Comment Re:Amazing (Score 1) 473
Comment Re:Does anyone understand the "zombies" craze? (Score 1) 220
Comment Re:Hardly enough enough bodies . . . (Score 1) 176
Comment Re:Nothing to see here (Score 1) 437
Comment Re:What Is To Be Gained? (Score 1) 101
Comment Re:Not just space, but research in general... (Score 1) 315
Comment Re:Privacy? (Score 1) 188
Comment Re:Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (Score 1) 110
Comment Re:Statistics (Score 1) 67
Comment Re:Whew! Thank goodness! (Score 1) 422
Comment Re:Amounts (Score 1) 294
Comment Re:Amounts (Score 1) 294
And if you are so hell bent on caffeine, why not check other substances like vinegar or soya sauce for that matter ?
Comment Re:You mean... (Score 1) 248
I am from Citrix
Comment Re:spoonful of sugar (Score 1) 263
Depends on the person.
This holds true for every theory. But I guess the basic idea is that people judge themselves by the reaction from their surroundings, in this case- the society.
Lack of negative feedback is in no way the only factor in overconfidence. Too much of a positive feedback will also give overconfidence. But this theory is from a different perspective. Its just trying to point out that we are reluctant to give negative feedback and people might take it in a different way. I have to say that I do not totally agree with this view because I feel, unless you get positive feedback or what you can call "appreciation", we don't feel motivated to do better. How can a neutral situation make anybody overconfident ?
Anyways, people will continue to make radical attempts to understand society. This is a weak one.