Psychologists are just like other ordinary people

There is a tale that psychologists and behaviour scientists are more calm and more wise and more broadminded than ordinary people. This is of course wrong. Even though you have learned quite a lot about mental conditions and about psychic development and about the human normality and the human disorders and whatever – this is not a guarantee for wisdom or special clever thinking. I have met several colleagues of mine, who are definitely weak in their communication capacity and who are greedy and touchy, just as anyone else in the general public. I have met colleagues, who have betrayed me and who have lied and behaved in a way that have made them to former colleagues and friends, not because they are evil in a general sense, but because they are shortsighted and not so very bright and because they found a special amusement of attacking me, or rather my position.
Psychologists are commoners. I hope I did not disrupt your hopes or your illusions by these lines of mine.

Are psychological tests reliable?

If you want to measure your length you can use a tape measure or a carpenter’s rule. These kind of measurement tools are very reliable. If you measure your length today, and tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow, and after a month there is a certain probability that you will reach almost exactly the same results. This means that the tools have a very high reliability, indeed.
But are they really measuring length? Are you sure?
Yes, you could rest assured. They do measure length. The tools have a very high validity.
But let us look at a common psychological test instrument that is said measuring intellectual capacity. You try it today, and then tomorrow, and the the day after tomorrow and then after a month.
Will you get exactly the same results?
Probably not. Not exactly. It may differ. Perhaps you will get a higher result after two days because you have learned how to solve the questions. Or, you will get lower results because after two days you are quite tired, or you are occupied by something else that is very important to you.
The reliability is in fact not so very high. If a perfect match between test day 1 and test day 2, or 3 or 4 exists the reliability is said to reach 1.0.
But most tests have a reliability around 0.6-0.8 at the most,
And is the test really measuring intellectual capacity?
Well, that depends on how to define intellectual capacity. And furthermore, the intellectual capacity could of course, as I guess that you know by experience, vary quite a lot from day to day. The human being is a very complex creature. We are all affected by so many emotional and other conditions so you will never know how your brain works tomorrow.
A lot of the most common psychological tests have a validity of around 0.3 – 0.5.
There are very large areas of uncertainties around the results of psychological tests.
It is possible to reduce the uncertainties, but then you have to meet and talk to and discuss a lot of issues with the candidate.
Tests that are used by themselves only are not particularly reliable.
That goes especially for so called personality inventories or personality tests used in selection programs.
Most psychological tests are reliable in the same way that you want to measure the length of a person by using a bathroom scale, primarily pointing out your weight.

The tribal unities

There are of course some obvious differences between human beings born in different corners of our world. Some people have developed a black skin in order to protect them against the burning sun. Other people have high cheekbones and eyes that are somewhat turned upwards. There are people with dark hair, light brown hair, big noses, small noses and so forth. But on the inside of all of us there is quite difficult to find any differences of significance. The brain works as brain work and so do the hearts and the lungs and the kidneys and the blood streams and so on. We are all brothers and sisters, belonging to one big single family.
But this is not accepted by all. There are certain social powers, organised by some individuals and their close surroundings, trying to state that the external conditions, may they be very small, should be looked at as major differences and just because of these facts people ought to be divided into separate groups. We, here, and they, over there. This is a typical tribal reaction, trying to form tribes into special unities. There are also lots and lots of dramatic forces working to make people identify their geographical nation as a special tribe. We, the Chinese, against them, the Tibetans. We, Thai, against them, the Indians. We, Swedes, against them, the Russians. We, the US Americans, against them, the Iraqians. And so on, and so on, and so on.
Want to have a closer look at this kind of human circus?
Just look at the soccer fans. We against them! Beat them! Shoot them! Make them bite the grass!
This is a very dangerous human game. The forces have so far been major forces behind lots of wars, lots of killings, lots of development of mass destruction weapons.
Beware of the tribal killers!

Reality a human construction?

What is reality? What do you mean by reality? Are you sure that the reality is what you think it is?
All those questions are matters for philosophical discussions – and they have for sure been profoundly discussed during all times. But not only by philosophers. Natural scientists have also special interests in trying to go deep into these issues. The scientists have delivered lots of theories of the basics of all matters, for examples the atoms and the nucleuses, the particles that build the atoms, the quantum physics, the quarks and the the string theories. But no one has ever seen an atom or a quark, and definitely not a string. How could we then know that they exist?
Well, as a matter of fact, we cannot.
But we can make pretty good guesses. And these guesses are constructed from a lot of theories and from a lot of mathematics and from a lot of physical experiments. Reality ought to be like this. We have found some important things, based upon lots and lots of logical, experimental and mathematical tools.
But, as a careful and a meticulous scientist you have to be humble: some day a new Einstein will show you something completely new parts about the areas that we call reality (the old Einstein showed that time is not a constant dimension and that the world as we experience it is not as simple as a three dimensional world and that the space dimension is bended, not straight).
What you and I can do is to try to figure out the reality by the means of our senses: primarily by our sight and by our hearing. But our senses are just a kind of electrical devices, sending electrical impulses to our brain, which has to work as hell to try to figure out the content and the meaning of those billions of signals. And the brain is gradually constructing pictures, or perhaps illusions, of what is going on around you.
So, yes, all that you experience as reality is a human construction. But it seems to be a fairly good construction as we so far have survived. So far.

How to make an obedient, non-critical citizen

Most people are dependent of each other. Man is a social creature. Very few are withdrawn in a way that makes them look like very special, lonely wolfs. And as the absolute majority is clinging to the social average, wanting to share the norms and the behaviours of the others, the one that wants to come into power could benefit of this special human trait. So, here is the recipe:
1. Invite people to a big event, preferably a meeting.
2. Do not be afraid of taking the leadership of the meeting. Be in charge.
3. Be loud and direct. Preach! Let the people get the illusion of you being the one that owns the truth.
4. Keep the distance, do not become too friendly, but act politely.
5. Repeat the word “we” in almost all of your sentences. “We have to do this….we will be able to reach…we, together, could become the real successful ones…” and so on.
6. The group of people in front of you will now create the giant group dynamic force, which will enforce everyone to join together and to give you full support.
7. If there will appear one or two critical voices in the group – do not bother. The group will bring the critical voices down. You do not have to do anything, but to keep the leadership illusion.

If you do not agree with me – just have a look around, particularly at the big sport arenas. The crowd is made up of loudly followers. And most people in your society do exactly the same, even though they are perhaps not so very loud.

What is possible to change and to develop – of your inside?

Talking about predictions of human beings prior to a recruitment process there are two different standpoints or points of views among certain recruiters.
1. It is possible to detect and to find a candidate’s all basic resources and limits that are relevant for the position applied for. The resources and the limits are fixed and can not become changed. This means that it is possible to screen out all those who are not suitable for the profession.
2. Very few human beings are in a fixed and once-for-all-times position regarding our internal resources. Most of our resources could become developed and refined, by proper training. This goes also for general intellectual activities. And the possible developments could continue also up in the old days.
The main issue for the recruiters is to look for candidates with the right motivation for further development. How eager is the candidate in his application? How willing is he (or she) to spend energy to really try to develop up to the level that is sought for?
These points of views and this main issue goes also for personality traits. Everything is changeable – if we really want to change and if we are prepared to make some efforts about it.
Those recruiters who state that there are candidates that can not change have probably met candidates with too low energy levels, looking as if they are not willing to try to change. Or are they (the recruiters) clinging to standpoint no. 1 above. But in such a case they are even more rigid than the candidates.