Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine Technology

VR Study Says 40% of Us Are Paranoid 221

Posted by Zonk from the other-sixty-percent-are-out-to-get-us dept.
Roland Piquepaille writes "UK researchers have recently used virtual reality to check if people had paranoid thoughts when using public transportation. Their VR tube ride experiment revealed that 40% of the participants experienced exaggerated fears about threats from others. Until now, researchers were relying on somewhat unreliable questionnaires to study paranoid thoughts which are often triggered by ambiguous events such as someone laughing behind their back. With the use of VR, psychiatrists and psychologists have a new tool which can reliably recreate social interactions. As the lead researcher said, VR 'is a uniquely powerful method to detect those liable to misinterpret other people.'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

VR Study Says 40% of Us Are Paranoid More

VR Study Says 40% of Us Are Paranoid

Comments Filter:

  • Sounds dangerous.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:34PM (#22982576)
    Maube I am being paranoid here, but 40%????

    That would explain a lot of the stupidity going on with terrorism and other tools uses to manipulate the public.
    • I'm curious as to paranoid about what ?

      They say "exaggerated fears of threats from others" ... but what constitutes a "threat" ?

      Personally I'm paranoid that every time I go out in public some passerby is going to cough on me and give me a cold. I know that this is illogical as the more viruses I'm exposed to the better my immune system will be at fighting them off and the less colds I will get, yet I still hate getting sick *so* much due to the added stress imposed that I will go out of my way to avoid putt

      • Re:Sounds dangerous.... (Score:5, Funny)

        by Ethanol-fueled ( 1125189 ) * on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:50PM (#22982738) Homepage Journal
        "Paranoia" is only a healthy adjustment to the modern world, which IS out to get you. If it's not the terrorists and pedophiles it's the corporations or the government.

        • Re:Sounds dangerous.... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by c_forq ( 924234 ) <forquerc+slash@gmail.com> on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:59PM (#22983236)
          If you ever spend some time in nature you will learn that it isn't only the modern world that is out to get you. The primitive world also seeks to destroy you at first available opportunity. Sometimes I think the slashdotters who never leave the basement are the enlightened ones...
          • I know what you mean about nature out to get you.

            Whenever we go hiking, I'm always the only one the mosquitoes target for a blood meal. Also, since it's the females that bite, that just reinforces my paranoia that all female are out to get me.

            I'm also still paranoid about my inevitable alien abduction and anal probing (Ouch! Maybe they work for the IRS...)

          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by dragonturtle69 ( 1002892 )

            Quite true. There is no "top" to the circle that is the food chain. Bacteria and viruses take down plenty of people every day. Being careful of what you eat, drink, breathe, and basic hygiene like washing you hands, might be smart not paranoid.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Lumpy ( 12016 )
            Life experience will adjust your paranoia level.

            Young teen that has been sheltered? they are invincible and dont have a care in the world.

            Teen girl that has been raped twice before 16? she's paranoid of every male she meets.

            Adult that has over the past 20 years had things stolen, homes and cars broken into, robbed, etc.. Then your become more paranoid. To the point that I noticed that only people over 30 want security cameras and recorders in their homes, younger than 30 do not typically. as they get o

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ushering05401 ( 1086795 )
          The real question is what the hell do the other 60% know that makes them so smug and secure?

          Why don't we put on the paranoia pants and walk down that path, huh?
          • Most of the other 60% are naive children.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by rts008 ( 812749 )
              Well said. I see this naive 60% all of the time, and they have no observation skills, and have zero situational awareness as they carelessly meander about the area, and are shocked when something happens to them or around them.
              It's even worse with cellphone use in public.

              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by jafac ( 1449 )
                What sucks - REALLY sucks, is when the naive 60% accuse you of being paranoid, negative, a downer, depressed, etc. that's supposed to help? I'll tell you what helps. Watching naive people get victimized because they were too stupid to protect themselves. Much nicer being a smug ant, than a starving grasshopper any day.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by SL Baur ( 19540 )

        I'm curious as to paranoid about what ?
        As am I. I presume it's all the fear-mongering in the last 7 years.

        The most paranoid I've ever been was on my first train ride in Japan and there was a lovely young lady. 20ish, who got on a few stations before Tokyo and stood by the doors and who had on a most amazing dress that wasn't held up and on by anything that I could detect. I was so afraid it was going to fall down and damage my prudish USian eyes ...

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by RockModeNick ( 617483 )
        Thats a very uncommon version of common sense. Check out: http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/ [nononsense...efense.com] For ways to determine actual threats vs imagined and avoid real ones easily without changing your lifestyle. It's a self defense site built around understanding how violence occurs and stopping it before it starts, rather than teaching how to hurt people first then get arrested later.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Actually I'm always paranoid when I am wearing a 5 kg headset that simulates me riding on the subway--unarmed that is. If I have a BFG then it is a different thing altogether. The worst thing about these subway sims is that it is so damn hard to safely fire a rocket--not that they have the decency to put spare ammo or guns in the sim. And even in the very rare sims where you are able to bring your weapons into the subway car it will never move because some damn aliens attacked your research facility. Ba

    • Re:Sounds dangerous....but bogus (Score:5, Insightful)

      by wwwrench ( 464274 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:06PM (#22982856) Homepage
      It seems to me that it would be impossible to extrapolate this VR study to real life. I mean, you strap on virtual reality goggles, and are presented with a scene from riding the tube (subway). It's like a video game, so of course you think the characters in it are about to pull out an AK47 and start shooting at you. Plus you are doing it as part of some experiment. What are you told before you strap on the goggles?

      But in a an actual ride on the tube, you would be thinking about something else -- you wouldn't be watching all the people, trying to figure out what is going on, as you would during some VR lab test...

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Xiph1980 ( 944189 )
      Well, the 40%, I actually wouldn't be surprised in a highly crowded metro or something. You're always less at ease there, and with the added chance of pickpockets, you're bound to be a tad more paranoid than normal.

      What I don't get though, is why they needed VR for this. Couldn't they just have placed 80 people in a crowded room or tube carriage where 10 are real test persons and the other 70 are actors and monitors? (monitor as in, monitoring the behaviour of the test subjects, not a TFT or CRT screen ;)
      • There is no way for a monitor in this situation not to influence the results... That's why they would need VR.

    • The Sky Is Falling (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Reziac ( 43301 ) *
      If you persistently tell people they should be afraid -- they WILL be. It matters not at all whether they SHOULD be.

      Witness that, lacking both better things to do and the ethics to do better things, our American news media plays up every negative incident as OMG the sky is falling, run for your lives!! Consequently, ask the average American (or any of our detractors) whether they think violent crime is out of control in the U.S., and they will uniformly declare that it is -- despite that the *actual* incide

  • Going to be used against us (Score:5, Funny)

    by El_Muerte_TDS ( 592157 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:34PM (#22982578) Homepage
    I'm sure these statistics are going to be used against us by the government to push some new laws to will limit our freedom.

    • Re:Going to be used against us (Score:5, Funny)

      by Jurily ( 900488 ) <jurily AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:40PM (#22982626)
      Remember, it's only paranoia if they're not out to get you!
      • They are all terrorists, I tell you. Watch out for your neighbor. They /could/ be doing something that should make you paranoid.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by rts008 ( 812749 )
          Some are terrorists, but you left out the non-terrost segment of our neighbors....THEY ARE PROBABLY 'COOKING' METHAMPHETAMINES!!!

          They are EVERYWHERE!! Cooking in their basements, garages, bathtubs, kitchen sink (YES!! Even the kitchen sink!!), pots and pans, the flowerpots!!

          Now days, if you go anywhere, do anything, or touch anything...*cue sinister music* You may be consorting with terrorists or meth cookers!!!

          'Holy Guano, Batman...Look at all of those lights shining on those weeds!'

          'Yes Robin, we have fal

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nurb432 ( 527695 )
      You sound paranoid to me :)

    • Going to be used against him (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      40% of us are paranoid, but the other 60% *know* Roland does need to be taken out back and shot.
    • Example:

      Perscribe certain drugs to people that are paranoid or have paranoid tendencies.

  • As the lead researcher said, VR 'is a uniquely powerful method to detect those liable to misinterpret other people.
    What exactly is meant by that? Will this be used to cleanse the impure or something? "Here are your drugs, citizen"... ?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MacWiz ( 665750 )
      It seemed to me that what they describe as "paranoid" might be called "awareness" or a "self-defense mechanism." Take it a little further and it becomes "law enforcement" or maybe "military training."
      • Allow me to expand for our newer PC (politically correct) and city-bred youngsters.

        1. We have established ourselves at the top of the food chain on land.
        2. Competition of the same species has resulted into numerous conflicts on Earth. Geographical and climate differences seem to back up sociological diff's, thus establishing a basis for conflict: after all, who wants to be wrong?
        3. No threat groups: company picnic, or similar like a LUG.
        You may not know all of the people there, but they all seem to fall int

  • wrong much? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ILuvRamen ( 1026668 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:43PM (#22982656)
    Paraonia is an opinion. If someone's laughing right behind you, it's 100% normal to wonder if it's about you. That's basic social interaction and everyone who's paying enough attention SHOULD be concerned. If you completely ignore it or assume it's not about you, you're a sociopath. The morons that ran these experiments probably started with the basis that nobody should be worried about anything ever unless they're being attacked by a tiger or something. Apparently they forgot that if I take one step towards a bird without even looking at it or intending to eat it, it flies away. It's not paranoia, it's normal.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      If someone's laughing right behind you, it's 100% normal to wonder if it's about you.
      That's not what paranoia is. Paranoia is not wondering if it's about you. Paranoia is hearing someone laugh and assuming (or "knowing") it's about you.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      So I'm a sociopath because I really don't care what people, whom I don't know personally, think of me? And that's a bad thing?

    • Re:wrong much? (Score:5, Funny)

      by TeknoHog ( 164938 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:38PM (#22983078) Homepage Journal

      It's not paranoia, it's normal.

      I'll choose the halfway option: it's paranormal.

    • If some complete stranger I'm never going to see again is laughing behind me on the train, why should I care even if it IS about me? Seems like it would be their problem, not mine.

      But maybe I'm a sociopath and didn't know it.
      • yes, that's the dictionary definition of a sociopath. Normal human interaction of any humans in groups is that any individual is concerned about what the others think of them. If nobody was, society would collapse because people would do whatever they wanted. Those that think they're above everyone else and don't have to abide by social policies and think every other individual doesn't matter are sociopaths.
        • Normal human interaction

          -does not evolutionarily include random strangers, and on those rare occasions when it did, they were to be distrusted until they demonstrated their worth. One method of showing distrust is act as thought you are deliberately ignoring someone.

    • Re:wrong much? (Score:5, Funny)

      by ignavus ( 213578 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @06:33PM (#22983452)
      "if I take one step towards a bird without even looking at it or intending to eat it..."

      You're a cat, aren't you? Come on, 'fess up.

      Hey everybody, there's a cat posting on Slashdot! I thought only dogs were able to post anonymously on the Internet.

      (And another proof you are a cat: you misspelled "paranoia". It is well known that cats can't spell. I've seen Lolcats. I'm not fooled.)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jd ( 1658 )
        It's easy to deal with cats on Slashdot - remember to embed a cheeseburger in the first post.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Stray7Xi ( 698337 )
      How do you differentiate paranoia and caution? Is it paranoid to be uncomfortable with someone in my personal space? How large of personal space is appropriate?

      I've never considered myself paranoid but I always find myself thinking ahead. I identify risks and think of how I can mitigate them or react to them. If someone bumps into me, I'm checking my wallet. I try to keep awareness of my surroundings, and I don't understand how people can blissfully enter a state of complete oblivion with Ipod's and th

      • I don't understand how people can blissfully enter a state of complete oblivion with Ipod's and the like. It's not a state of complete oblivion. It's a state of cat-like readyness.
  • No, Roland, we really do hate you that much! *twitch*
  • I find solace knowing that the more paranoid and fearful I am, the less likely things will happen to me.

    I'm paranoid, so that means I have nothing to worry about!

    No wait, now I'm not .. ohh nooo!

    Better, better .. hmm nooo!!

  • Somewhat unreliable (Score:4, Funny)

    by Jurily ( 900488 ) <jurily AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:44PM (#22982666)

    Until now, researchers were relying on somewhat unreliable questionnaires to study paranoid thoughts
    Like any decent paranoid is going fill those out honestly?
  • It's kind of silly to report things like this. How'd that study go?

    Pollster: Mind if I ask you some questions?
    Person: Sure.
    Pollster: Do you like sausage?
    Person: Yeah, it's good.
    Pollster: Patty or link?
    Person: Patty please, something bothers me when it's in the casing of-
    Pollster: Are you afraid I'm going to kill you?
    Person: I... what? Are you?
    Pollster: Thank you for your time.
    -------------
    Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you - Kurt Cobain

  • Uncanny valley? (Score:4, Informative)

    by bargainsale ( 1038112 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:48PM (#22982700)
    A lifelike VR simulation is likely to be more creepy than reality because of the "Uncanny valley" effect

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_Valley [wikipedia.org]
  • but rather, aware of my surroundings and how they might affect me. I'm the first person to jump in if someone needs help, but I keep my eyes open, too.

    This is nothing less than Jeff Cooper's Color Code [wikipedia.org] in action.

    • +1 to that. Code Yellow, the prepared individual's default mode of operation.

      ...No, I'm not paranoid, I'm a Detroiter.

  • Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 0123456 ( 636235 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @04:56PM (#22982788)
    This is Britain they're talking about. If you live in Britain today and you're not paranoid, you're crazy.

    • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Funny)

      by gardyloo ( 512791 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:10PM (#22982890)
      Yes, but if you lived in Britain 200 years ago, and you're reading this, you're also crazy.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by CSMatt ( 1175471 )
      Indeed. Orwell didn't just pull Britain out of a hat full of governments when he write 1984.
      • George Orwell/Eric Blair was British. I think its safe to assume that was the primary reason he chose England. After that I would actually put forth that the UK was the least totalitarian power in Europe and especially so given the recent history at the time of the writing (1948). If he intended to chose a society where one would be 'justifiably paranoid', the UK would have been a very odd choice given the other nations he had available to him (Communist Eastern Europe especially but also Franco's Spain,

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nbert ( 785663 )
      For some reason the UK is doing quite well regarding 1984'ish scenarios. Quite related: I'm more afraid of the government than some random guy in the train reading the Quran out loud - if this guy blows it all up my brain will be in parts before I can notice. Various governments in the western world on the other hand sell oppression as another layer of security. I just went to Denmark and they checked all liquids I brought along just to tell me that I have to carry them in plastic bags separately so they ca

  • What's the context? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LighterShadeOfBlack ( 1011407 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:03PM (#22982836) Homepage
    First of all, what pretense was given to the test subjects for the experiment? Obviously you can't tell them "we're going to see if you're paranoid", so what did they tell them? The very act of being in an experiment where you're put in a VR environment is likely to affect behavour and the way you interpret people.

    Secondly, put this in context of the location used for the experiment. A VR reproduction of the London underground? A place where you're crowded by people, a place which in all honesty does have a reputation for being a haven for pickpockets (whether that's deserved or not I don't know), and oh yes, one other thing - the site of the last major (successful) terrorist attack on Britain. Gee, do you think any of this might make people a little more wary when put into that environment for an experiment?

    Some of this is addressed in TFA of course, but it doesn't correspond to the sensational headlines this peice has been getting in tabloids and on the Internet. Being somewhat cautious in that particular situation is a world away from the headlines implicating that 40% of us are clinically paranoid all the time.

    • Being somewhat cautious in that particular situation is a world away from the headlines implicating that 40% of us are clinically paranoid all the time.

      People are afraid of things they are not familiar with.

      TFA even states that people who regularly rode the tube (in other words, were more familiar with the environment) experienced less "paranoid" thoughts. I wonder what would have happened if they ran the same experiment, but primed all the high anxiety people with calming thoughts. Would that 40% figure decrease?

      Don't get things twisted because the study uses the word "paranoid".

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by praksys ( 246544 )
      I guess the idea was that because it was VR, and the subjects knew it was VR, all paranoid thoughts were inappropriate. None of it was real, and they knew it wasn't real, so it made no sense to wonder whether the laughter was aimed at them, etc.

      The problem I see with this methodology is that it may be detecting which people are able to play the game, and which people don't have enough imagination to do it. Maybe in a similar *real* situation 100% of people would have paranoid thoughts, while in a VR situati
  • They're just pretending to be paranoid as part of a plot to undermine confidence in public transportation.

  • The remaining 60% (Score:4, Funny)

    by gmuslera ( 3436 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:06PM (#22982852) Homepage Journal
    REALLY have the world against them.

  • Patenting new business plan... (Score:5, Funny)

    by JamesTRexx ( 675890 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:08PM (#22982866) Journal
    1- Sell tin foil hats at subway stations
    2- ?????
    3- 40% Profit!

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:14PM (#22982926)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Appearances are meaningless (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MisterSquid ( 231834 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:45PM (#22983122)

      I don't get cautious around most white people. Being a US academic I'm surrounded by them. They are my friends and colleagues. However, in every city I've lived in except Los Angeles, I have had whites yell "nigger" at me as they drive by in cars. In three places spanning a dozen years, drunken young white male students have challenged me to fight (tried to provoke an excuse to beat me); so far, I open my mouth, they see I'm intelligent, and they go away.

      These white men look like any thousands of white men I've seen all my life. Appearances count, in my case, for absolutely nothing.

      I wonder, how may times have you been accosted by a black, gangbanger lookalike or otherwise?

      • Physiological appearances are meaningless but I wouldn't go so far to say appearances are meaningless. If someone wants to dress like they're from the street, they should expect to be treated like that. They want to be identified as part of a culture that has espoused a disrespect for law and using violence to resolve conflict. None of this has to do with race.

        That said don't fall into the trap that you can identify a criminal by appearance. Con-men, pickpockets and the like are successful by blending i

      • Re:Appearances are meaningless (Score:5, Interesting)

        by glittalogik ( 837604 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @06:44PM (#22983526)
        Having just recently been the victim of an attempted bashing (still got bruises), I can understand how events like that put you on edge. Mine was pretty random - I was walking through a park, heard "fucking faggot!" yelled behind me, and turned around just in time to cop a fist to the face. It was mildly ironic, since I was walking with a young lady I'd picked up that night, who yelled and screamed until he went away while I was figuring out how to stand up again, but he obviously knew how to throw a punch, which I sure as hell don't, he didn't care that I was a complete stranger, and I shudder to think how I would have ended up if I'd been on my own.

        I'm curious, if sounding intelligent doesn't get you out of one of these situations, what other options do you have at your disposal? Do you or would you consider carrying a firearm? Have you done any martial arts or self-defence training?

        A counterpoint to your question, though: The first site I could find [canadafreepress.com] that didn't look like a hatespeech outlet still suggests that black-on-white gang violence, US-wide, is approximately 8 times more prevalent than white-on black, in a country with 6 times as many whites as blacks. If you have any other numbers I'd like to see them.

        I'm not excusing anyone's behaviour here, and I admire your restraint in dealing with the fuckwits you've encountered thus far. There are obviously heavy social, cultural, historic, economic and legal factors in the equation, and the above is just one type of crime out of many. I assume there are also rampant reporting discrepancies - yelling "nigger" at someone is a crime pretty much anywhere with hatespeech laws, but I doubt it gets reported or enforced frequently, if ever.

        Your thoughts?

    • Re:Not all fear is paranoia (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:47PM (#22983140)
      "Saying "don't judge a book by its cover" toward people is irrational. Appearances are one of the most effective ways to gauge what sort of person you are dealing with."

      People dressed in thug clothing are making an effort to associate themselves with a culture of violence. Therefore, the way they look tells you something about their mindset and values.
    • "I don't get cautious around most black people, but you better believe I get cautious around ones that look like they've bought into the thug culture."

      There is also no downside to avoidance, That's also why actions like "white flight" from areas into which blacks buy are logical When it is observable that neighborhoods with a certain demographic are of a certain character, one may choose where to live taking this into account.
    • "don't judge a book by its cover". Judging a book by its freaking cover probably saved my skin a few time, because it gave me a few second split start when I started running away.

  • Err... Uncanny Valley effect? (Score:5, Informative)

    by JavaRob ( 28971 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:17PM (#22982944) Homepage Journal
    I RTFA... can we just mod down this entire story?
    It's a *virtual reality* subway ride. The other passengers are AI.

    The carriage contained neutral computer people (avatars) that breathed, looked around, and sometimes met the gaze of the participants. One avatar read a newspaper, another would occasionally smile if looked at. A soundtrack of a train carriage was played.
    Even if none of these participants have *ever* played a video game (which would obviously tend to prime them for something nasty coming up), this sounds creepy just from the description.

    People who will feel perfectly normal taking a subway ride with human beings who occasionally meet your gaze or smile, or even talk to themselves.. will be royally spooked if you replace those human passengers with Uncanny Valley [wikipedia.org] inhabitants: not human enough to fool you, but human enough to seem like an animated corpse.

    The article completely ignores this effect. It could be useful research -- one can find out useful information about people with the ability to put different people in identical situations -- but it's absolute nonsense to say "wow, 40% of people have paranoid thoughts on a simple subway ride". Go figure, but virtual reality and reality are not, in fact, the same.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by JavaRob ( 28971 )
      Whoa -- I just ran across an article on this experiment on the BBC, with video. Check it out and tell me (particularly watching the end of the video when one of the "avatars" looks up suddenly) if this is a normal life-like experience... or if you can understand why a startling number of participants might have reported paranoid thoughts:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7322951.stm [bbc.co.uk]

      I'm surprised it wasn't higher than 40%, actually....
  • ....60% are naive.

    Its healthy to be a bit paranoid when using public transportation as it is probably creates a safer environment.
    Imagine the criminal mentality increasing the crime rate if their was no paranoia and resulting actions in effect.

  • Well, duh. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CSMatt ( 1175471 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:34PM (#22983042)
    The more repressive and invasive a government or other powerful entity gets, the more paranoid people become.

  • Misused term... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PhotoGuy ( 189467 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @05:55PM (#22983206) Homepage
    The term "paranoia" gets thrown around way too much, inappropriately, IMHO... Wiktionary's definition:

    1. A psychotic disorder characterized by delusions of persecution
    2. Extreme, irrational distrust of others

    The study mentions "exaggerated fears" of the threats from others. Sure, it pays to be a bit overly-cautious with strangers on public transportation. That doesn't translate into "extreme, irrational, psychotic, they're-all-out-to-get-me" paranoia... I think "mistrust" is a far more accurate term.

    • "VR study says 40% of us are mistrustful."

      Don't got the same ring.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Torodung ( 31985 )
      Thank you for that post.

      Paranoia literally means that your mental universe is differs significantly from established reality. Para == beyond / noos == mind. Real paranoia is like living in a parallel dimension with bridges to reality so one can relate to others.

      It is not an "exceptional case of nerves," as described in this article. Given all the "terror alerts" western governments have been issuing lately, that's (fnord) just (fnord) to be (fnord) expected.

      --
      Toro
  • Sounds like John Nash's game "Fuck You Buddy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_Long_Sucker [wikipedia.org], which was invented in the 1950's. So they put you in a subway the game is the same...
  • Either people tend to get on with things without really thinking about the consequences (even if they're insignificant) or 40% is far too low a number. I'm pretty sure > 40% of people in the West could be classified as "paranoid" about something.

    Heck, I can't even wear two earphones at the same time because I'm responsible for the security of the family home. That kinda sucks for being able to listen to music at night, but seems pretty sensible really. Humans are built to be paranoid and protective of th

  • Feminization of man. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by haakondahl ( 893488 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @06:10PM (#22983312)
    Or Feminisation, as this was done in the UK. Shame on you for paying attention to instincts which protected your particular history of DNA for millions of years to the present. The government says you must not resist your mugger, your assailant, your attacker. Sit there and take it or be branded mentally divergent.
  • Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you.

  • UK Public Transportation (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PPH ( 736903 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @06:43PM (#22983520)

    Didn't they have a few bombs go off not long ago? Paranoia? I think not.

    Where I live, public transportation is the domain of the lower socio-economic classes (as opposed to places like London, New York, etc. where its use is more widespread). Our fear is of the (sadly common) incidence of transit riders off their meds.

  • This is the UK we are talking about after all...

    UK 'unsafe, dirty and anti-family'
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2980028.stm [bbc.co.uk]

    I don't even live there and I think the same
  • In this life, you can be paranoid, or in denial, or always know exactly what is happening. Exact knowledge is hard to come by even under the best circumstances, let alone on the subway. So 40% paranoia probably means close to 60% denial. Which is exactly what you need to keep it together on the subway, surrounded by the public, strangers you'll never see again.

  • WHY IS THS STUDY WATCHING ME!?!? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Picass0 ( 147474 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @07:52PM (#22983968) Homepage Journal
    I have to go. They're listening
  • ...being normal is not normal. People must be changed and medicated to live up to act like normal human beings.
  • Man, you shove a million people into a little tube, all on the way to get humiliated for 8 hours a day, to get your job outsourced to some bunch of dudes in Manila, and then come home and get bitched at by the old lady when she's not slobbing the neighbor's knob. If you don't come through that being paranoid, then, man, you are retarded. "Ride choo choo train... look at pretty lights..." Keep riding, dude, and enjoy the lights.
  • than "Paranoid" is the wrong adjective. The proper adjective is "normal".
  • only 40% of us are alert to possible threats.

    It seems to me to be a straight forward evolutionary development, right? Animals which are insufficiently alert get eaten, while there is no penalty for being "too" alert.

  • This is from the Uber Nanny State (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gelfling ( 6534 ) on Sunday April 06, 2008 @11:18PM (#22985334) Homepage Journal
    So the definition of Paranoia is clinical, political, helpful, fearful all at the same time. That's more or less the point of England nowadays.

  • april fools... (Score:3, Informative)

    by sluggie ( 85265 ) on Monday April 07, 2008 @05:55AM (#22986872)
    i mean come on, dr. freeman on a subway...

Slashdot Top Deals

To be awake is to be alive. -- Henry David Thoreau, in "Walden"

Close