we construct a house around that lie, with eaves and guttering and drainpipes, then we are in trouble. There is a psychological theory that is called cognitive dissonance, which implies that everything must be reasonably congruent. So there comes a certain stage where you start living in that house because there isn't too much else outside. Then even the most reasonably balanced person will find it quite difficult to distinguish between truth and non-truth. They do literally live that lie and it becomes part of their self-structure. It will be hard then to say that someone is deliberately lying because, by that stage, the lie becomes self-reinforcing. The power of the lie is enhanced if there is a folie a deux, if two people are in on the lie together. At its most extreme, the lie can lead to a mass suicide, like the Heaven's Gate suicides..... Within the structure it was congruent, it made sense, they understood it, everybody said the same thing. It was the rest of the world that was living the lie.' "

. . . . .Does that explain why some couples or families have an elaborate system of reinforcing each other's statements and beliefs, in the face of just about everything going on around them? I've often wondered when keeping my ears open on trains & buses. No doubt I am no different when push comes to shove.

Returning to a book mentioned in another article here, 'More Scams from the Great Beyond: How to make even more money off of creationism, evolution, environmentalism, fringe politics, weird science, the occult and other strange beliefs' Peter Huston:

He comments on various hoaxers or what some people call 'true believers' and comes up with some interesting ideas about dynamics. In particular he writes of rather earnest campaigners that there can be in some fields - any field really. Maybe a lot of us are basically rebels seeking a cause or something 'meaningful' to work on with other people.

In Chapter 4 on the subject of 'Environmentalism' Huston takes the mick out of the seriousness with which some people take the issues, and I'm not saying that should be an object of fun. But
there's many a true word spoken in jest, as the saying goes, and he illustrates it with this on p.86 under a title of 'Canvassing' he writes:

'Choose one particular issue and declare it your cause of the day... Next get a group of well-meaning, idealistic people together... one way is to run a newspaper classified ad... 'Save the Environment' etc... The key elements are an appeal to idealism, greed, and people with lack of experience.

'Collect these well-meaning, idealistic people. Keep them in one place together for a period of time. This serves several psychological purposes. First they will enjoy one another's company and form a group of some sort. Second they will reinforce each other's willingness to do the humiliating and morally questionable work that comes later.'
. . . . .

I was fortunate to attend a talk by an author on cults, hypnosis, brainwashing and so on, who was not afraid to mince words, many of which were above my head. But something stuck in my mind and was worth the visit. He used the term 'deployable agents' to describe what some people turn, or get turned, into. In his context of cults and influence (My note: I feel it could be a group or workplace situation) he suggested that the 'deal is done' when the individual can be relied on to act on the cult philosophy without now being watched or told what to do.

Some companies openly use the words 'company indoctrination' and there's an increasing trend towards teamwork, building a group-mind, de-individualising the individual, 'you can't do enough for a good firm', 'we need 100 per cent of you' and so on. Hang on, if they get 100 percent, what's left for the individual?
We are naturally affected by people we are in contact with, and perhaps the influence is benign or most of it disappears over a period of time.

Perhaps it sometimes works in favour of individuals, a group-mind or team-spirit which can be nourishing too and which they can draw from. Some suggest that we need to mix with a variety of other people to stay sane and healthy. However I guess one man's meat is another's poison so one can't generalise.

So long as no-one is manipulating a group for their own purposes, perhaps there is no need to worry too much, and there could actually be benefits to others involved. I think unease about cults in general comes in when, to the person outside looking in, there seems an agenda which only a few at the top layer know of or can do anything about, and is detrimental to the members.

Somewhere I read that people like Charles Manson were like an orchestrator or conductor of the personalities of people in his group, so that they were effectively acting out the roles of his subpersonalities or dissociations like in a DID system.






More videos in this series at www.youtube.com/user/scillaholmes



Dr William Sargant wrote on the phenomenon of conversion to religion or way of thought, and suggested it occurred a lot easier if there was high excitation of an area in the brain. In a TV interview some years ago he joked that he would not wish to attend a particular ritual or event as he 'did not want to get converted'.

Does this have relevance for large crowds, rallies, congregations, pop concerts, or even some individual or small-group practices like meditation or ritual? Can we change our own psychological reality? Can reality really get changed, or does how we perceive things change? Can someone else change us against our inclination? How would they benefit? Would we! If about half of us have a 'religious gene' and half not, where does that leave half of us? any of us? all of us? 'in real terms'?


Will there always be some split in belief or perception which divides us humans into camps, as if somehow we have to seek differentiation? Maybe this is where the 'hissing & splitting' comes in. If someone goes in for meditation, or has a feverish illness and senses things differently, do they actually become different? If tragedy knocks harshly on your door, are you necessarily the same person afterwards? I feel we can get changed by things, sometimes so that there is no 'going back' completely. The speaker on cults and 'deployable agents' mentioned above, suggested a need to accept that people may not be able to go right back as they were before joining.

Before closing, a note about a public lecture that was held at the London School of Economics on 'Why is it Always 'Us' and 'Them': on the natural history of thinking through groups' by Professor Lawrence Hirschfeld. I couldn't make it to the lecture so looked his name up and with luck and a fair wind this Link will take you to some information on his work. The LSE holds free public lectures in term-time, see www.lse.ac.uk/events



Over to you - What do you think?
. . . . .

Cults, groups, indoctrination, exiting

Post by Kaytrin
During life we go through periods of being a part of some grouping, in a family, at work, in the neighbourhood. Sometimes it works well, sometimes not! But we gain knowledge about ourselves and others, and have a tendency to seek situations which offer us something meaningful. Perhaps that is a role we can play, or a general feeling of being accepted.

Without that, we can feel alone in the world, and some groups take advantage of that. They may home in on people, offering what they want to hear, that they will be liked or taken care of, that the group provides answers of a philosophical or religious nature. We won’t be just zizzing around without a clue or a base, because there’ll be someone to act as friend or family.

This can work to mutual advantage. I recently ordered a book written by someone who spent 20 years living in different communal settings, and await that with interest. However, books and advisory centres range in their attitude about particular groups, or on the phenomenon of cults as a general principle and how harmful they are likely to be.

I think it’s good to have an enquiring approach, but recently I came across a book in an Oxfam shop where the author had joined some groups or cults that he found strange, amusing, stupid, awful. He seemingly implied that neither he nor anyone else actually got hurt in the process. How can he know that? That is an interesting phenomenon in itself. It would be interesting to undertake research into how groups such as juries come to a consensus opinion - or not.

If we are on our own in the world, to some extent we can make up our own minds and not get swayed into something different by another person, or in a group setting of a natural or contrived kind. Once we are involved with other people, there has to be some give-and-take or negotiation, and there are likely to be subtle changes that can be built on or further altered, becoming quite profound. Some businesses work on this in terms of team-work, company ethos and so on. It always used to be like that up to a point, but I can’t help thinking it has become more deliberate and invasive. One may find oneself not fitting in – and not being able to do much about it!

Bullying in the workplace (and elsewhere besides) has become an issue to the extent that both the Samaritans and Joseph Rowntree Foundation have prepared information on it. Without harping on about ‘the old days’, perhaps we had more respect for each other’s strengths and weaknesses, and the boundaries surrounding another person’s job, and personal or working space. Perhaps the decrease in physical area around someone’s workstation plays a part in how things have changed. In many places there isn’t even a personal desk with a little drawer one can lock or that no-one would think of going through!

A couple of other observations and I will aim to wrap this up. Firstly, if you’re in a supermarket and there are say 20 other shoppers and trolleys, maybe you don’t cross paths too closely too often. Increase the number to 40 and maybe it’s a bit harder. Increase it to 60 and the shopping process doesn’t work so well. Walk around a small town during a weekday and you might not meet many people. You may recognise some faces and even greet a few. Walk around a large town or city when people are heading to work or leaving, or racing around in their lunch break, and people are much less likely to stand back and smile. It becomes a survival situation – they need their job or to catch a train, and pit their survival against anyone else’s.

So we tend to think we’d rather be in a group than on our own, in this maelstrom of humanity, because there’s safety in numbers plus we’d like some personal recognition. Personal recognition can indeed still come with a job situation, but perhaps less than years ago, and less when job security is so decreased. Perhaps this is why workplace bullying increases, but it seems to have spread wider through society and neighbourhoods. It’s not as cosy and supportive as ‘Coronation Street’, although there’s plenty of that around.

I caught a comment by a psychiatrist on a radio show some years ago. He was of the opinion that his work would be reduced by 80 per cent, if people had another person they could confide in. The fact that Samaritans and other organisations have helped so many people through difficult times in their lives seems to bear this out. Sometimes people ‘go it alone’ either because they need to or have to, but at other times they need contact. They may seek it in a close personal relationship or in more of a group setting.

One of the things about groups is that we like to identify with certain things about them, or some of the people in them, at the same time as needing to retain some of our individuality. Unless that can be negotiated there can be difficulties.

In a cult-type setting, people may find their days mapped out and may be told what to believe, how to behave with their partner – even if that is allowed, children may be cared for by others, and contact with the outside world is restricted. If someone tries to buck the system and do their own thing, pressures are brought to bear on them to conform. If they want to leave, some cults will allow this and some don’t. However one of the main problems is that, living in a situation which is isolating in some way, members may not see the invisible walls around them, and that they even could still access the outside world.

This is why it is important, if you can, to maintain some form of contact with someone you know who has joined a group or cult, so that a part of their reality is that there is someone who knows them and will talk to them. And if the person manages to leave, depending on how they have been affected, it can take several years for their thinking to gradually get back onto other tracks. That process may never completely ‘undo’ all the changes, so one does need to be realistic and do what one can.

Sometimes people have attempted to 'rescue' someone from a cult and forcibly change their attitude and beliefs back. This was called deprogramming and it fell into disrepute, sometimes involving legal battles for kidnap. The term now used is exiting a cult with perhaps the facility of some exit counselling. As is often the way of things though, this has also been called into disrepute by those who say it's just a euphemism for the deprogramming of the past that could be quite a violent process.

Find out what form the exit counselling will take and see what options there may be. It is tempting sometimes to want to extract someone from a group which seems harmful, but it may not be possible or advisable.

Something you could perhaps explore is the concept of what is termed intervention, and this approach sometimes gets used with an addiction or other problem. Family or friends arrange to meet in a neutral setting like a hotel room, and invite the individual to join them, along with a professional who takes control of the interaction. The dynamic seems to be that the individual with the problem is faced with an irrevocable choice: to give up their problematic behaviour, or never to see their family and friends again.

It can be highly emotional, but the tug of family and friends and their promise of continuing support can just swing the balance.

Intervention can also be taken more generally to describe anything which breaks, or might break, into a cycle, pattern, or mode of thought or behaviour. It may be a matter of waiting until the person starts to question for themselves.

Certainly battering your own reality up against theirs is unlikely to be productive, and they have rights about leading their lives as they feel they want. The problems are more that we have known the person when they were very different, or we believe what has happened to them is wrong. 'Someone else' has entered the scene and had a devastating effect so the individual does not seem in control - and may in fact not be in control because 'someone else' or some other 'reality of belief' is.

. . . . .
Posts by Kaytrin and others on similar subjects are now all located on 'Unseen Aspects of Behaviour' at http://unseenaspects.blogspot.com to make space for newer articles here.

Norman's article 'Profiling - the company we keep?' (about groups) is here on this Blog.
For more on Cults and groups in general click HERE
Also see 'Doc Matrix' - A fun site with a serious purpose in mind - YOU!
Problems are not all Your Fault! : Outline Questions on Help
Pressures Outside or Within
: P-Y-O Personality Parts
Groups & Cults
: Dissing, Dissonance, Splits & Divides
Doc’s X-Files or WHY?
: Beliefs & Myths We Live By
Con-Tricks, Hustles, Scams, Deception - BookList