Mind Field

What I really like in Mind Field is the way how they approach the psychology and how they explain in details to us as well as the subjects in their episodes using a simple language and as subjects.

Mind Field replicates some concepts and show how our brain works and trick us many times and if you have courage to try one of these you'll probably enjoy.

I strongly agree that Mind Field should continue with more of these experiments.

There is a rich content inside this serie and as always with sense of humor.

This show is beyond marvelous! I have rewatched it several times and I can't believe it isn't even more regognized than it already is.

I would love to see this more used in the classroom or elsewhere. I think Micheal Stevens is one of the best YouTubers I have ever watched. As it becomes even more common for content creators to upload less frequently and better quality it is really nice to see that Micheal Stevens uploads videos that contain subjects that fascinate and interesting him. For years and years on end I have watched Mindfield and learned alot about human behaviour and the mind in general. This show is just a masterpiece!

I've only seen two episodes so far but I'm already hooked beyond my mind with this show! Michael, the host, whose Youtube series I loved strongly throughout the years, really makes 20+ minutes fly away as you learn stuff that quite literally shape our daily lives.

Filmed to a high standard, produced with heavy effort reflecting in show's quality, we are led into the depths of new cognition, by Michael (now finally recognized for being a super-talented brainiac he is) leading the show in a chilled, information-packed and comical manner, never failing to captivate your imagination with new facts while cracking you up in the process.

Many thanks from a massive fan and I hope you reach the heights you deserve, Michael. Keep our minds in your field.

As always.. keep watching..(background music in your head)

It's hard to know where to begin. Many of the conclusions drawn in this documentary are insufficiently well thought out. Further, some of the experiments lack rigour ... for no good reason. Let's address concern #1. Seeing pictures of puppies makes people click bubble-wrap because they have alternative thoughts. What happens if you give people those blowable windmills or sand-timers? The conclusion from everyone I spoke to was that these people wanted to pat the puppy and the stimulation from their fingers was directed toward the bubble wrap (as one volunteer said herself). So, why focus the conclusion elsewhere? Then the science. 30% more bubbles were popped when people saw puppies. Was that on average? What were the actual figures? Or the people who were given choice of tea and had to decode words. Was this linked to their spelling ability? How big was the group size? The problem is that it's hard to tell (these and quite a few other cases) if it's like the Stanford Prison Experiment (aiming for a conclusion), poor communication or ignorance. It's really hard to tell. I've studied behavioural psychology a lot over the years. I knew many of these topics already. This is not the starting point you want to start with. The science is sufficiently sketchy that it's hard to pick what's credible and what's not. I'd give the hit rate about 6/10 ... so that's what I'm scoring this series.