HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-MX-Warning:   Warning -- Invalid "To" header.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 13:23:09 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         tmsellers@UALR.EDU
Subject:      discovering science?

   Okay, so here's a new subject I hope may generate some interest. How do we
 go about the process of discovering knowledge? Is this something that is
 taught at your University? Is there much focus on research methods, and if so,
 does this include the process of generating new ideas? I'm reading a book right
 now that is called "Discovering". Anybody heard of it or read it? How do we
 discover new information? Information that is not an extension or generation
 of new tidbits of exactness to support existing theories. Does your University
 support this kind of science?
   Hope to get some replies. Sincerely interested.
   Tammy in Arkansas
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu>
Posted-Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 20:03:39 EDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL10]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 20:03:39 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Eric Zorrilla <zorrilla@CATTELL.PSYCH.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Matthew's comments
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu

>>argument, then if I decide to develop a therapy completely based on
>>astrology (e.g.,"You're a Gemini, so here's how to deal with your depression"
>>not based on any kind of "legitimate" research, as long as I stay ethical
>>and legal no one should question the legitimacy of my methods, right?

> That's right.  No one should question the legitimacy of a standard method.

As no one should have questioned the legitimacy of phrenology?  Or
trephination?  How about exorcism while we're at it.  PLEASE, Matthew,
take a look at what you're saying...

> One SHOULD question the ability of a psychotherapist to do a good job
> (ie. ability to do what he or she claims to be able to do).

Certainly.

> Haven't you heard in your clinical courses that the process is
> as important as the content?

Haven't you heard that this is an ideological position?  Empirically, we still
know too little about what is truly going on in therapy because people easily
accept what they are taught in clinical courses and rarely test the ideas
rigorously.  :)

> Outcome-based literature, by its nature,
> only looks at the content (the tool and the standard method).

This has nothing to do with the "nature" of outcome based literature.  It's
possible (and increasingly common) that people are doing outcome studies
which also examine the contributions of the process in more detail.


Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 13:49:22 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Mona Oommen <oommen@PSYCH.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      research on animal models of alcoholism
X-To:         psycgrad@psych.purdue.edu

Is there anyone out there who is involved in doing research on
animal models of alcoholism --specifically work with GABA and
ethanol?  Or do you know of any faculty at your university who
does this sort of work?

Mona Oommen
oommen@psych.purdue.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 08:08:10 HST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Denise Lajoie <DLAJOIE@UHUNIX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: summer in sight!!!!
X-To:         "Psychology Graduate Students Discussion Group List"
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNE>

Diana,
      Did you really mean to send that letter to "mom" to the entire PSYCGRAD
list?  I hope you enjoyed your lunch.  Denise
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Original_To:  JNET%"psycgrad@uottawa"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 09:42:00 CST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         PSYMON <SPB4508@TAMVENUS.BITNET>

set psycgrad nomail
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 10:07:10 GMT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Loree Harpster <PCYLHP@UTAHUSI.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: APS Rooms and Location

Hi, Gang:

   Just got back from a great trip to Boston.  My excuse for going was
the EPA conference, and I really did go to some of the meetings, but
mainly I wanted a break from school.

   I also had the very enjoyable experience of meeting two of our fellow
Psycgradders while I was there, Nancy Briton and Paul White from North-
eastern.  It was terrific to actually converse face to face with "voices"
from the list, and also added immensely to the trip.  It was as if I al-
ready had some friends in town.  So, I heartily encourage all other
Pscygradders to make sure you look each other up when you go to con-
ferences.  Speaking of which......

    APS will be in San Diego this year, from the 20th to the 22nd of
June.  The convention is being held at the Sheraton.  I saw a flyer
that announced a special room rate for the convention $89.00, for up
to 4 people in the room.  That's fairly inexpensive, if you get enough
"roomies".  I will be there prior to the convention, and plan on moving
out of the in-laws' house and into the hotel with a fellow student on
the 19th.  Let's plan on getting together and having some fun.

     I am willing to volunteer to be the clearing house for info about
conference attendance, if you would rather move it off the list.  I
will keep track of who's going, what days, and who would be interested
in finding "roomies".  I'd compile the info and post it back to the
list.

     The bad thing about APS that I noticed last year is that they don't
send out programs, you get them when you register, so I'm not sure if
there will be any receptions or "social hours" where it would be easy
to meet.

     If you want to take me up on my offer, e-mail me direct at either
pcylhp@utahusi or psyllh@freud.sbs.utah.edu. (Great job on the directory
Dave!).

     Looking forward to extending the circle of friends.

     Loree Harpster  University of Utah (Warmer than Boston, but not as
 historic).
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 12:18:04 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         diana allen <dallen@UNLINFO.UNL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: summer in sight!!!!
              92 1:51 pm

mom,
I'm feeling optimistic today, realizing that school is
almost over!!!  I am looking forward to summer.  I hope to
have a perfectly kept yard and house--ha!

Last night I took a statistics test and a planning theory
exam.  NOw I have a small reprieve before crunching on the
stromsburg project.

I loved the bunny fable---how marvelous!!  I just met with
Gordon to discuss my thesis topic, on friday, so it had even
more meaning for me---I will have to print it out and
distribute it to a few people.

No real news.  Can you believe the water situation in
Chicago? Amazing.

Lunch calls--so I'll close
Diana
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: psycgrad@UOTTAWA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"psycgrad@uottawa"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 14:26:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         BONDURAN@UNCG.BITNET
Subject:      knowledge

in response to Dev at Emory's comments:
I agree with the statement that new ideas can sometimes be seen as radical
as can get ignored.  I think this is due to the fact that scientific ideas
and knowledge are not objective as we were all raised to believe.  The whole
point of academia, I thought, was to think in new and exciting ways.  Yet,
that challenges others ways of thinking, as well as their research programs
which they may be deeply invested in.  AS we get "invested" it gets harder for
us to critically evaluate our "pet theories".  A common suggestion is to always
acknowledge your personal "subjectivity".  This helps clarify things for
everyone, but is not a total solution.
Barrie at UNCG
From: NANGEL@FS1.PSY.EMORY.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Subject: Re: Regression therapy
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:10:43 GMT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: NANGEL@fs1.psy.emory.edu
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.1c R5.
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu


    I think my reply to Matthew's comments got lost somewhere,
but Darryl did get my point:  I certainly wasn't arguing for less
research, but for more.
    I cannot understand how I'm labeled dogmatic for not accepting as
legitimate the purely anecdotal success of exorcism.  Dogma is
accepting as fact that which is not demonstrated.
    And to stretch the plumbing analogy: If our plumber were
casting spells and praying as he/she is working with the monkey
wrench, would we really say that praying is a legitimate way to fix
the pipes? Or would we be close-minded and thank God for wrenches?
    :)
    Nangel @ Emory
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 13 Apr 1992 09:21:12 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Matthew Simpson" <054340@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Regression therapy

On Fri, 10 Apr 1992 19:10:43 EDT Someone                    said:
>    I cannot understand how I'm labeled dogmatic for not accepting as
>legitimate the purely anecdotal success of exorcism.  Dogma is
>accepting as fact that which is not demonstrated.

THIS IS NOT TO ARGUE FOR THE LEGITIMACY OR SUCCESS OF EXORCISM
I don't want to call anyone dogmatic.  Yet, the statement begs the question.
Are you accepting as fact, without demonstration, that exorcism is only
anecdotal?  If you are not, then you will be able to provide me with the
one article, citation, or demonstration that you personally have read or
witnessed that has refuted, in your mind, any possibility of the success
of exorcism.  :)  (Gotcha!)

>    And to stretch the plumbing analogy: If our plumber were
>casting spells and praying as he/she is working with the monkey
>wrench, would we really say that praying is a legitimate way to fix
>the pipes? Or would we be close-minded and thank God for wrenches?

That depends on what you believe is REALLY happening, if you are
into reality.  :-)

As Someone brilliant offered recently to the discussion:
What do you accept as evidence?
Are you going to assume that everyone else MUST also accept this as evidence?
To where do you attend to get your data?  What is the source of your data?

  __    ||   __
  -\\   ||  //-      O=====================================O
    \\__||_//         |Matthew Simpson (origin: St. Louis)|
     \__||_/          |Clinical Psychology; U. of Ottawa  |
        ||            |BITNET:   054340@UOTTAWA           |
        ||            |INTERNET: 054340@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA|
        ||           O=====================================O
        ||            "There is no life I know like the world
      ======           of pure imagination" Willie Wonka
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 15:33:44 PDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Stephanie Fishkin <fishkin%girtab.usc.edu@USC.EDU>
Subject:      A "Psych Assessment" (not!)
X-To:         psycgrad@acadvm1.uottawa.ca

I thought you might get a kick out of this.  My sister (13) came to visit me
for the weekend.  She passed on some lore that her friends have been passing
on to each other.  They are a series of "tests" that uncover your innermost
feelings about certain topics.  Since I'm in social and have no clinical
background, even if these are based on valid research I wouldn't know.
Anyway, here goes:

1)  What is your favorite body of water (name one;  it can be an ocean, a river,
a lake, etc., but you have to identify which one, Pacific ocean, Lake Temescal,
etc.)?  Now, imagine youself diving into this body of water.  How would you
feel (list three feelings you would have, ie, adjectives) ?
	This is supposed to represent how you feel about sex.

2)  What is your favorite animal?  Why (name three reasons)?
	This is supposed to represent how you feel about yourself.

3)  Imagine yourself in a white room with no windows or doors. How would you
feel (again, list three feelings)?
	This is supposed to represent how you feel about death.

4)  Imagine yourself walking along the beach.  You see the most beautiful vase
in the whole wide world laying in the sand. Only it is broken.  What do you do?
	This is supposed to represent how you deal with
problems in a relationship.
	(My sister chastised me for my response to this one;  I said that if
	it was broken, it wasn't the most beautiful vase in
	the world, therefore, I'd leave it and walk on...)

Any comments? Is anyone going to tell me that some
psychoanalyst (maybe one into regression therapy?) devised
this hundreds (or tens) of years ago?

Bye, and good luck with the end of the semester for those
folks still struggling with classes!

Steph



Stephanie Fishkin
fishkin@girtab.usc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 00:05:56 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         newberry <NEWBERRY@NDSUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      legitimate therapies

On 4-13-92 someone wrote, "Given the limitations of the probabalistic
nature of our knowledge, we will not be able to replace intuition and
judgement with numbers, ever."
      This is a claim often heard in psychology, and it has been empirically
proven to be false, at least in the area of clinical judgement (including
diagnosis). There is no reason to expect this claim to be true when it comes to
 deciding what therapy to use with a client. In considering legitimate therapie
s this should be considered. In my opinion, therapy needs a lot more science
and a lot less intuition.

                        Don in Dakota
  Ps. For a reference try: Research on Human Judgement and its Application,
 by D. Faust in Professional Psychology: Research and Practice vol.17, #5,
 pg. 420-430.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 16:28:37 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Mustafa AlAbsi 270-0510 Student Psychiatry"
              <u717@REX.UOKHSC.EDU>
Subject: Re: research on animal models of alcoholism
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu

Mona,
In our program at the Un. of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center- we
have several people who work on similarido
 work. do similr work.  There is a lot of work with
ethanol tolerance and etahanol effects on neural activity, especially
in the hippocampus.. etc.  Two of the people who do this worlk> : Frank
Halloway and Larry Gonzalez.  Our program is in the Department of Psychiatry.
It focuses mostly inobiomedical-biopsychological issues.  The work
on alcohol in both humans and animals consideris considered one of the
 meritswell established
areas of research in this program.  I can tell you more about it if you
are interested.  al

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 13 Apr 1992 14:27:54 -0400
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Stephen W. Jarrard" <jarras@RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Legitimate therapies
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu

All,
     This reminds me of a 20/20 piece I saw on TV about some guy in
FL who calls himself a "counselor/therapist" (not licensed or bound to
APA, of course).  His "deal" is that he has women visualize having
larger breasts (even regressing back to puberty and thereby influencing
said growth during that formative time), and claims a degree of success
at this.  Several women interviewed claim increased measurments versus
"pre-therapy."  Believe it....or not.  I'm just reporting this, and make
no judgments either way.

                                |================|
                                | Steve Jarrard  |
                                | D/Psych - RPI  |
                                | (518) 276-8271 |
                                | jarras@rpi.edu |
                                |================|
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 11:25:43 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Matthew Simpson" <054340@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Regression therapy
              13 Apr 1992 14:10:22 EDT from <NANGEL@FS1.PSY.EMORY.EDU>

On Mon, 13 Apr 1992 14:10:22 EDT <NANGEL@FS1.PSY.EMORY.EDU> said:
>> THIS IS NOT TO ARGUE FOR THE LEGITIMACY OR SUCCESS OF EXORCISM
>    Good!  I was beginning to wonder...
     I thought so.  So I thought I had better spell it out for you.
>
>
>> As Someone brilliant offered recently to the discussion:  What do
>> you accept as evidence? Are you going to assume that everyone else
>> MUST also accept this as evidence?
>> To where do you attend to get your data?  What is the source of your data?
>
>    I don't assume anyone to accept anything as evidence.  After all,
>we each have to use our personal and professional experience to
>decide what works for us... But as scientists, one of our goals
>is to communicate our findings, and in that capacity I find it
>irresponsible to accept as "facts" or as "legitimate" that which only
>satisfies our PERSONAL crtiteria, but does not conform to wider
>academic/scientific standards.

But what you fail to recognize is that this position forces what
the "standard" considers to be valid data onto everyone else.

Now, my friend, you have finally partialled out that which makes your
view so at odds with mine.  You see, I am not addressing this point
with respect to academic/scientific standards and the communication
thereof.  I am talking about the "acedemic/scientific" community
focussing their attention on one instance of incorect application
of a method, or harmful therapeutic activity, and claiming that they
have "standards" by which all therapists must adhere.  The therapist
was unethical.  Academic/scientific comunities want to point their
finger at the method, according to the conversation here.

I propose that these "standards" are nothing but a way for a select group
of psychotherapists to get a sense of control over their peers.  They
get to say, "Nobody moves unless I say so."  And the very powerful
tool they use to do this is, "Of course our standards are valid. See
I have empirical support."  But the type of data they used to compile
the empirical support is not necessary the data that others use to
do their psychotherapeutic work.

  __    ||   __
  -\\   ||  //-      O=====================================O
    \\__||_//         |Matthew Simpson (origin: St. Louis)|
     \__||_/          |Clinical Psychology; U. of Ottawa  |
        ||            |BITNET:   054340@UOTTAWA           |
        ||            |INTERNET: 054340@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA|
        ||           O=====================================O
        ||            "There is no life I know like the world
      ======           of pure imagination" Willie Wonka
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:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 10:25:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         NANCY BRITON <BRITON@NORTHEASTERN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Legitimate therapies

Well, I was trying to stay out of this, because there are enough clinical
grad students on the net to argue this out.  But being non-clinical, and
having been a consumer of mental health therapeutic services in the past,
perhaps I can offer a reasoned perspective.  I think it is really quite
simple.  If the therapy worked for one person, then it worked.  There are
many licensed practicing therapists and counselors out there who are sexist
with female clients, proponents of middle class values to those of us who
may not want that, ethnocentric to those of us from different cultures, etc.
My point is that just because you practice a "legitimate" therapy it doesn't
make you a good therapist.

I've been to a workshop and seen Albert Ellis, a "legitimate" ( I think)
therapist who is just plain cruel to his clients.  The woman (from the
audience, who had volunteered to be his pseudo-patient) finally agreed with
him that all her thoughts were irrational, I believe just to make him stop
verbally abusing her.  This is legitimate therapy that I guess people say
works, but I wouldn't want it.

Anyway, if massage therapy works for you, then fine! I think it sounds like
a great idea, right about now!  If the plumber fixed your pipes by praying
over them, don't worry about it.

So my point in all this rambling was just that: 1) "legitimate" therapies do
not make a good therapist. 2) People can respond to all kinds of things that
may not fit with traditional therapy techniques.  (placebo effect included)

Nancy at Northeastern
Ex- mental health consumer, helped by an MSW after being disappointed by
1 MD (psychiatrist) and 3 (male, sexist) psychologists (yes I know not all
males are sexist).
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sat, 11 Apr 1992 14:30:31 -0400
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Stephen W. Jarrard" <jarras@RPI.EDU>
Subject: Re: [Professional Societies]
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu

     I'm almost positive that when I joined APS (within the last
three months) that student dues were only $10.00 yearly.  Even
if it is $20, it's still a great deal for what you get (see Mona's
earlier post).  Plus, I have contacted them e-mail once or twice
with questions, and have always gotten prompt, thorough answers.
If you lean more to the applied side of Psych (not that clinical
isn't applied, but you know what I mean), experimental, or
cognitive areas...It is a good society.

                                |================|
                                | Steve Jarrard  |
                                | D/Psych - RPI  |
                                | (518) 276-8271 |
                                | jarras@rpi.edu |
                                |================|
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU