Posted by shar on October 22, 2000, at 21:48:35
In reply to Re: Hedonic range?, posted by stjames on October 22, 2000, at 19:49:32
This is an interesting topic, and I always feel that "operational definitions" are so important in research, or (if you've ever done a lit review) people can be discussing very different things under the same name. Moreover, in a journal article, words are everything.
A person may be "happy" or "fine" if there are no problems at the moment. While another person, may not be happy or fine in the same situation. Of course, that leads to defining happy and fine.
And, perhaps my mind is clouded, but I'm not immediately grasping the difference between a set point and range as it relates anhedonia. Heat, I understand, anhedonia is harder. Sort of like motivation (internal/external locus of control) or something.
Examples not related to what's inside one's head are fairly easy to come up with, and it happens frequently, but the point is, we're talking about what's going on in someone's head. And, anhedonia relates to so many psych conditions. Can there be one operational definition for all of them? Or will it vary with condition?
Even within depression itself, there are great variations in the conditions. Will a theory hold up for all of them?
Just a few questions I learned the hard way, but a good lesson to be sure. My dissertation was a meta-analysis, and going back to the original articles (as was necessary) and finding how things became changed/distorted over many citations made me realize the importance of clear unambiguous words to describe what one is discussing.
That plus my own not understanding this very well, led to this post. Not a critique of your work at all!
Shar
poster:shar
thread:47078
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20001022/msgs/47137.html