#behavior analysis

[stoicskullveil]

sometimes when i see how weird Nico is then i remind myself that this man is; an only child of Keke Rosberg 1982 WDC himself, NEVER have ugly phase in his life and yet constantly getting bullied because of it, poorly socialised and yet his only best friend dumped him, then married his childhood bff turn to lover. And well then some of his actions are justified in my eyes because he clearly have some issues.

[lvstfxrlife]

[drowning-in-cabbages]

Reading the BBS Light Novel (and also thinking back through the games) and I had some thoughts on Vanitas's truthfulness with how he speaks but also his relationship with Terra and Xehanort

I don't think Vanitas really ever flat out lies

Feel free to correct me on this, it has been a while, but Vanitas has never really lied to anyone. He's always been brutally honest, at least as far as I remember.

When he first meets Ventus and tells him that "ooo Terra's changing better go find him", he wasn't lying. He knew Xehanort's plan and knew that Terra was going to change. When he met Aqua, he said he was the only one who was going to make it out alive. He didn't lie he just changed his mind. He kept her alive on purpose.

Another example is when he meets Sora. Vanitas is extremely transparent with what he wants and what he plans to do. Same with his fight with Aqua and Ven in KH3.

Vanitas does lie in a manipulating way. Any "lie" he tells would at most be a "You didn't ask so I didn't tell" kind of way. You'd think he would, like Xehanort, lie to get his way. But he doesn't.

I don't think this makes him any better of a person. In fact, I think it makes him more evil. He doesn't lie because he doesn't feel bad about what he's doing and has no need to make others trust him. He literally tells Ventus that he plans to kill him during their first fight! He has no filter!

I could yap about this forever but I'll move to my next talking point, the BBS light novel.

Thinking back to the scene in BBS where Terra fights Xigbar to "save" Xehanort, the old man says to Terra "Heyo kiddo! You did pretty good back there! Why don't you become my apprentice?"

I can't help but think that Vanitas would get jealous. He was nearby, obviously because he had to face off against Aqua, and could have overheard.

Xehanort praises Terra, treats him well, says he's better than anyone else and asks him to be his apprentice. In the novel, he is cruel to Vanitas and treats him like absolute shit! Not only that, but he treats Vanitas like a tool while he plans to use Terra as a vessel (this was before Vanitas also became one of the 13 vessels).

Would it be reasonable to suspect that Vanitas would harbor a lot of ill will against Terra for how Xehanort treats him? Also, Xehanort says to Terra that Vanitas should be eliminated. And to add salt to the wound, they were forced into the same arena in KH3.

Ouch.

These were just some thoughts I had regarding Vanitas's behavior and/or future behavior (if Square isn't a wimp and gives him a redemption, PLEASE!).

tagging: @an-archii

[cheezeynoodles]

Fandom: Tobot (HoD)

I am definitely overthinking this: part 2

Yk how Semo. like. Idk um. Yk how in the first part of HoD S1, he almost always wore only his shirt when he was at home/at the headquarters, but after all that bs happened and the next arc came, he rarely ever took his jacket off?

Do you guys think there’s like. Something there? Because I’ve always interpreted it as like, a symbol of vulnerability (or however that word is spelled).

He has the jacket off when he’s in his comfortable/safe spaces (headquarters, Hana-Duri’s house, his own house) and/or with his comfortable/safe people (Hana-Duri, Limo)

But he has the jacket on when others are around because he’s not as comfortable and safe with them than with Hana, Duri, and Limo.

Semo is extremely closed off, we know this. And honestly, as far as I remember, he’s the character who is always fully covered up and rarely even wore short sleeves (I only remember him ever wearing short sleeves in the movie).

So him being comfortable enough to only have on the shirt he usually has on under his jacket, might be like, his way of showing that he trusts the people he’s around.

[thechaoticfaelostitsshame]

It feels like it’s telling of something that autism’s become more well known but if you look into ABA tags on tumblr the majority are filled with ads for ABA, and if you look for research most of it is shit like measuring caregiver satisfaction after stopping stims, and if you try to talk to someone about how shitty it is or any of its history most people don’t know what ABA even is.

Autism itself may be more well known, but expecting people to act normal and not need accommodations and just stop looking autistic is still just as prevalent as ever

[cinnamoodles]

spencer reid doodle <3

[bardic-tales]

"While my path eventually shifted from pursuing forensic psychology toward the world of publishing and now retirement, my fascination with how we perceive one another—and how often those perceptions are skewed by our own inner critics—has never really left me. /gen"

you studied FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY??!?!?! :DD /impressed.

(for context: I like to [light tone tag] pick other humans' brains in the mostly-metaphorical sense. studying how ppl think is so fun! and studying the brain Or its weirdness is so cool!! to me. and unfortunately whenever anyone mentions the subject of psychology or its various divisions - I perk up like a frazzled dog. /lh).

so may I ask you some questions? /not forced.

[i.e.

how would you personally define it? I know it's the intersection of legal matters and psychological matters, but most definitions just leave the meaning there and. do not seem to specify common subjects-of-study/occurrences? :I.

are there subdivisions within the subdivision of forensic psychology? like can you specialize in [specific legal-matter-advisory-thingy] instead of the relatively-broader field itself?

rhetorical one but- why are you so awesome???? >:D /light-hearted /positive].

^you don't have to answer the queries or this ask btw. just wanted to. ponder this knowledge-display publicly. :O ouo <- impressed face emoticon :>

-🫀 anon (hope the cold's gone/fading by now).

Oh, hearted anon, you are making me blush! /pos How are you so cool that you can turn a "knowledge-display" into such a wonderful, high-energy conversation? /q To answer your rhetorical question: I think we’re both just "frazzled dogs" for a good brain-pick! /lh

My interest was specifically pulled toward criminal profiling: the puzzle of looking at a crime scene and working backward to understand the "why" and the "who." However, my daughter was very young (around 2) at the time, and I chose to prioritize my family and my pursuit of publishing over the grueling path of further forensic study. I don't regret it for a second, especially because I still use everything I learned about the human psyche and darker motivations to fuel my writing and meta-analysis today! When you see me doing deep analysis, I'm usually trying to utilize what I learn during my classes and apply them to the character in question. /gen

To dive into your brilliant questions:

What is it, really?

You’re right that "legal meets psych" is the textbook answer, but in practice, it’s the study of human behavior in a legal context. It involves everything from determining if someone is fit to stand trial (competency) to evaluating eyewitness testimony or risk assessment for parole. It’s essentially using psychological data to help the justice system make informed decisions about human intent and stability. /nerd

The Subdivisions

Yes, it gets very specific! You can specialize in:

Investigative Psychology: Which includes the profiling I loved.

Victimology: Focusing on the psychological impact on victims. Another specialization I was thinking about.

Legal Psychology: Consulting on jury selection or how judges make decisions.

Correctional Psychology: Working on rehabilitation within the prison system.

Police Psychology: Assisting law enforcement agencies with officer selection, training, and stress management.

Family Forensic Psychology: Dealing with child custody evaluations, domestic violence, and other issues in family court.

Juvenile Forensic Psychology: Focusing on the unique psychological needs and legal issues surrounding young offenders.

Thank you for being so impressed. It’s such a treat to share this with someone who finds the "weirdness" of the brain as cool as I do! 🌞 Also, thank you for the well-wishes. The cold is finally fading. Still got a cough, though.

[theplotdemandsit]

were every hargreeves siblings lonely and lone? Were they all incapable of making friends truly?did they had any choice in the matter after they left the hargreeves mansion at 18,19?

Were the hargreeves lonely? Were they really incapable of making friends? Did they have any choice in the matter after they left the academy?

How I’m understanding this question is basically: Was the dominance and loneliness forced upon them growing up still chaining them down after they left?

The short answer? Yes. 

I’m a behavior therapist, and part of my work is looking at how individuals have been conditioned to behave in certain ways. Functional behavior and nonfunctional behavior all stem from consequences. If the consequences of a behavior increase the likelihood of you doing it again, your behavior has been reinforced. If the consequences decrease the likelihood of you doing it again, your behavior has been punished. Reginald Hargreeves uses these principles of behavior to essentially control his children.

Just to give an example of how this works: say you ask politely for a cookie and Mom gives you a cookie—you’ve now learned that asking politely gets you a cookie and are more likely to ask that way again. It can also go the other way where if you ask for a cookie by screaming and yelling, you don’t get a cookie. You are now less likely to scream and yell. Sound familiar?

But now think about this:

Say you ask Dad for a hug and he ignores you. Eventually you stop asking. Say you follow all his instructions and he praises you. You keep following his instructions. 

Say you ask Dad if you can go to the mall. He tells you no. Eventually you stop asking. Say you follow all his instructions and he praises you. You keep following his instructions.

Say you can’t do what Dad wants you to do so he locks you up and hurts you. You don’t want to suffer but you also can’t follow his instructions, so you do what you can to make it hurt less. He only tells you he’s disappointed but at least he can’t hurt you anymore.

Say you work really hard and outperform everyone else, and Dad praises you. He praises you for taking risks to be better. So you take more and more risks. Except one day he tells you to stop—that you can’t do it. The only problem with this is that experience has told you otherwise. You’ve been reinforced in the past for taking risks, so you take another. And another.

Say Dad tells you you’re nothing. You’re ordinary. You try to prove him wrong by doing well in other things, but instead of praising you, he ignores you or uses you as an example of what not to be. So you stop trying. 

The only reinforced behavior the Hargreeves had was following whatever Dad said. (Aside from Five’s case due to reasons 2 paragraphs ago). They couldn’t rely on each other because they were always competing against one another for Dad’s approval.

For more about the Hargreeves’ hierarchy, check out this entry which dives even deeper! https://www.tumblr.com/atalana/183592717183/five-and-the-effects-of-reginald-hargreeves?source=share

So, yes. They were lonely. And while they could make their own decisions after saying Bye, Felicia to dear old dad, their behavior had already been conditioned into living a certain way. For the numbers at the top, they had to keep doing and being the best. For the numbers on the bottom, they were already a disappointment so what was the point? (Unless, again, you're Number Five and just keep pushing to become better)

And while most behavior is conditioned, it can also be conditioned to change (literally my job) so they could all learn to not be so harmfully dependent and learn to believe in themselves had they positive role models in their lives. But they didn’t. From what I can tell, it seems like Diego is the only one who made any friends, but none of them were deep relationships. Him and Patch didn’t last, but maybe they eventually could have had he found more reasons to live than taking out bad guys. And even though Allison married and had a child, she still couldn’t find herself living without relying on her power, her need to control things. She was trying to rise to the top by any means necessary, but it wasn’t fulfilling which she later realized.

One of my favorite things about season 2 is that the siblings all getting sent in different times helps them to learn to rely on others and maybe heal a little. Although unfortunately Five just went from one Apocalypse to the other so he basically never heals. It’s fine. (It’s not and I’m still upset about that storyline they call season 4). 

But anyway. Changing behavior that has a long history of consistent conditioning is challenging and takes time. We see that throughout their stories and their laughable inability to communicate. But hopefully in some universe somewhere, they are learning to be happy. Thanks for the great questions!