Dan Luu is interested in this RMET thing so he set up a survey here. Click on the link and try it out!
Dan has some thoughts on this, and so do I. I have a post scheduled for October (that’s the current end of the queue) with our thoughts, but he’d like you to try it out now without being influenced by our takes.
Dan did the No Vehicles in the Park survey awhile ago and got some interesting results, so I think you’d be contributing in some small way to the public good by trying out this new survey and giving him some data. Enjoy.
Just a quick thought regarding the analysis of that data. Here on the internet, the data is distributed to an international audience. This might affect
(1) how facial features are interpreted in practice (some cultures may pay more attention to other facial features; recall the well-known example of a classification algorithm that identifies a bedroom by its curtains rather than the presence of a bed);
(2) how the descriptive adjectives are understood by the reader (not all of whom are native speakers).
RE 1
I am not up on the literature in this area but I’d be worried from the few things I’ve read. Is there a cultural anthropologist in the audience?
RE 2
In real use we would hope that the test has been translated and validated in that language. I’d be dubious of an on-line test without these considerations.
Having seen examples of how tests can be distorted, butchered, or used in totally inappropriate situations besides just invented out of pure imagination. I am not all that enamoured with posting clinical tests on the internet to begin with.
the RMET has major validity issues to begin with. See e.g. the work of Wendy Higgins. I agree with your concerns in general. But when it comes to the RMET, I think the real outrage is that this test is actually used in clinical practice.
Ivy Tso does some cool studies on averted gaze and interpretating facial expressions, but for patients with schizophrenia. I just clicked through this survey and put random answers and called myself 109. Take that, time wasters.
Why were half of the women flirting with me?
Wins thread. It’s a short thread, but still.
I don’t know. I saw everyone as being suspicious.
Appreciate the post and Dan Luu’s survey!
Could you please relay that the results page would greatly benefit from references?
Every other sentence is screaming for sources/DOIs:
“have found issues”, “here’s a quote”, “reading the available literature”, “Another thing that’s said”, “The most widely cited result”, “in a study on another topic”