HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 12:49:36 -0800
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Tor Neilands <tbn@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: What's the Beef? ( Common Sense etc.)

Phillip Richins writes:

>I suppose that his touch on a sinking feeling I have had as I have
>read the postings about our role as psycholgists viz. educating the
>"public" about our profession.  We as psychologists spend great amounts
>of time and energy in expounding our special view of the profession.
>I see Psychoanalysis flamed, I see Jungian analysis flamed,  I see
>"alternative methodlogies" flamed.  I see empirical methods flamed.  I
>do not see much cross pollenation.  There are some out there on the list
>whom I have applauded before, that I admire for their ability to see across
>the issues.  The profession of PSYCHOLOGIST will never be sold to the
>outside world, until we learn to embrace all facets of our study/science/art/
>craft/discipline.  We are the enemy.
>
>Philip
>RICHINSP@CWU.BITNET

Phillip: What I read you saying is that you would like more acceptance of
alternative viewpoints of ways of thinking and doing psychology. I think's
that's great, but how far should we take it? For the record, I don't see so
much "flaming" going on here as I do healthy disagreements among
professionals who all care about their profession. But, do we necessarily
*want* total agreement among all psychologists about what is the best way
of doing psychology? Is this in fact desirable? Does a high level of
agreement facilitate progressive change and accountability? There is a risk
that in trying to be all things to all people, we would lose our sense of
selves and our ability to critical advance our field. I for one feel like
I've learned a lot about psychology from these discussions, and, just as
imporant as far as I'm concerned, what and how my colleagues think and feel
about psychology and what it is and what it should be.

This is not to say that we should not have interdisciplinary and
cross-discipline work going on. Quite to the contrary--but the
cross-discpline work that I've witnessed tends to have a unique flavor or
viewpoint brought to it by the investigator's orientation.

cheers,

Tor


Tor Neilands
Systems Analyst
Statistical Services Group
Computation Center
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX  78712

Phone: (512)-471-3241, Ext. 263

Internet:  TBN@Utxvm.cc.utexas.edu
___________________________________________________

"Life is too short to self-verify"   --- Shawn McNulty

"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood and I, I took
 the road less traveled by, and that has made all the
 difference".                                 --- Robert Frost
___________________________________________________

Disclaimer:  All of the views expressed above are solely
those of the author. Any relationship between my own
views and those of the University of Texas and/or The
Computation Center at the University of Texas are
due merely to regression to the mean.
____________________________________________________
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 12:36:25 -0700
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         AUBAS@ASUACVAX.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Common-Sense Knowledge In Ps

HELP!!!  The unthinkable happened.  My 'puter crashed!!
I had been saving all the msgs concerning GRAD info, msgs for
the last two weeks.  I think it was Jenifer that started the conversation.

Did ANYONE perchance save these msgs????  If so, could you leave me
your name and I could send a disk to you to copy them for me?
The info concerned the best way to find and get into grad schools.

Any help will be VERY appreciated!
Thanks,
B Sherman
ASU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sat, 12 Dec 1992 11:17:13 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Sunni <bjreilman@UCCS.EDU>
Subject:      RE: Someone else's stats expertise

And why is it ALWAYS, ALWAYS the professor who gets first authorship whether
he has done ANY work, or even has a clue about what you are doing?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  PGLIST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 11:38:00 CST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Betty Harris <B1H6017@TAMVENUS.BITNET>
Subject:      What's new and exciting in Social Psych?

I had an interesting phone call from a prof of mine at the
school I attended for my MA.  The school has a masters program
that puts out experimental, couseling and school psychology
majors.  The program is very strong in the areas of statistics
and computers and to a lesser extent in basic research design,
but has a definite behavorist bias. They're restructuring their
program a bit and he's tryin to decide whether to add an upper
level undergrad social psych course or some other course.  He
asked me "Hey Betty, What's new and exciting in the
field of social psychology?"
Well... I didn't have a real good answer for him.
I rambled a bit bout attitudes and persuasion eg the
elaboration liklihood model, Chaiken's model; measurement
issues in attitude behavior consistancy ala Fishbein & Ajzen,
Epstein, Snyder & Ickes, Mischel, but I was a bit disappointed
that I really couldn't make a strong case for the social
psych course.  *shrug* now it's buggin me!  Does anyone out there in
Psygradland have any better answers for him???

He also asked. "Why should I teach a social psych course?
Will that help prepare them for grad school better than
some other course?"
On this one I leaned toward measurement and methodology
eg Fishbein & Ajzen, Epstein, Snyder & Ickes on measurement issues
and Cronbach and Meehl, Campbell and Fiske on construct
validity.  As I think this would better prepare people for PhD
programs that a general social psych course would.  How
would you respond to his question?

Time to go give a final exam!
(Jeeeez it's nice not having to take final exams!)
Betty
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sat, 12 Dec 1992 16:34:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         KMORGAN@WHEATNMA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: authorship

How about a grad student who is paid as a post-graduate
researcher on a 3-member research team, who along with the
other PGR, collected all of the data, analyzed all of the data,
and wrote all of the manuscripts?  In this particular
circumstance, the PI only editted the manuscript (a book
chapter)--and I mean, he checked for grammar, etc.  Yet
mysteriously, though I wrote over 50% of the manuscript, I
ended up as 3rd author.......
        Does it show how I feel about this....?  :{

        Also, intellectual contributions are sometimes "stolen"
from graduate students.  Harlow's career-making "learning to
love" stuff was stolen from one of his post-docs, and Trivers'
hypothesis about differential investment in offspring was
"borrowed" from a grad student in one of his seminars.  I've
had faculty tell me straight out that one way to write a review
paper is to hold a graduate seminar on it, and let the students
do all the dirty work.
        Ah, life in the big city!

        --Kathy Morgan
        kmorgan@wheatnma.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: RICHINSP
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 10:26:00 PST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Philip Richins, Continuing Education, CWU,
              (509) 963-1504" <RICHINSP@CWU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: What's the Beef? ( Common Sense etc.)

Kathy Morgan wrote:
 An
important committee on campus failed to nominate me for a
position because they thought I was a natural scientist--after
all, I study animals and use equipment and live in the Science
Center, right?
        At the same time, I have my fellow faculty members in
psychology tell me, as though they are paying me a compliment,
that I "could teach any of their courses, but none of (them)
could teach even one of my courses!"  This marginalization
feels pretty crummy, in actual fact."

I suppose that his touch on a sinking feeling I have had as I have
read the postings about our role as psycholgists viz. educating the
"public" about our profession.  We as psychologists spend great amounts
of time and energy in expounding our special view of the profession.
I see Psychoanalysis flamed, I see Jungian analysis flamed,  I see
"alternative methodlogies" flamed.  I see empirical methods flamed.  I
do not see much cross pollenation.  There are some out there on the list
whom I have applauded before, that I admire for their ability to see across
the issues.  The profession of PSYCHOLOGIST will never be sold to the
outside world, until we learn to embrace all facets of our study/science/art/
craft/discipline.  We are the enemy.

Philip
RICHINSP@CWU.BITNET
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1992 14:44:03 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         jlbugg@UCCS.EDU
Subject:      RE: authorship

Why is it so bad to get paid and get authorship?  The professors themselves
get paid too - everyone has to eat - even graduate students.

Jen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@VM.USC.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@VM.USC.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:02:01 -0700
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         encapsulated concupiscent procrastinator
              <MONCRIET@CGSVAX.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Subject: Re: let's hear some opinions

Thank you, Todd.  Said better than I could have!

Tracy

___________________________________________________________________
         Tracy Moncrief ~ The Claremont Graduate School
Department of Psychology      Internet: moncriet@cgsvax.claremont.edu
Claremont, CA 91711              Bitnet:   moncriet@clargrad


If you're looking for infinity, just close your eyes!

        Milan Kundera, _The Unbearable Lightness of Being_

Furious activity is no substitute for understanding.

*************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 08:39:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Todd.Nelson" <22817MGR@MSU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Common-Sense Knowledge In Ps

Monika,

I agree with you. This is what I have been arguing for all along. Of course no
one is saying that simple bitching and whining about this issue will get us
anywhere. As you say, through acting like scientists, teaching, publishing,
and talking to others at cocktail parties :) we will be able to achieve our
desired ends. Glad you agree with me!

Todd D. Nelson

(The Rogue PsycGrad)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu>
Posted-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 23:28:09 EST
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL10]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:28:09 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Eric Zorrilla <zorrilla@CATTELL.PSYCH.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: What's the Beef? ( Common Sense etc.)

> Aside from this confusion of comparative psychology and biology,
> have people out there really been told that psychology is not
> a real science?  I mean at parties

Yes.

> or in arguments on street corners

Yes.

> or something?

Yes.

> Frankly, this just hasn't been a big item in the circles I've been in

Not to be facetious (above), Perhaps an anecdote about my father's reaction
to his children's choice of majors would be appropriate....

My father is (like most fathers), a brilliant engineer who was sent from Cuba
to study at MIT on a state-sponsored scholarship.  To make a long story short,
he settled here as a civil engineer and started a company which has written
some of the prominent Computer-Aided-Drafting programs for high-end systems.
He is an enormously intelligent, critical thinker, but his children had to
educate him about the value of not only psychology but a liberal arts education

My brother (the oldest of the 3 of us), wanted to go to a liberal arts
university.  My father pushed him to go to CalTech so he would "learn
something valuable." (He had earned his place through the hard sciences so it
was a legitimate conclusion to conclude that they were valuable.  Based on
his experience prior to MIT, liberal arts teaching probably WAS inadequate).

By the time my sister (the middle of us) was of age to go to college, he had
decided that maybe liberal arts weren't the archenemy.  She was "allowed"
to go to Duke.  After her freshman year, she declared her intention to
major in psychology.  My father hit the roof saying that "she was too smart
to be a shaman."  My sister explained to him what psychology had become, and
emphasized that, anyway, it was only a major and she was going to get a
B.S. in it before going on to Med School.

When I declared my intention to not only major in psychology, but enter
it as a profession, my father questioned me repeatedly.  "You could be
a doctor?  A surgeon?  A lawyer?  An engineer?  A chemist?  A molecular
biologist?" (In short ANYTHING, but a psychologist).  I explained in great
detail my research interests to him and presented him with my senior thesis.
He was absolutely dumbstruck.

I had almost identical experience when discussing my research during my
undergraduate years with my natural science friends.  Many people do not know
what modern psychology is because they have had no exposure to it and they
disparage it based on a popular myth that is at least 50 years outdated.

Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:41:59 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Sunni <bjreilman@UCCS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Common Sense vs. REAL Scienc

Kathy,
AMEN and thank you.
Sunni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: cohen@cmu.unige.ch
Subject: Education and Nutrition: biblio ?
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:40:40 GMT

Hello,

I am looking for a good bibliography or selected referrences 
regarding the following subject:

	Food selection, Nutrition and Education.

Thanks for any help.

Emmanuel-S. Cohen-Laroque
Unviersity of Geneva
Switzerland
COHEN@CMU.UNIGE.CH

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:23:03 -0500
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         20SSMITH@GALLUA.BITNET
Subject:      Touche'

Touche' Matthew on the thesis-antithesis bit...

Sybil
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: RICHINSP
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 11:12:00 PST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Philip Richins, Continuing Education, CWU,
              (509) 963-1504" <RICHINSP@CWU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: What's the Beef? ( Common Sense etc.)

Tor (one who I see as able to look across the issues to the big picture)
writes:
Phillip: What I read you saying is that you would like more acceptance of
alternative viewpoints of ways of thinking and doing psychology. I think's
that's great, but how far should we take it? For the record, I don't see so
much "flaming" going on here as I do healthy disagreements among
professionals who all care about their profession. But, do we necessarily
*want* total agreement among all psychologists about what is the best way
of doing psychology? Is this in fact desirable? Does a high level of
agreement facilitate progressive change and accountability? There is a risk
that in trying to be all things to all people, we would lose our sense of
selves and our ability to critical advance our field. I for one feel like
I've learned a lot about psychology from these discussions, and, just as
imporant as far as I'm concerned, what and how my colleagues think and feel
about psychology and what it is and what it should be.

This is not to say that we should not have interdisciplinary and
cross-discipline work going on. Quite to the contrary--but the
cross-discpline work that I've witnessed tends to have a unique flavor or
viewpoint brought to it by the investigator's orientation.

I guess what I would call flaming of the sub-disciplines have been over time
on the list.  I mean the times where a term is tossed out as a pergoritve i,e,
equating analysis with unscientific.  or alternative methodologies as NEW AGE.

yes, there are flakey psychologists out there.  However,  graduating from an
APA accredited program is no guarantee agaisnst flakiness.  I advocate
that we examine each others view and tolerated them as different.  I do not
want to see us homogenous.
Philip
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1992 00:16:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Todd.Nelson" <22817MGR@MSU.BITNET>
Subject:      AMA Phobia Update

***************************************************************************

ATTENTION: THIS IS THE LATEST UPDATE ON THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION'S
           DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR PHOBIAS

***************************************************************************

1. DATACRAPAPHOBIA                          (fear of p's > .05)

2. FRIDAYNIGHTALIBRARYPHOBIA                (fear of turning into a
                                             grad-school geek)


3. MACDONALDSASACAREERPHOBIA                (fear of pissing off your advisor)

4. LAUGHABLEVITAPHOBIA                      (fear of no publications)

5. ICOULDJUSTDIEAPHOBIA                     (fear of having some statistics
                                             prof. stand up during your paper
                                             presentation at APA and reveal
                                             you as the statistically-inept
                                             dork that you are)

6. IAMSOOLDAPHOBIA                          (fear of undergrads)

7. HEARTSTOPAPHOBIA                         (fear of your dissertation
                                             committe saying "we've decided to
                                             pass you on your final oral
                                             defense-----NOT! HAHAHAHA!!!")

8. DINNERNOWMORETHAN50CENTSAPHOBIA          (fear that it will be reported
                                             that a continuous diet of Ramen
                                             a continuous diet of ramen
                                             noodles and macaroni and cheese
                                             is BAD for you)





 Best to all, and Happy Holidays!!

Todd D. Nelson
Department of Psychology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
E-Mail: 22817MGR@MSU.Bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:04:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Todd.Nelson" <22817MGR@MSU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Common-Sense Knowledge In Ps

Matthew,

Ah, another "ostrich" among us!

I was quite surprised by your postings today, I was erroneously under the
impression that Eric, Tor, and myself were making headway in persuading you of
the 'error of your ways.' :)

It seems that your position on the debate one of curious advocacy of ignorance
of the issue at hand. You are essentially saying "It is not a problem. If we
don't focus on it, it is not a problem." How scientific is that?

You say that psychologists shouldn't concern themselves with 'ranting and
raving at the pulpit,' about the issue at hand (see "common sense knowledge in
psychology"--original posting). Who's ranting?

I guess I'm a bit puzzled that ANYONE would advocate a 'do-nothing' policy
when it comes to advancing our field as a science in the public's (and
student's, and other faculty's) eyes. If we all buried our head in the sand as
you seem to be advocating, ignorance and misconceptions about the SCIENCE of
psychology would continue as it always has.

In answer to the above, you say that all our field needs is for all of us who
are concerned about having others perceive us as a legitimate science, to
begin to ACT like scientists. By your argument, if we just all go about doing
our business of science in psychology, then others will naturally see our work
and say "Gee, they ACT like scientists, so psychology must be a legitimate
science."

Well, maybe in a perfect world.

Reality is against you on this one Matthew. Can you imagine how long it will
take our field to eliminate the many misconceptions about it if we all took NO
active role in correcting those misperceptions, but rather relied on some
vague evolutionary flow of information (who's going to make sure the info is
accurate?) to the public (& students)?

I think many of us will agree that we should NOT take the
hide-your-head-in-the-sand-and-voila!--no problem!-stance that Matthew seems
to be taking on this issue. Matthew says that we should start acting like
scientists, and others will treat us like scientists. I say that part of being
a scientist is working to advance your discipline AS A SCIENCE in the public's
view. This is especially true for psychology. We all need to wear two hats as
both psychological scientist (and practitioner) AND a worker for the 'public
relations' between psychology as a science/practice, mediating between our
discipline and the public perceptions of our discipline,...working to
eliminate the discrepancies between the latter two.

Best to all,

Todd D. Nelson
Department of Psychology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
22817MGR@MSU.Bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:01:02 -0700
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "JOHN P. KLINE" <KLINE@ARIZVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: authorship

RE:  The person hired to clean up after the rats:
If the project deals with rat droppings per se, then authorship may be
appropriate.... Sorry... I couldn't resist...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 22:52:16 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         jlbugg@UCCS.EDU
Subject:      RE: Stats & Therapists

Tim, Wow, what a dangerous and chaotic message:  YOU know who is a
good therapist for the world - regardless of their credentials - and
you also know is is bad - regardless of theirs.  Why have degrees
from accredited universities at all - why even have licesure...
we can "just ask Tim."

Jennifer "the one who flamed you in prior times and is sorry for that."
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU