485Kviews
Psychology Professor Is Going Viral For Debunking TikTokers Sharing ‘Facts’ That Are Completely Made Up
InterviewYour mental health should be your priority, but you shouldn’t rely just on social media to get all your facts. Just like any other website, TikTok has its fair share of awesome and educational content that’s mixed together with utter garbage and even fake news. Ex-Soviet refugee and psychology expert Dr. Inna Kanevsky is calling out the latter in her own TikTok videos.
The psychology professor, who works at San Diego Mesa College, debunks psychology fake news over on TikTok in a blunt yet witty manner. Her videos have earned her a following of nearly a million people on the video-sharing platform. They’ve also gained popularity elsewhere as well, including on Reddit where a post about her amassed a whopping 130k upvotes in just 2 days.
Check out some of the best excerpts from Dr. Inna’s debunking videos where she roasts other psychology ‘experts’ below, upvote the ones that you thought were the peak of wit, and let us know what you think of the professor’s videos in the comments.
Bored Panda reached out to Dr. Inna and had a friendly chat with her about her viral TikTok videos and her journey into the world of psychology. "Anytime you see 'Psychology says,' 'Psychologists say,' 'Studies show,' and the like, without referencing specific studies or psychologists, it’s most likely to be a false, unsupported claim," she explained to me via email.
"But it is a generally good habit to look up any statement about psychology, and not just psychology, to see what the source of that claim actually is. If it’s a blog, a Reddit thread, a press article that doesn’t cite or link sources, a 'medical' website that’s also not backed by research, or similar, it is unlikely to be valid." Scroll down for the full interview!
This post may include affiliate links.
Professor: Let's not teach people to be stalkers, please. Thank you. There is no way this a "psychology fact". Think about it. How would we test this?
Professor: No. This is isn't a "psychology fact". This is just some sexist stereotyping.
When a girl (woman) acts like your mother, it's because you're acting like a child. Women, shockingly, don't usually want to date children or men who act like them.
Nope. My ex broke a door and ended up arrested because I wouldn't set his clothes out for him while he has a shower (I was busy with a 4 week old baby)
Load More Replies...Sounds like a self-justifying excuse for men to act like idiots and get taken care of.
It's also a really unhealthy thing to teach to children about how adult relationships are supposed to work. I was well into my 30s before I realized it wasn't healthy or normal to be with someone who needed to be taken care of like a child.
No, this isn't a psychology fact, but Sigmund Freud would cum his pants if he saw this
Oooh--barf. Let me tell you, I do not want to be your mother, and the day I am treated like his mother, it's over.
Hey look, I can have my man-tantrums like the best of them, but they last for a minimal amount of time and then you get on with being an adult again.
When a guy truly loves you, he acts like an adult or you tell him to do one, surely?
When a girl acts like a mother, it s because she gsve birth or adopted.
This is such BS. Kids are taught to show love differently based on a dozen factors.
Dr. Inna told Bored Panda that she originally began making videos last June, aimed at her summer PSYC 101 online students. "By winter, I noticed other qualified psychology accounts, such as @tallpsychology, work to address misinformation, and more of it showed on my FYP. I thought I should help… and as soon as I started doing that, people started tagging me in more and more fake fact videos," she explained the inspiration behind her TikToks.
The professor also went into detail with Bored Panda about her journey towards becoming an educator. "I grew up in Soviet Ukraine. I wanted to be a teacher since 1st grade, but kept changing my mind about the subject based on my then-favorite teachers. In high school, though, I ended up in a 'pedagogical class' for aspiring future teachers—and we had a psychology class. That’s when I decided I would rather be a psychologist, but Soviet universities had unofficial but real quotas for Jewish applicants, and so it wasn’t possible," she said.
Professor: How about three signs that you shouldn't be talking about psychology on TikTok.
1: You are exploiting other people's mental health for your own clout.
2: You do not provide any evidence for any of your claims.
3: You actively block people who ask you to provide evidence for your claims.
How about: please, stop. Thank you.
no way! this lady (in pink) was on a bored panda article about unlikeable things.
Professor: Wearing black does not give you depression. There is absolutely no evidence that it does. Don't say "according to latest science" unless there is actually some "latest science". And the science just doesn't support this claim. Not "soft" science, not "hard" science. No science at all
Because of these restrictions, Dr. Inna's life took a slightly different turn than she wanted. However, through a lot of effort, she ended up teaching psychology in the end. "I graduated from a local Pedagogical Institute with a degree in mathematics and informatics (computers, today) instruction, and taught math for a year and half. But then we immigrated, as refugees, and so I took advantage of the possibilities in the US to pursue psychology. I accidentally ended up in an MS program that wasn’t going to make me a school psychologist like I wanted, because I didn’t understand the system. However, that’s when my advisor there persuaded me to go for a doctorate, and it was during that part of my education that I rediscovered my passion for teaching," she told Bored Panda.
"I love teaching at my community college, where I have awesome departmental colleagues who value research and academic depth but truly prioritize our students. Sometimes, I wish I could teach a larger variety of classes, but I make up for it by incorporating what interests me in what I do teach. Psychology is a new science, not even 150 years old, officially—watching it grow and getting my students (and my TikTok audience) interested in it is very exciting for me."
Professor: Hips? Hips? Is this supposed to be short for "hippocampus"? Because it can't be short for "amygdala," right?
Ooooooh, so is this why twerking is suddenly the thing - people trying so hard to shake off the trauma in their life! Mind-blowing!
TikToker: Why women's body count actually matters to guys with the psycological studies proving that it does matter anyway
Professor: Next time you decide to justify your misogyny, please leave psychological studies out of this. There are no psychological studies that prove this BS.
Dr. Inna added that she's currently banned from posting on TikTok because of a misunderstanding on their part. She was banned for multiple 'violations' because she answered a question about tattoos in academia and had photos of her colleagues' arms and legs in one of her videos.
"My removed comments had academic source links—that is NOT against published guidelines at all. My muted videos were addressing blatant misinformation about my academic subject, respectfully and with sources. Please have an actual human who understands the nature of my work look at this," she wrote to TikTok.
Professor: I got so excited when I saw this, because I thought the follow up was going to be "I have since learned that serotonin that's produced in the gut is used right there in the gut to regulate intestinal movement". Because it does not cross the blood-brain-barrier and it serves multiple functions in our body. But I guess not...
Well seems her gut is working overtime, because her brain is definitely out of office
TikToker: Psychology says that when someone is laughing and they look at you, they're attracted to you.
Professor: Psychology says no such thing. And don't even get me started on the one where "If you dream of someone, that means they're in love with you". How is that supposed to work?
Meanwhile, Dr. Inna’s videos reminded me of a chat about double-checking sources that I had earlier with Lee McIntyre from Boston University.
He told me that we should focus on finding accurate and reliable sources of information, instead of double-checking every teeny-tiny tidbit of info we come across. We wouldn’t be able to keep up this sort of in-depth fact-checking because we’d end up exhausted very quickly. So it’s far easier to find who we can trust.
Professor: Did you know what the Barnum effect is? A lot of these supposed personality tests you see online, as well as a bunch of other things that "tell you your personality," or pretend to work because of the Barnum effect.
Barnum Effect, also called Forer Effect, in psychology, the phenomenon that occurs when individuals believe that personality descriptions apply specifically to them (more so than to other people), despite the fact that the description is actually filled with information that applies to everyone.
TikToker: Psychology says that if you're over 16, you've probably already met your soulmate.
Professor: Psychology says no such things. Psychology doesn't talk. But psychologists don't say them either.
It would more be about statistics than psychology... But it would still be wrong anyway. When you are 16, you know nobody, you have never been in a relationship, and all the few people whom you know will soon be forgotten.
“It would be exhausting to fact check every single news item we hear. In fact, insisting on this degree of skepticism is something that demagogues use to get us to be cynical, because when we doubt that it is possible to know the truth—even when it is staring us in the face—we are riper to their manipulation. So I’d say the best thing with news is to do a little investigation into finding a reliable source,” he said.
“Look for an organization that does investigative journalism (and doesn't just repeat information from other sources), double sources its quotations, discloses conflicts of interest, etc. Once we've found that we can relax a bit and trust the reporting behind the stories. Do we still need to be on guard? Yes. Even The New York Times can make mistakes. Or individual reporters can have biases. But that doesn't mean 'all sources are equal.'"
Professor: Max, we talked about this, didn't we? You shouldn't say "according to science" when it isn't. And you shouldn't say "studies show" when there are no studies.
TikToker: If you saw the flowers first, that means you're meticulous, modest, and shy.
Professor: No. It does not mean anything at all like that. This is just a figure-ground illusion. There are many around like that. None of them are personality tests. Perceptual phenomena ARE NOT personality test
TikToker: Quick way to identify someone more narcissistic or psychopathic is to look ...
Professor: One quick way to know which psychology 'professionals' on TikTok to stay away from is when they teach you a very quick way to identify whether someone is narcissistic or psychopathic. Do you really need views this badly, doctor? This is really not something you should be teaching people.
TikToker: You can change the way you look and heal yourself from disease with your thoughts and it's been scientifically proven.
Professor: No. It is not "scientifically proven," for two reasons. One is that science does not "prove" things. In science, we support theories with evidence that we obtain from testing our hypotheses and we do not actually "prove" things because the next study may show that your theory was, in fact, incorrect, and needs changing. So, no, scientists do not say "scientifically proven". And epigenetics does not work the way you think. What you're describing is magic, not epigenetics. Epigenetics[processes] can change your genes depending on the environment but it's not going to have effects that you claim and it has not been shown, in any studies to have the kind of effect that you claim. And placebo effect? it's not quite relevant to what you're describing. You really don't understand science, huh?
This. Oh, this. "the way you heal yourself from your disease with your thoughts".... AKA "magic cure". That's right! Just cheer up and kill cancer! Who knew? Oh wait...
Professor: This is your regularly scheduled reminder that PERCEPTUAL PHENOMENA are not PERSONALITY TESTS. These are figure-ground illusions, they are not personality tests. They just say things about perception.
My eyes were wandering around the picture because I couldn't decide where to look, and then I read the caption. What does that prove? Oh, nothing.
Lots of "facts" and "scientifically proven" knowledge out there coming from... urban myths with no actual sources. Lots of our common knowledge is an illusion. That's why it's important to have an open mind and be constantly observing.
And become scientifically literate. Social media is mainly for entertaining, and only to a small degree for information. It undoubtedly is never for information on subjects with a stronger impact on life, such as health, mental wellbeing, jurisdiction, and emergencies. "Do you own research" should not be a slogan used by idiots who dispute scientific knowledge but be the claim of those who do not believe claims on social media without checking the sources. General cue: no sources means highly questionable, regardless of how well the intention of the poster were.
Load More Replies...I’d bet a years wages that none of these people are trained in psychology.
And even if they were, psychology is a field full of controversy and with ongoing research. Even if they quoted from scientific research, it would be questionable if their sources were older than a few years. And on top of this, psychology is highly context-dependent. Any "absolut truth" in the form of "If you do A then you have character trait B" are fishy.
Load More Replies...Could we please have more content of tiktok idiots being dunked on by actual professionals with functioning brains? Reading this was so cathartic.
They are doing a lot of damage just for the sake of going viral. Despicable idiots.
Or you could consult an actual trained and licensed medical professional, and hear that we're not sure why our brains/bodies do all they do yet, but that doesn't mean you can giggle your way out of having a chronic/lethal disease, okay? OK. And stop trying to sell magic fruit juice to "make you healthy". Eat fruit, drink water, much cheaper, same result, end. ...
If “studies show” anything, it’s that way too many people have a poor understanding of science means and how it works.
I just love the contrast between those filtered, overgroomed, posing peeps and her normal, down to earth face :-D
Even on legitimate news sites and TV programs, you'll see stories proclaiming something some new study has shown. Like (fictional example): "Pickle juice prevents colon cancer!" But if you actually read the original source, you'll often see that the study doesn't really say that. It will say something like (again, fictional): There were 40 middle aged German white men in the study, and of the 20 who drank pickle juice, 8 showed a 15% reduced level of some enzyme that tends to be higher in people with colon cancer. And then quite often, researchers at a different university try to replicate the experiment, and they don't come up with the same results. That's why you should always keep a healthy cynicism when you read about any new "superfoods" or fad diets.
So when will YouTube, Facebook, TikTok, etc.... ban these people for misinformation? what? That's only for people questioning government overreach and mandates? ah.. good to know
The very summation of why we shouldn't SIMPLY "follow the science" to determine public policy: science is usually silent. We should act reasonably, and science is one important method of considering a question reasonably.
To wit: a lot of public policy in the era of Covid-19 was based on assertions on researchers despite those assertions lacking proof. Science rarely offers proof; especially in regards to newly discovered phenomenon. That lack of proof does not mean the research should be disregarded. It also does not mean that any notions challenging that research should be censored or cited as a basis for punishment or inhumane treatment. Science is a process, not a prescription, and attempts to suppress inquiry to bolster confidence in prescriptions are antithetical to science.
Load More Replies...Too toc is so not a place people go to for Psychology advice. Aren't all GenZs suppose to be eating frozen honey and doing goofy dances that the rest of the world doesn't care about.
Ha ha, Mona, frozen honey! Presumably comes from chilly bees. Hang on, don't bees do a kind of dance to direct the other bees to the flowers with the sweetest nectar? I saw that somewhere....
Load More Replies...These TikTokers are no different than those little Facebook games you play that tell you what your personality is based on some meaningless choices/answers you give.
This is actually very concerning... 1. As a therapist, it is horrific to see people's opinion on depression, anxiety and personality issues so lightly (getting these "facts" from god knows where...) and believe that all these are real. It will be like someone who got sick, looked up all kinds of nonsense, went to the doctor's office and argue with the doctor about their issues. I personally had encountered patients whom I had to spend sessions correcting these misconceptions before working on the real issues. 2. These kids are YOUNG! Is that how young people nowadays get validation, affirmation and self-esteem boost by making videos, in reality, that made them look even more foolish, uneducated, and untrustworthy??? Bottom line is, for instant, a research while studying psychology in school, takes any where between two to six years to finish depending on the level of study. Two to six minutes on a video hardly makes anyone look legit to talk about psychology.
I'm glad someone with actual credentials is calling BS on some of these C.R.I human beings. I'm not on the professors level so I'll just say, "Thanks" for telling them to stop talking out of their asses.
She spreads bs too. When someone disagrees with her on something just calls them misoginists and mansplainers, so scientific of her. She blocked me for pointing out her use of logical fallacies when confronted. And she is a positivist. She goes against what psychology is in it's origin and essence, a branch of phylosophy. She treats everything that isn't scientific in psychology as pseudoscience. But, even though there is a lot of pseudoscience in psychology phylosophy and pseudocience is not the same thing. She doesn't even understand her own area of expertice. It's quite sad actually. And she also said Jordan Peterson, a far more acomplished clinical psychologist than her a misoginist because she disagrees with actual scientific data that showd differences in personality between men and women in average. She is an ideolog more than anything. She also has a very clear positioning in the Russia-Ukrain war that is very ignorant and biased and she keeps pushing that narrative non-stop.
Load More Replies...TikTok is one big cringe network, probably worse than Vine or YouTube circa 2005 (Reddit as well, gotta put them in here too). 🙄 I refuse to take advice from randos in bite sized clips who spout their supposed knowledge, or even give them any of my time. At least here I can just read the transcript and leave it at that.
People shouldn't be taking advice on TikTok. Mostly idiots. Does amuse the Chinese govt which steals all the people's info, though.
Ah yes, tiktok, a media platform for all dumb people to really express how dumb they actually are. If only a login came with automatic spay or neuter for the users.
Even if these people cite research, you still need to have a look at the conclusions, methodology, and such.
Inteesting that Tick Tok "experts" allways seem to be somewhere between 15 and 21. That means basically between zero and very little life experience, and absolutley not enough time to get a degree and some experience in a particular field.
While Dr. Inna’s responses were correct, she presented them in such a boring manner this was only mildly interesting. C’mon, Professor, have a little fun zinging these knuckleheads - it’ll be informative AND fun to read!
Lots of "facts" and "scientifically proven" knowledge out there coming from... urban myths with no actual sources. Lots of our common knowledge is an illusion. That's why it's important to have an open mind and be constantly observing.
And become scientifically literate. Social media is mainly for entertaining, and only to a small degree for information. It undoubtedly is never for information on subjects with a stronger impact on life, such as health, mental wellbeing, jurisdiction, and emergencies. "Do you own research" should not be a slogan used by idiots who dispute scientific knowledge but be the claim of those who do not believe claims on social media without checking the sources. General cue: no sources means highly questionable, regardless of how well the intention of the poster were.
Load More Replies...I’d bet a years wages that none of these people are trained in psychology.
And even if they were, psychology is a field full of controversy and with ongoing research. Even if they quoted from scientific research, it would be questionable if their sources were older than a few years. And on top of this, psychology is highly context-dependent. Any "absolut truth" in the form of "If you do A then you have character trait B" are fishy.
Load More Replies...Could we please have more content of tiktok idiots being dunked on by actual professionals with functioning brains? Reading this was so cathartic.
They are doing a lot of damage just for the sake of going viral. Despicable idiots.
Or you could consult an actual trained and licensed medical professional, and hear that we're not sure why our brains/bodies do all they do yet, but that doesn't mean you can giggle your way out of having a chronic/lethal disease, okay? OK. And stop trying to sell magic fruit juice to "make you healthy". Eat fruit, drink water, much cheaper, same result, end. ...
If “studies show” anything, it’s that way too many people have a poor understanding of science means and how it works.
I just love the contrast between those filtered, overgroomed, posing peeps and her normal, down to earth face :-D
Even on legitimate news sites and TV programs, you'll see stories proclaiming something some new study has shown. Like (fictional example): "Pickle juice prevents colon cancer!" But if you actually read the original source, you'll often see that the study doesn't really say that. It will say something like (again, fictional): There were 40 middle aged German white men in the study, and of the 20 who drank pickle juice, 8 showed a 15% reduced level of some enzyme that tends to be higher in people with colon cancer. And then quite often, researchers at a different university try to replicate the experiment, and they don't come up with the same results. That's why you should always keep a healthy cynicism when you read about any new "superfoods" or fad diets.
So when will YouTube, Facebook, TikTok, etc.... ban these people for misinformation? what? That's only for people questioning government overreach and mandates? ah.. good to know
The very summation of why we shouldn't SIMPLY "follow the science" to determine public policy: science is usually silent. We should act reasonably, and science is one important method of considering a question reasonably.
To wit: a lot of public policy in the era of Covid-19 was based on assertions on researchers despite those assertions lacking proof. Science rarely offers proof; especially in regards to newly discovered phenomenon. That lack of proof does not mean the research should be disregarded. It also does not mean that any notions challenging that research should be censored or cited as a basis for punishment or inhumane treatment. Science is a process, not a prescription, and attempts to suppress inquiry to bolster confidence in prescriptions are antithetical to science.
Load More Replies...Too toc is so not a place people go to for Psychology advice. Aren't all GenZs suppose to be eating frozen honey and doing goofy dances that the rest of the world doesn't care about.
Ha ha, Mona, frozen honey! Presumably comes from chilly bees. Hang on, don't bees do a kind of dance to direct the other bees to the flowers with the sweetest nectar? I saw that somewhere....
Load More Replies...These TikTokers are no different than those little Facebook games you play that tell you what your personality is based on some meaningless choices/answers you give.
This is actually very concerning... 1. As a therapist, it is horrific to see people's opinion on depression, anxiety and personality issues so lightly (getting these "facts" from god knows where...) and believe that all these are real. It will be like someone who got sick, looked up all kinds of nonsense, went to the doctor's office and argue with the doctor about their issues. I personally had encountered patients whom I had to spend sessions correcting these misconceptions before working on the real issues. 2. These kids are YOUNG! Is that how young people nowadays get validation, affirmation and self-esteem boost by making videos, in reality, that made them look even more foolish, uneducated, and untrustworthy??? Bottom line is, for instant, a research while studying psychology in school, takes any where between two to six years to finish depending on the level of study. Two to six minutes on a video hardly makes anyone look legit to talk about psychology.
I'm glad someone with actual credentials is calling BS on some of these C.R.I human beings. I'm not on the professors level so I'll just say, "Thanks" for telling them to stop talking out of their asses.
She spreads bs too. When someone disagrees with her on something just calls them misoginists and mansplainers, so scientific of her. She blocked me for pointing out her use of logical fallacies when confronted. And she is a positivist. She goes against what psychology is in it's origin and essence, a branch of phylosophy. She treats everything that isn't scientific in psychology as pseudoscience. But, even though there is a lot of pseudoscience in psychology phylosophy and pseudocience is not the same thing. She doesn't even understand her own area of expertice. It's quite sad actually. And she also said Jordan Peterson, a far more acomplished clinical psychologist than her a misoginist because she disagrees with actual scientific data that showd differences in personality between men and women in average. She is an ideolog more than anything. She also has a very clear positioning in the Russia-Ukrain war that is very ignorant and biased and she keeps pushing that narrative non-stop.
Load More Replies...TikTok is one big cringe network, probably worse than Vine or YouTube circa 2005 (Reddit as well, gotta put them in here too). 🙄 I refuse to take advice from randos in bite sized clips who spout their supposed knowledge, or even give them any of my time. At least here I can just read the transcript and leave it at that.
People shouldn't be taking advice on TikTok. Mostly idiots. Does amuse the Chinese govt which steals all the people's info, though.
Ah yes, tiktok, a media platform for all dumb people to really express how dumb they actually are. If only a login came with automatic spay or neuter for the users.
Even if these people cite research, you still need to have a look at the conclusions, methodology, and such.
Inteesting that Tick Tok "experts" allways seem to be somewhere between 15 and 21. That means basically between zero and very little life experience, and absolutley not enough time to get a degree and some experience in a particular field.
While Dr. Inna’s responses were correct, she presented them in such a boring manner this was only mildly interesting. C’mon, Professor, have a little fun zinging these knuckleheads - it’ll be informative AND fun to read!