Are you a HSP? Highly sensitive person?

[HSP2022]

Apparently 20% of people are classified as a highly sensitive person.

I'm certain I fit the criteria but do any of you?

Is there a way to get absolute clarification?

Do you just accept that's how you are or have you been able to change aspects so you are not as highly sensitive to certain things?

18 participants in 2013?

Anything more legit?

This really doesn’t prove anything like what this thread has discussed - it shows that 18 people generally had feelings of happiness when they saw pictures of their own partners smiling and less happy when they saw their own partner frowning, based on a study that showed mothers are happy when they see their smiling child and less happy if they see their child crying. Nowhere in that study did it provide proof or even consider that some HSP can pick up on other people’s feelings or appreciate art more deeply.

Also, these people were recruited by flyer and asked to ‘self-report.’ Exactly the type of people who would look at it, go ‘I’m a HSP’ and skew the results by imagining they’re the only person to have ever had an emotion.

Also, these people were recruited by flyer and asked to ‘self-report.’ Exactly the type of people who would look at it, go ‘I’m a HSP’ and skew the results by imagining they’re the only person to have ever had an emotion.

What a ridiculous, ignorant thing to say based on pure conjecture and prejudice.

It's the theory of a clinical psychologist, so just wondered where other psychologists are at with it. Is it unproven or disproved. And if unproven, is it ethical to publish without the disclaimer that it is just a theory.

How much weight you place on her profession is going to depend on the amount of weight you place not only on psychology as a science, but on Jungian psychology as a science. If indeed you even consider it a science at all in either incarnation. On a cynical note, it’s not unusual for American doctors to make a name for themselves, not to mention plenty of money for themselves, by claiming to have identified some ‘new’ thing.

From Googling, it appears that Elaine Aron is the one peddling this trait as a condition in its own right which may or may not be related to her book sales, while others are pointing to a lack of research necessary to deem it one, distinct from it being a feature of an actual condition such as depression, autism, ADHD etc.

‘Rachel Annunziato, an associate professor of psychology at Fordham University, stresses that HSP is not a clinically-diagnosable condition:

“In general, it seems like such theories capture our attention when they seem to explain our personalities. It's a bit like when I read descriptions of a Gemini and think 'Wow, yes, that's right on!'”’

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/emotional-sensitivity-condition-is-it-real-highly-sensitive-a7719346.html?amp

so not mainstream psychology.

Many thanks@whumpthereitis That was bugging me.

@CallMeDaphne

🤣🤣🤣🤣😆

I’ve read about HSP and found it interesting.

Years ago I had therapy after a car accident when I developed a driving phobia. I remember at the time being told by the therapist that I was just someone who had a lot of trouble dealing with too many external stimuli at once. I didn’t have a ‘filter’ This seems to tie in with being highly reactive as another poster suggested.

I know I always though of my self as a Highly Fussy Person. If I go to a restaurant I get bothered by the fact that the tables are too close together, the seats are hard, the lights too bright, too much noise to concentrate, the noise from the kitchen etc etc etc. I cannot relax and just enjoy the meal and the company, I feel on edge and antsy. I try really hard not to show it, but it means I’m nearly always faking it.

I didn’t used to be like this and thought it was just getting older. Then I realised that it’s only became a problem when I stopped drinking alcohol! So I conclude that alcohol deadens the sensory inputs that I find disturbing.

Im sure there are many people who would say that most people are like that,
but I know my Ex wasn’t. As someone else pointed out we are nearly all on a continuum.

The current theory known as the Big 5 Personality is very popular at the moment. It measures people on 5 traits - openness to experience/conscientiousness/extroversion/agreeableness/neuroticism and where you sit on the line.

Maybe others have knowledge/views on wether this is also pseudoscience?

Out of interest did you have a narc parent or a volatile parent? seen some suggestions lately that 'empaths' 'HSP's are just people who have learned to read nonverbal cues, tone of voice, and body language in general because they had to as children in order not to 'set off' the volatile parent or partner. So its not innate as much as learned as a survival mechanism.

Not really a ridiculous thing to say, more a valid critique of a limitation of a study and its measures and choice of sample. There are well documented disadvantages of self report measures within psychological research.

Not really a ridiculous thing to say, more a valid critique of a limitation of a study and its measures and choice of sample. There are well documented disadvantages of self report measures within psychological research.

Except the PP didn't express her thoughts on the matter objectively, but instead decided to take an unpleasant personal stab at those who feel the HSP hypothesis holds some relevance for them.

Pure conjecture and prejudice isn’t doubting that a study of self recruited participants who smile when they see a smiling photo proves that HSP ‘appreciate art more deeply’ than others. It’s just common sense.

I wasn’t having a stab at people who believe they are a HSP (although I do think it’s silly) I was having a stab at the poster who linked that thread as some proof that ‘science’ has proven that there are HSP who can appreciate art more deeply and are the only ones who find abhorrent violence disturbing and can immediately identify other people’s emotions. That study isn’t science proving any of those things. Either that poster hadn’t read the link or misunderstood it, or presumed nobody would follow the link and she could just go ‘ha science! See, I DO understand art more than you.’

those who feel the HSP hypothesis holds some relevance for them.

Thise people who’ve never heard the term “confirmation bias” (nor understood it if they have heard it).

some proof that ‘science’ has proven that there are HSP who can appreciate art more deeply and are the only ones who find abhorrent violence disturbing and can immediately identify other people’s emotions. That study isn’t science proving any of those things.

I find violence abhorrent to the point that I CANNOT participate in any kind of “boxercise” or Body Combat classes at the gym - any kind of exercise based on hitting people.

Not because I’m a “Highly Sensitive Person” (although I’ll beat most people at my understanding of and deep emotional response to many forms of art - even tne OP ).

But because I was violently mugged in the street about 30 years ago and beaten up particularly I was repeatedly punched around my face and head.

As a couple of PPs have observed, our responses are usually to do with past experiences, not some innate superiority of feeling or empathy. My very high sensitivity to violence is because I was subjected to random violence by a stranger.

Everything else that defines a so-called “Highly Sensitive Person” according to @HSP2022 is actually being a reasonable and feeling human being, rather than a sociopath.

Although it’s hard ago overlook the narcissism involved in thinking that abhorrence of violence and understanding of art makes anyone superior.

Of course, that’s understandable. Past traumas will obviously make you uncomfortable with any type of ‘combat.’ Much like a pp who had a car accident and was then frightened to drive - that’s not really being an HSP - it’s just being frightened of doing something after having a bad experience doing that thing.

Part of the issue I think (for me) is the pathologising of normal human emotions and experiences. It is normal (although unpleasant) to be frightened after a bad experience. It is normal to find abhorrent violence upsetting (which is why we call it abhorrent). It is normal to be affected by the arts - the very definition of art is that it is produced to show ‘emotional power.’ All of these things are normal and healthy, but whipping them up into a ‘condition’ makes people think they are different, and I think it encourages this very self centered view of the world where you are the only one who feels deeply, special and apart from others, and that’s unhealthy.

This, with bells on.

I wasn’t having a stab at people who believe they are a HSP (although I do think it’s silly) I was having a stab at the poster who linked that thread as some proof that ‘science’ has proven that there are HSP who can appreciate art more deeply and are the only ones who find abhorrent violence disturbing and can immediately identify other people’s emotions. That study isn’t science proving any of those things. Either that poster hadn’t read the link or misunderstood it, or presumed nobody would follow the link and she could just go ‘ha science! See, I DO understand art more than you.’

Understand your reasoning, but that wasn't clear in your earlier post, and because you spoke about 'the kind of people' (not person) it did sound like a sneer aimed at people in general who relate to the HSP trait, not just one specific person.

No, that was in reference to the validity of the ‘science’ that poster was talking about. But unfortunately a very small test group being asked to self report then looking at photos of smiling faces and saying a smiley picture of their partner makes them happy just doesn’t prove what that poster was suggesting it did.

Although as it goes I do think the type of person who genuinely thinks they must have a special label because they are affected by violence and art is a very self absorbed type. They lack the ability to understand that they aren’t the main character of life - we’re all affected by violence and art. It’s unusual if an adult isn’t affected by these things.

How does one quantify how deeply someone appreciates art?

So basically you stand in the Sistine chosen quietly and the one wailing is the one who appreciates it the most. Or alternatively the one who bangs on about how much they appreciate it appreciates it more deeply than all of us who quietly contemplate and appreciate it in our own way.

Sistine chapel duh! But basically that’s the thing. You don’t know how deeply affected others are by art and violence. They might just not go on about it.

Have these people never seen any sort of scene in which someone sheds a single silent tear, or even just twitches their face a little, and you can see from that alone how deeply they are feeling in that moment?

Part of the issue I think (for me) is the pathologising of normal human emotions and experiences. It is normal (although unpleasant) to be frightened after a bad experience. It is normal to find abhorrent violence upsetting (which is why we call it abhorrent). It is normal to be affected by the arts - the very definition of art is that it is produced to show ‘emotional power.’ All of these things are normal and healthy, but whipping them up into a ‘condition’ makes people think they are different, and I think it encourages this very self centered view of the world where you are the only one who feels deeply, special and apart from others, and that’s unhealthy.

Totally agree with you here @Kanaloa In fact, I’d go so far as to say that the apparent “sensitivity” @HSP2022 describes is normal, and not to have such responses is sociopathic.

Well yeah - someone who admitted they were totally unaffected by abhorrent violence would presumably be abnormal.