HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,sci.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Note on Smithsonian psych. exhibit
Date: 12 Sep 92 01:46:09 GMT
            <1992Sep6.230250.27560@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>
            <19950@fritz.filenet.com>
            <BILL.92Sep9185650@ca3.nsma.arizona.edu>
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <BILL.92Sep9185650@ca3.nsma.arizona.edu>
 by bill@nsma.arizona.edu (Bill Skaggs):

: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:
:
:> As silly as it may seem, people DO follow authority, even when
:> authority is obviously silly. 
:
: Think about what would happen if people didn't automatically obey road
: signs without understanding why they're there.  Just because you can't
: *see* the reason for something doesn't mean there is no reason.

Well sure, there's frequently very good reason for rules.  That's not
what I'm saying, tho.  Please read my quoted statement again, and note 
the phrase, "even when authority is obviously silly."

Clearly there's a significant difference between, "Please drive on the
right-hand side of the road" and "Please buckle the safety-belt in the
car to your right."  I'll bet you a dollar that putting the latter on a
highway would result in at least one accident from someone trying.

: Bill

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
If I tell you three times, it's true.  If I tell you three times, it's 
true.  If I tell you three times, it's true.  
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: ffujita@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Frank Fujita)
Subject: Re: Meyers-Briggs Personality/Temperament Types
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 04:37:26 GMT

ffujita@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Frank Fujita) writes:
>>In your opinion, do better instruments exist?
>Yes.  The NEO-PI is a better instrument, if you aren't really wanting
                                                 ^^^^^^
>the Big 5.

Make that if you *are* wanting the big 5.

Frank Fujita
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: murphyg@Software.Mitel.COM (Gary Murphy)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: Psychology as Science
Date: 11 Sep 92 12:30:28 GMT
	<1992Sep11.002045.16174@u.washington.edu>
Organization: Applications Software II, MITEL Corporation, Kanata, Ontario,
	Canada
In-reply-to: bjornl@milton.u.washington.edu's message of 11 Sep 92 00:20:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.002045.16174@u.washington.edu> bjornl@milton.u.washington.edu (Bjorn Levidow) writes:
   In article <lavk95INN5l5@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM writes:
   >
   >I noticed some people critiquing NLP as not being scientific.
   >This leads me to ask what has psychology proven with scientific rigor?

   Well, first off, you have to make a distinction here between observable
   phenomenon and theoretical constructs.  There are a number of psychological
   phenomenon, such as priming effects of related words, which have been
   demonstrated time and time again.

As is the effect of asking leading questions, the 60% 'success' rate
within 5 years regardless of the flavour of therapy (or even if there is
none at all), and the other studies of psychology by psychologists which
find a 6% risk of damage due to psychotherapy and an absurdly high
incidence of divorce, also directly attributable to therapy (see Garth
Wood's "Myth of Neurosis" for a summary of some of these studies).  What
is lamentable is not that psychology is not science, because in many,
many instances it is very good science.  What is lamentable is this is
the only field where too many practitioners in the field completely
ignore the scientific evidence that contradicts their pet methods.

   As for proving a psychological theory, most philosophers of science will tell
   you, you can't ever prove a theory.  The best you can do is to accumulate
   evidence which is consistant with one theory and inconsistant with
   others.

Bzzzt. Sorry, wrong answer.  Philosophy will tell you that any theory
that cannot be proven wrong is not a theory.  I'm not in my own office
right now, and can't remember the name, but I do know of one British
philosoper who pointed to this flaw in "personality" theories: all data
is consistent with the theory.  This is not the signature of scientific
modelling, this is the sign of a theology.  This same philosopher said
he became suspicious when he noted the tone of abstracts in clinical
psychology papers and found every one to profess certainty, while with
papers in the sciences, certainty is carefully avoided.

Has anyone else on this list noticed that Bradshaw now earns a 7-figure
income?  Has anyone else noticed that Courage To Heal has sold over
800,000 copies?  I studied with some great scientific psychologists at
the U of Toronto, all of them subsisting on grant money and tenure.
Tell me again who it is that is giving psychology a bad name.


--
Gary Lawrence Murphy - Gary.Murphy@software.mitel.COM - (613) 592-2122 x3709
        "But what if there _were_ such things as past lives?"
    "Close your eyes.  Notice how dark it becomes. Open your eyes.
                          What do you see?"
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: wilkman@med.unc.edu (Alice Wilkman)
Subject: Re: NLP  (WAS Re: Xanax
Keywords: NLP  NeuroLinguistic Programming
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 03:41:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.003648.19808@news.Hawaii.Edu>  
lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady) writes

>First of all, this discussion belongs in sci.psychology not sci.med.  

There are people in both groups who seem to feel it belongs 
in neither group.  :-)  It does seem as appropriate as most 
topics discussed in either group and as appropriately 
discussed in either one, IMHO.  The person who set these 
groups up as Sci.groups must laugh him/herself to sleep 
every night.  

>...Furthermore, the game is
>stacked against you in that any evidence you can reasonably come up
>with will be attacked as being inadequate and in fact worthless.

>What makes this especially frustrating in the case of the NLP Fast
>Phobia/Trauma Cure is that the damn thing is so easy to test.  The
>technique is not secret. 

Last April, Charles Faulkner, NLP Modeler and Trainer, 
contrasting the NLP Phobia Relief Method and Systematic 
Desensitization in Sci.psychology offered to donate a day of 
his services for a study if someone with access to persons 
with either dog phobias or Vietnam Vets with PTSD (the 
assertion being that it would work as well in that 
population) would set it up and write the report.

I haven't seen any follow-up to that.  And I'm wondering if 
anyone took him up and if there are any results to report.  
It would certainly be nice to get some new data into this 
recurring discussion.

Sandy Wilkman
wilkman@med.unc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,soc.culture.usa,sci.misc
From: packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer)
Subject: Note on Smithsonian psych. exhibit
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Dept. of Independence
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 03:10:00 GMT

At a new psychology exhibit at the Smithsonian in Washington
there is one exhibit consisting of a canopied walkway with black
and white 12"x12" tiles in a checkerboard pattern. The walkway
is 13 feet long and, as I recall, five feet wide. At the entrance
large signs announce 

            ATTENTION!
  Please step only on the BLACK squares

without any explanation of why they should do this.

It was about Milgram's experiments, of course, the ones that
demonstrated how people accept authority. Sure enough, people
were obeying the signs, be they kids, college students, or
pot-bellied men in baseball caps. Except for the kids, who got
in a little hopscotch, everybody awkwardly stepped only on the
black tiles, even standing that way while they waited for people
in front of them to view the object on display, which was the
original fake electric shock device used in his famous
experiments. The explanatory text next to it didn't tell the
viewer that he'd been conned into stpping only on the black
tiles, but asked why he did it -- the authority of the museum or
because he'd seen other people do it? I doubt whether very many
people got the point of it all. 
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: shl@ais.org (Stephen Landman)
Subject: Re: Psychoanalytic Therapy
Organization: UMCC
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 01:39:49 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.162823.12304@morrow.stanford.edu> CT.MMJ@forsythe.stanford.edu (Michelle Jahanpour) writes:
>Can anyone tell me if psychoanalytic therapy is practised much
>anymore?  If so, what kinds of clients would most benefit from it.
>Also, I'm fuzzy on the definition of psychoanlytic therapy--a good
>description would be very helpful.  Thanks.

Yes, psychoanalytic therapy is practiced today.  It is defined
as psychotherapy informed by the ideas of Freud.  You used the
correct term "psychoanalytic psychotherapy", as this is often
distinguished from "Psychoanalysis."  "Psychoanalysis refers more
to a purer, more orthodox approach, which is much less common than
"psychoanalytic psychotherapy."  There are very many "psychodynamic"
therapists who work with internal psychic conflicts, unconscious
motivations, etc. but whose practice is still not modeled after
Freud's practices, but who are still influenced significantly by
some things Freud said.  These terms all refer to places on a
continuum based on how close to Freud's teachings a therapist is.
Of course there are other therapies which are not on this
continuum at all, as they have little in common with Freud's
views.

Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady)
Subject: Re: NLP  (WAS Re: Xanax
Followup-To: /dev/null
Summary: Oops!
Keywords: NLP  NeuroLinguistic Programming
Organization: University of Hawaii (Mathematics Dept)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 11:41:28 GMT

In article <1992Sep13.042241.8065@news.Hawaii.Edu> lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady) writes:
>     ...   If you don't find my gift of value, then fuck
>you too!  Why not put  /lady@uhunix.uhcc/:j  in your kill file and save
>us both a lot of aggravation.  

Actually, that should be   /lady@uhunix.uhcc/h:j  .  

Furthermore, "fuck you too" was not meant to be directed to Mark D Kline
personally.  Actually, he sent me some quite nice (and rather intriguing)
email.  It was rather meant for certain other persons, who complain
bitterly that my articles should not be posted in SCI.psychology and yet
who seem compelled to read everything I post in detail.  As Spock might
have said ... "Fascinating!"  

--
It is a poor sort of skepticism which merely delights in challenging
those claims which conflict with one's own belief system.  
                                                          --Bogus quote 
lady@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu         lady@uhunix.bitnet
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,sci.misc,talk.politics.misc
From: foxd@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (daniel fox)
Subject: Re: Note on Smithsonian psych. exhibit
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:55:42 GMT


I was in Washington a few weeks ago and saw the exhibit.  My wife chided me
for ignoring the sign.

                                          Daniel B. Fox
                                          KF9ET
.standard disclaimer
From: dab@ism.isc.com (David A. Butterfield)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: Note on Smithsonian psych. exhibit
Date: 9 Sep 1992 19:16:59 GMT
Organization: x
NNTP-Posting-Host: change

windsong@nevada.edu (Anne Racel) writes:
>I wonder what it is about the sign at the museum that makes even kids
>obey and walk only on the black squares, while when PARENTS tell them
>something it goes in one ear and out the other.

Maybe the parents taught their children to behave "better" in public
than in private.

>I can say with certainty that PhD scientists are unable to obey or comply with
>instructions...

Do not confuse "unable" with "unwilling."

-- 
                     Vote for *anybody* but Quayle!
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: lisa lynne davidson <lldavids@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Mood swings
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 17:13:00 GMT

Can someone tell me about the character disorder connected w/ mood
swings, not manic depression itself, but where the moods swing
faster?  
Xref: sparky sci.psychology:3652 sci.misc:1583 talk.politics.misc:44008
From: jhcooper@ocf.berkeley.edu (John Hutton Cooper)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,sci.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Note on Smithsonian psych. exhibit
Date: 6 Sep 1992 23:32:39 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: monsoon.berkeley.edu

You people who go around disbelieving this and disbelieving that are real
troublemakers in our society.  They tell me pro wrestling is fake.  Why
should I doubt what I can see?  If a sign says, "Step on black squares"
there ought to be a good reason for it or the Smithsonian wouldn't
have put it there.



:)

-- 

"Besides, it's clearly a bunny rabbit."		      John Hutton Cooper
- Lt. Com. Data, discussing random gas patterns       jhcooper@ocf.Berkeley.EDU
From: zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Eric Zorrilla)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: Brain and Mind
Date: 11 Sep 92 14:11:52 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

>Eric Zorrilla writes:

>> From a layperson's definition, the "leg" referent suffices.  An anatomist
>> might prefer the latter referent if he or she wanted to characterize the
>> leg.  Both terms refer to the same objects, BUT AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF
>> ANALYSIS.  This is NOT a category mistake.  It is linguistics.

>How does the analogy apply?

Suppose a person begins having trouble walking.  Specifically, one of his legs 
doesn't really seem to want to go where he wants it to go and he reports fee
feeling pain in one of his joints (phenomenological experience).  He goes to
see a physician who refers him to a team of neurologists and neuroanatomists 
who cut open the skin of his leg and find that his patellar region is greatly
compressed.  Somehow, it has affected the local production of acetylcholine
at the neuromuscular junction and some sensory cells in the area have begun
secreting Substance P.  Both the patient and the doctors are seeing and
referring to the same referent, but their vantage points on the physical
phenomena are different.  The patient's experience of it is expressed primarily
subjectively.  The doctors' observation of it is 3rd person and primarily
objective.


[--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------]
| Eric Zorrilla - Dept. of Psychology  | zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu     |
| University of Pennsylvania           | 3815 Walnut, Philadelphia, PA 19104  |
[--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------]
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger)
Subject: Re: Psychology as Science
Reply-To: jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 11 Sep 92 03:26:53 GMT

Todd Hoff writes:
> it is my understanding that major advances in the above areas
> [genetics, biology, and chemistry] were not made by psychologists.
> If this is untrue please inform me.

Example: effect of EAB on toxicology and teratology.

-- Jon
--
Jon Krueger  jpk@ingres.com
From: an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: sexual addiction *joke*
Date: 7 Sep 1992 23:04:59 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston) says:

>
>In a previous article, an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston) says:
>
>>
>>Peter,Gods first angle walks in on God whom is apparently
>>building something.
>>
>>"God what are you building?"Asks Peter.
>>
>>"Why I'm building a man and a woman." God replies.
>>
>>"Can I help in your creation God please."Peter persists
>>
>"Oh very well hand me some of those low sensitive nerves...no Peter not those
>>those are super sensitive nerves... Yes that's right those."
>>
>>"Well what are these for God."
>>
>"Now I an working on the butts of the humans and I don't wish them to be 
>very sensitive so if the are bad I can spank them and not do serious damage."
>>
>>"Oh I see,but why are you only building one of each."comments Peter.
>>"And what are these super sensitive nerves for any way."
>>
>>"If you must know I'm planing for my creations to produce off spring by 
>>themselves."
>>
>>"That's fantastic God,but how do you plan on doing that and how can you be
>>sure that they will produce."
>>
>>"Well, you see Peter that's what I'm working on now there reproductive
> organs and that is what these super sensitive nerves are for.I think if I
> make sexual reproduction feel good ,how could they not want to have sex,
>>now hand me some more of those super sensitive nerves."
>>
>>Gee God that's sure is a lot of those nerves."
>>
>>"Well, I want them calling out my name."
>
>>
>>Moral...
>>"Everyone is some kind of junkie,there's Money junkies,Booze junkies,
>dope junkies,sex junkies, we're every thing your parents ever warned you 
>about and there is one thing that they don't understand.
>All of us you and I we're Godz,and the Godz are Rock & Roll machines 
>no hearts,but at least were machines.Some day there will be thousands of Godz
>thousands of machines,more of us then there are of them,
>the Godz are Rock & Roll machines,
>the Godz are Rock & Roll machines,
>the Godz are Rock & roll machines...>" The Godz.this is not a complete quote
>but I'm trying,we're all trying... Pleasant dreams.
>

Transfer complete.  Press RETURN to continue: 
When uploading your file remember to use only printable characters
and end each line with a carriage return.  To end the upload type `###' on
a line by itself.

Begin transmission.
From: dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: Psychology as Science
Date: 12 Sep 92 22:14:24 GMT
	<1685F6988.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com> <00716272435@elgamy.sccsi.com>
Organization: Intermetrics Inc., Washington Division, USA

In article <00716272435@elgamy.sccsi.com> elg@elgamy.sccsi.com (Eric
Lee Green) writes:

   The current state-of-the-art in psychological experimental research
   is not to predict whether a certain procedure X will work or not.
   Rather, it is to detirmine the percentage of people who will be
   helped by procedure X, as compared to a placebo procedure. The
   immediate goal is to seperate out the effects caused by normal
   healing and placebo effects from the effects caused by procedure X.
   The long-term goal is to detirmine which procedures have the
   highest probability of working. Then, hopefully, when a clinician
   is choosing interventions, he can start with one that works with
   90% of people and if that doesn't work, go on down the list to one
   that maybe only works with 1% of people but this person happens to
   be in that 1%.

I am not sure what a "placebo" is (nor do the papers I have scanned
seem to be sure).  However, NLP has been shown in various studies to
be as effective as selected other therapies in given situations.  I am
aware of no study that shows that any other therapy is more effective
than NLP for a situation that NLP is intended to cover.  (Note: "any
other therapy" above specifically excludes pharamacological therapies;
I am speaking of any other kind of intervention).  I have not read the
entire literature, to be sure; just a single (rather long)
bibliographic list.  

In some cases, NEITHER therapy was shown to be effective (Keith L.
Allen, Doctoral dissertation, "An Investigation of the Effectiveness
of Neurolinguistic Programming Procedures in Treating Snake Phobics",
University of Missouri at Kansas City, 1928).  A sample where both
therapies were found effective: Stephen C. Bacon, Doctoral
Dissertation, "Neurolinguistic Programming and Psychosomatic Illness:
A Study of the Effects of Reframing on Headache Pain", where NLP was
compared to a relaxation therapy.  Both were shown effective to an
extent; neither one better than another.

[snip....]

   Not to mention that many placebos are expensive (NLP training ain't
   cheap, folks, and neither is computer-assisted-instruction in
   education -- both of which may get their primary effect from
   placebo effects). In this case, you may wish to substitute a less
   expensive but equally effective placebo -- but without the
   research, you wouldn't have a clue.

I still am not sure what a "placebo" is here.  I can find a fair
number of studies comparing two different techniques, but none that
claim that there is a "placebo" in the comparison.  It is true that
NLP training is not cheap; however, neither is training in any of the
other clinincal fields (I assume, not having trained in everything in
the world).

					Dave Barton
					dlb@hudson.wash.inmet.com
Xref: sparky sci.psychology:3696 sci.misc:1602 talk.politics.misc:44608
From: dab@ism.isc.com (David A. Butterfield)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,sci.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Note on Smithsonian psych. exhibit
Date: 10 Sep 1992 20:13:55 GMT
Organization: x
NNTP-Posting-Host: change

bill@nsma.arizona.edu (Bill Skaggs) writes:
>   > As silly as it may seem, people DO follow authority, even when
>   > authority is obviously silly. 
>
>Think about what would happen if people didn't automatically obey road
>signs without understanding why they're there.

Think about what would happen if people automatically obeyed authority
symbols without understanding why they're there.

Dave
-- 
	  Only resort to the Rules when absolutely necessary.
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: buurt1@rulfsw.leidenuniv.nl (Jasper Kips)
Subject: Re: Mood swings
Organization: Leiden University Faculty of Social Sciences
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:04:15 +0100

In article <Bu7x5p.B1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, lisa lynne davidson
<lldavids@silver.ucs.indiana.edu> writes: 

> Can someone tell me about the character disorder connected w/ mood
> swings, not manic depression itself, but where the moods swing
> faster?  

This is like asking a physician, to tell you about the disease connected 
with fever. Not to put too fine a point on it, but mood swings is a 
symptom of a whole variety of personality, mood, and psycho-fysical 
disorders. Typpically you expect to find it (and for a diagnosis the 
expectation is REALLY problematic, but that is beside the point here) 
in PMS, Depression, Paranoia-like disordes, schizophrenic-like disordes, 
Post-Natal depression, Sexual disorders (mainly those in which 
impotence, not frigidity, is a factor)

So, take your pick or be more specific. On this formulation alone there 
is not just the one correct answer.

Success Jasper
Newsgroups: sci.psychology