Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Смелость быть собой 🤍

@ethics_psy

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

660subscribers

-1 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001683619572
TypeChannel
Username@ethics_psy
CreatedBetween 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live14 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 14 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/ethics_psy

Growth

660661660.56 August 2026 — 661 subscribers6 August 2026 — 661 subscribers14 August 2026 — 660 subscribers6 August 202614 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 8 days, net -1. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 660–661 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
14 Aug 2026, 17:38660-1
6 Aug 2026, 17:18661no change
6 Aug 2026, 12:03661first reading

Engagement

17 posts held, back to 2 February 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
14.9%
avg views ÷ 660 subscribers
Avg views / post
98.3
4 posts measured
Reaction rate
9.16%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
4
of 17 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 23 July 2026
Posts held17 (2 February 202623 July 2026)
Views total393
Reactions total36
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken6 Aug 2026, 17:18 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

354 reactions across 17 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 53.7% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
19053.7%
💔3610.2%
custom 5465269034310197894339.32%
🔥329.04%
🤬236.50%
🤯164.52%
😁102.82%
😢92.54%
41.13%
💯10.282%

Custom emoji. One row above is a Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The count beside it isTelegram’s.

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 17 of the 17 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 354reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 17 most recent posts we hold, published 2 February 2026 to 23 July 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 17 we hold a reading for · 6%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @ethics_psy. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 17 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 2 February 2026 to 23 July 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

23 Jul 2026, 11:06 UTC64 views5 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @letsdiscuss_it

Дайджест встречи клуба по аптечке психолога 🚑 Мы обсудили, как помогать себе, учитывая особенности профессии (например, необходимость выдерживать не только неизвестность сегодняшних дней, но и чужие переживания по этому поводу. Или выкрученную эмпатию) Поскольку отдых в нашей профессии перестает быть лишь естественной частью жизни, а становится ещё одной проф. задачей, нам важно напоминать себе, что это не только о

5

22 Jul 2026, 10:24 UTC95 views3 reactionsread 6 August 2026

Мы часто уверены, что умеем заботиться о себе. 😉Но помним ли мы о том, что знание о самопомощи не гарантирует, что мы заметим собственное истощение?) Предлагаю игру в слова 🙂 Напишите первое, что пришло в голову Что для вас является антонимом к слову "работа"? *здесь сделаем паузу, вы поделитесь в комментариях, а потом вернётесь к чтению поста 🥰* А что если в том, что мы считаем противоположностью работы, прячетс

2custom 54652690343101978941

21 Jul 2026, 06:15 UTC108 views12 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Наконец-то нормальные задания 🦝

12

19 Jul 2026, 15:49 UTC126 views16 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Будто пора уже вспомнить о том, что у меня есть соц.сети 😁 Из нового: • Диссер на отлично, мага закончена; • Времени вагон, но я уже заткнула его ремонтами (уже четвёртый, спасите); В первое время я чувствовала себя так, будто попала в другую вселенную: я держу в руках что-то очень-очень ценное, но понятия не имею, как это и куда применить. Вообще знаете, люблю такие моменты, когда приходится сталкиваться с феноме

16

25 Jun 2026, 07:08 UTC260 views21 reactionsread 6 August 2026

Я подступалась к этому посту несколько дней... Мы заплатили слишком высокую цену за то, чтобы другие имели возможность не думать о себе плохо. Привычное нам объяснение виктимблейминга – попытка обвиняющих сохранить веру в справедливый мир. Но вместе с этим обвинение жертв – механизм сохранения собственного тщательно охраняемого морального облика. Не могу не думать, что одним из исторических механизмов утверждения

11💔8😢2

24 Jun 2026, 08:56 UTC240 views16 reactionsread 6 August 2026

Блог и проф. этика сегодня у многих становятся конфликтующими сторонами. И здесь, действительно, много сложностей, когда в пространстве соцсетей масса спорного контента. Собственные радары могут сбиваться, злить и опустошать. Потому что спорное часто будет получать гораздо больше признания, чем аккуратное. Пришлось уточнить у психологов, как они обходятся с этикой в своих блогах? Отвечу сама и покажу ответы колл

84custom 54652690343101978944

8 Jun 2026, 12:47 UTC277 views21 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Распахиваются ли двери моего нового кабинета? - Да. Уютно ли там? - О-о-очень. Там только индивидуально работать? - Ничего подобного! Группы и он, и я вмещаем) А какие? - О, разные. Но чаще краткосрочные или в виде единичных мастер-классов. А для кого? - Группы для подростков и взрослых. А мастер-классы и для деток тоже. А девичники? - Точно! Ещё же девичники. И они тоже, с творческими занятиями, обдумыванием и

14🔥5😁2

27 May 2026, 16:38 UTC265 views15 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @letsdiscuss_it

🗓 Дайджест по первой встрече на тему доказательности Встреча выдалась насыщенной, вдумчивой и очень честной! Рассмотрели аспекты идентичности психолога, проблемы феноменологии «доказательности», вклада капиталистической культуры и маркетинга в распространение «доказательных» подходов, разобрали напряжение между «физиками и лириками» (КПТ и гуманистическими подходами), требованиями к доказуемости того, что сложно или

12🔥3

27 May 2026, 08:57 UTC285 views25 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Не представляю лучшего названия для рассуждений о доказательности 🫳🐈‍⬛🫴 И поскольку я - человек науки, было бы странно, если бы я с этой наукой не воевала) И вот почему: Судьба знания на протяжении истории претерпевала кучу изменений и сформировалась в примерный алгоритм: ➡️ сначала рождается вопрос/сомнение; ➡️ потом включается внимание к деталям и поиску закономерностей; ➡️ потом находятся основания или опроверже

🔥106😁5custom 54652690343101978944

21 May 2026, 10:08 UTC225 views22 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Прокрастинирую написание диссера тем, что делаю ремонт в кабинете. Сама себе дизайнер, прораб и рабочие) Возникают просто неразрешимые вопросы о плинтусах 🫳🐈‍⬛🫴 А диссер сдавать уже на следующей неделе! Пинки приветствуются Help!🦄

15custom 54652690343101978945😁2

13 May 2026, 06:50 UTC317 views24 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Есть новости. Пока все хорошие) ♥️ Диссертация. Пишется. Исследование выполнено качественно, тема - моя любовь) Несмотря на то, что даже респонденты задаются вопросом - нахера было так усложнять себе жизнь этой сложной темой? А я напомню🤌 Пишу исследование об этической компетенции практикующих психологов. ➡Тут и тут классные статьи об этом. Иии... Скоро конец этой истории 🤔 Родные умоляют меня запомнить моменты, в

16🔥8

12 May 2026, 06:23 UTC291 views32 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Обещалась расставить точки над i по ситуации с носом. Но, откровенно говоря, прояснять особо нечего. Судебное разбирательство продолжается и будет трепать мне нервы ещё какое-то время. Лукавить тут не за чем, процесс это категорически неприятный. Что часто окунает в философские размышления о правоохранительной системе. Но мне повезло. Ведь я магистрантка факультета юридической психологии, а посему, есть где размеща

custom 54652690343101978941613🤯3

Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @ethics_psy. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 223,522 of 1,480,688entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Republished by

Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 3 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 14 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Смелость быть собой 🤍” (@ethics_psy), 660 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ethics_psy.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.