>>112691437>never taken psychology classesNice assumption. You're wrong.
>no background in psychologyNotwithstanding the above, you're still wrong. A decade with family who won't STFU when they psychologically analyze everything, cite every fundamental principle of psychology ever, and even occasionally recommend reading. It rubs off on you after a while.
>consider your own opinion valid is arrogantNo, is isn't. You have no basis for this. I don't need to have so much as a B.A. in psyche (or anything else for that matter) to look at a paper, or any number of papers, cross reference them to their own and other sources, and point out obvious flaws in them.
If I didn't know better, I'd say YOU'RE the arrogant cunt here, probably with a psyche degree of your own, and with the hubris to back it up.
Well, listen up, buttercup. The only thing your PhD. gives you is knowledge, which makes it easier to know WHAT it is about an experiment you need to be analyze, which in turn leads to more experiments, etc., and it allows the analyses you do to be more in depth.
But to look at a bunch of related works and simply analyze them requires nothing but logic and analysis, both of which I am highly confident I am good at, based on my work in other fields.
>tldr: kys, you elitist fag 
