Veli-Matti Karhulahti
mkarhulahti.bsky.social
Veli-Matti Karhulahti
@mkarhulahti.bsky.social

science, gaming, art (senior researcher at university of jyväskylä)

Psychology 27%
Sociology 20%

it’s understandable that stakeholders want reviews but sadly it’s garbage in garbage out; there’s no easy way to disseminate this complexity

Thanks, a nice overview of their work. The problem is (=continues to be) that dicussions, like those on the site, are based on reviews while very few publications are able to tackle the issue

there's also "interviews with experts in multiple fields, including behavioural addiction"-- why isn't this data shared? Relative to a) the seriousness of this topic, b) the fact that expert views on design aren't sensitive & c) resources isn't an issue, sharing this data should be no-brainer

the features listed in the press release are used by almost every successful platforms/products-- I'd like to understand how TikTok design is different (beyond its size), and what specific combos/types produce addiction here (ppl have studied this for ages with little success)

Reposted by Matti Vuorre

European Commission's formal analysis of TikTok has concluded today & finds it to represent 'addictive design'

--great that someone is doing this work but would really appreciate some transparency in the process so that experts (like myself) could understand

ec.europa.eu/commission/p...
ec.europa.eu

Some examples could be to class those who play from those who don't, or by those who failed the control item, or by employment situation/eduction (if these things count)

How large? We have a nationally (FI) representative n≈8000 dataset open for use here

services.fsd.tuni.fi/catalogue/FS...

Not exactly what you look for but among the most interesting takes on postdiction that comes to mind:

doi.org/10.1080/0898...
Preregistering qualitative research
The threat to reproducibility and awareness of current rates of research misbehavior sparked initiatives to better academic science. One initiative is preregistration of quantitative research. We i...
doi.org

Orange is light disagree & red is strong disagree, there's only ~7% ppl who disagree in total which imo falls well within some natural noise

Thanks Marcus, hope to meet again somewhere soon!

indirectly though: he co-created many of measures in the field so his work pace (haste) has likely contributed to the issue that way

Yeah the sample included several of his papers too. For his credit, he was rather helpful with the materials requests (& I've heard he has been in the past too)-- I don't think this affected results much bc the prevalence rate was ~zero anyway

I don't find it so strange tbh. Eg weekly lotto is betting real money, but associating it with gambling stereotypes (slot machines etc) isn't necessarily clear for everyone

In English, betting real money is, indeed, 99% gambling (in Slovak, terms operate a bit differently, as it does in Finnish and Swedish, which is interesting for sure!)

Yeah there's plenty of variation in psych too, nuance over generalisations!

There are two things: a) yes, fundamental psych RQs aren't statistical in nature, plus, b) psych constructs tend to be language bound & language games evolve, so psych can never be science in physics terms

Thanks :) The vagueness of related concepts is indeed a long-standing issue in other contexts too-- the chapter sounds interesting, looking forward to check the PDF!

Yeah the intentional confusion by the industry certainly doesn't help..

Thanks for the kind words! Tbh, I *think* the finding isn't as big as it first sounds, as a lot of general surveys are with kids & they don't gamble so much-- then again, papers often operate with diagnostic cutoffs which should be very strongly affected

Thanks Ian!

Reposted by Ian Hussey

It will still take decades before social sciences understand with what Wittgenstein tried teach them 70 years ago

bsky.app/profile/mkar...
Wittgenstein's hot take on psychological science remains accurate, timely, and unparalleled

Cannot express how happy it makes to read that, coming from you-- the genuinely positive feedback in academia is so few compared to all days that go into work, it really means a lot!

Thanks, better measurement practices will definitely be a first step for all progress!

One problem is, they do often have some formal instruction, eg that from GDT which we used shown in the pic. This doesn't exclude online gambling-- but naturally changing the official description of a measure wouldn't be allowed..

Thanks Jamie!

All past & future gaming measures should be revised to explicitly distinguish between gaming & gambling; all previous results should be reassessed in the light of the measurement error. Last: the issue influences studies in different ways, so implications are context specific.
In sum: all global prevalence rates about gaming addiction/disorder seem to be a partial combination of both gaming *and* gambling prevalence. The same applies to other studies, which use gaming measures in relevant languages. Chinese seems to be a major exception.
behold, we found great variation in how people think! Many activities that we thought would be “gaming” weren't & vice versa, eg half of the participants interpreted ‘gambling’ to be ‘gaming’. Ergo: surveying ‘gaming’ without defining it creates data mess