HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Via:        UK.AC.ST-AND; 26 AUG 92 15:30:12 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:29:13 BST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Julie Marie Williams <jmw1@ST-ANDREWS.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: discussion versus "trapping"

All very well, Jorge, but what is the point in deliberately provoking people
and trying to "trick" them - and at the same time gloating that you're doing
so - just for the sake of it??
Where is the "sensible discussion" in this??

Julie
St Andrews
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:48:02 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Michelle Bengtson <bengtson@PSY.PSYCH.NOVA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: looking for programs in attention
              Snyder" at Sep 2, 92 9:45 am

>
> I'm interested in studying attention and its role in/effect on
> perception. Can anyone recommend a grad school with a cognitive/experime
> ntal program that has a strong interest in perception or attentional
> mechanisms? I figure this is the place to find the people who really
> know about grad schools pros and cons :-).
> Thanks for your input,folks!
> Irene Snyder
> irenes@unc.bitnet
> irenes%unc.bitnet@mcnc.org
>
Irene,
Check out the experimental psych. program at Florida Atlantic University,
particularly, contact Dr. Hock.  He is the main researcher there in the
field of perception.  It is a good program, not terribly demanding course-
work wise, but good professors and a lot of publications.

Hope this helps.


Michelle Bengtson
bengtson@psy.psych.nova.edu

 -------------------------------------------
|*Life is not a matter of holding good cards|
| but of playing a poor hand well.*         |
 -------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <HOPE@UKANVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:13:56 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Mike Babyak <HOPE@UKANVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Trapping is Male?

I am not sure that I understand the discussion regarding trapping,
cooperation etc.  The comment that such behavior (trapping) supports
a male stereotype sounds itself awfully much like a stereotype about
males, yes?  No?  Given that I (nor any of us) know whether Matthew
intends this as malicious entrapment or not, I prefer to give him
the benefit of the doubt that he is using a tradition of dialogue that
dates back at least to Plato (check, for example, the Euthyphro).
In this style of inquiry, the teacher purposely leads the pupil
down various paths, many of which are logical dead ends in order to
demonstrate flaws or simply facets of a topic.  It has been known to
be useful.  And there needn't be any nastiness of ill-will involved.

Most important, however, it is not the ONLY way to know or discuss.
Knowing takes many forms, each with its relative merits and disadvantages.
     To exclude a method of dialogue on the
basis of its historical links to oppressive social structures, rather than
on its lack of merit per se, seems unfortunate.  Seems to me truth might be
better served when we engage in examining what all methods have to offer,
rather than disparage   old methods out of hand.

MIKE BABYAK UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS         *THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE HOME*
HOPE@UKANVM
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  PGLIST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:03:00 CST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Betty Harris <B1H6017@TAMVENUS.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Causality

Jeff Writes:
>    TAMMY:  GOOD POINTS ABOUT REPLICATION.  HOWEVER, IS ANYTHING WE
>STUDY IN PSYCHOLOGY PROVEN TO BE BASED UPON CAUSE-EFFECT?  AREN'T WE,
>WHEN WE STUDY HUMAN BEINGS, REALLY LOOKING AT CORRELATION?  I CAN SAY
>THAT A SHOCK "CAUSED" THE CRITTER TO  ,, SAY, AVOID AN OBJECT, BUT IS THIS
>PROOF THAT THE SHOCK CAUSED THE AVOIDANCE?

Correlation or covariation has to be present before causality can
be established experimentally.  We can never prove something,
we can only disprove alternative explanations and provide support
for our proposed causal hypothesis through replication and controlled
experimentation.  The problem with studying people is that we are not
univariate creatures. There are often multiple 'causal' factors
associated with any outcome.  This makes it much more difficult to
identify causal relationships through experimental manipulation.
Betty
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
        TTT     TTT     TTT           Betty A. Harris
                TTT                   Department of Psychology
      AAA       TTT    MM     MM      Texas A&M University
     A   A      TTT    M M   M M      College Station, TX 77843-4235
    A A A A     TTT    M  M M  M      1-409-845-2566
   A       A    TTT    M   M   M      Bitnet: B1H6017@TAMVENUS
  AAA     AAA TTTTTTT MMM  M  MMM     Internet: B1H6017@VENUS.TAMU.EDU
___________________________________________________________________________
Interactions are the spice of life
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.ST-AND; 31 AUG 92 10:18:32 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:17:34 BST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Julie Marie Williams <jmw1@ST-ANDREWS.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Mostly OK

Douglas et al,
Many thanks for posting your message and letting us know you're safe.  I'm sure
I can speak for everyone on the network when i wish you all the best followint
the recent hurricane.

The winds here are bad enough, but mere GUSTS compared to yours!

Keep in touch!

Jule
St Andrews

(No, i've not changed my name- that was a mis-type.  Should have been "Julie")
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
From: jonathan@psych.psy.uq.oz.au (Jonathan Dwyer)
Subject: DAY address wanted?
Followup-To: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Organization: Psychology Department
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:30:16 GMT


Hi all,

Someone asked for Dr Ruth Day's address at Duke.  I've lost
the posting, and our site is cleaned rather 'efficiently',
so here's a posted answer, sorry to breach netiquette...

DAY, RUTH S                                                             
(919) 660-5694

   ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
   DEPT OF PSYCHOLOGY - EXPERIMENTAL

   Duke University
   223 SOC-PSYCH
   Durham, NC 27706  USA

She doesn't appear to have an email address, you could phone her
and ask, or write, including your email address.  Thanks to Orin
Day for this info.

Jon
ath
an.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: FAIGELES@fs1.psy.emory.edu
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.1c R5.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 11:11:49 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         FAIGELES@FS1.PSY.EMORY.EDU
Subject:      Re: Prescription Privileges
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU

Recently, I have had a few heated discussions with medical students
on the training that would be required for clinical psychologists in
order to be prepared to have prescription privileges.  One good point
that they raised was that psychoactive medications also have effects
on many other organs of the body, and understanding of these other
organ systems (as well as understanding the consequences of
medication mixes) would be neccesary to gain prescription privileges.
 Such training would add at least two years to present training time.
 I'm not sure that many of the clinical psychologists who are calling
for prescription rights would be willing to engage in such an
involved training process.
    If someone was really dedicated to both the research/clincal
training of

the clinical psychologist and the medical training of a psychiatrist,
the logical solution would be an MD/PhD!

Robin
faigeles@fs1.psy.emory.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Original-To:  psycgrad@uottawa, GOLDBERG
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:40:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         GOLDBERG@FORDMULC.BITNET
Subject:      video suggestions

Hi!  I was hoping that somebody would be able to be of assistance.

I was asked to deliver a couple of lectures to an undergaduate intro.
to psych. class.  The topic is learning.  Would anyone know of any
good videos, how to access them, and the cost?

Thank you in advance for your assistance.
                                        Neal
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:51:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "David M. Fresco" <FRESCO@UNC.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Anima

Rick,
As you say it is a matter of perspective.  Still, I would rather come to
understand my relationships in terms of conditioning history rather than
an esoteric construct like "anima" that eludes scientific study.
I would be delighted to have an anima. . .and a collective unconscious,
an id, ego and super ego too.  Yet after dilligent searches, I find none
of these constructs.
Why make additional assumptions about the basis of personality
development when there exists a simple, elegant explanations offered by
behavioral and cognitive-behavioral persectives?  If you are indeed a
Jungian, it's your model that could be lightened by jettisonning some
excess baggage.
David Fresco
UNC-Chapel Hill
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 06:23:15 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         C150630@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      Re: PSYCGRAD Project Announcement

It seems there are several psycgradders who want to signoff.  While
listowner Matthew is away on honeymoon, there is probably no help
available.  (This is my stoic opinion- I asked Matthew for help
directly, but my timing was bad- it was the weekend of the wedding!)

By the way, Congratulations and Best Wishes to the NewlyWeds!

Polly Brown    C150630@MIZZOU1
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:41:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "David M. Fresco" <FRESCO@UNC.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Psych-iatry vs -ology?

Tim,
It seems to me that the shortcomings you describe below in psychiatrists
sereves to support Eric Z's argument for prescription privileges:
>
>   By the way, we file complaints against psychiatrists who perform the
> work of clinical psychologists for which they arenot qualified, such as
> performing certain types of personality testing and assessments. It's
> NOT as though they can do anything we can. In fact, my personal view is
> that they are trained to perform very few functions compared to us.
>
To me, it sounds like it would be easier and desirable to train the PhD
in pharmacology rather than training the MD in clinical psychology.
David Fresco
fresco@unc.oit.unc.edu
fresco@med.unc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:54:27 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Chris Cameron <CCAMERON@UKANVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Trapping is Male?

I almost mailed Nancy privately to agree with her, but stopped myself
with the realization that I would do this to avoid the potential
confrontation my agreement might elicit.  So...here goes.  I wish
to state outright that the differences *AMONG* mem and women are far
greater than those BETWEEN men and women.  I know this and appologize in
advance for the following generalizations.  Men and women do have different
ways of communication with men being more confrontational and women being
more cooperative.  Or even perceiving interactions as such.  I believe
that most of the responses opposing Nancy were by males while the few
agreements were females (throw tomatoes now).  I, in fact, perceived the
responses to be very confrontational.

On Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:13:56 CDT Mike Babyak said:

>Given that I (nor any of us) know whether Matthew
>intends this as malicious entrapment or not, I prefer to give him
>the benefit of the doubt that he is using a tradition of dialogue that
>dates back at least to Plato (check, for example, the Euthyphro).
>And there needn't be any nastiness of ill-will involved.
>
>Most important, however, it is not the ONLY way to know or discuss.
>Knowing takes many forms, each with its relative merits and disadvantages.

It seems that we have a group of people who may chose to interact in
many different ways, although most of the talk does seem to be of
the "trapping" variety.  Matthew and others are very effective at this
kind of debate, while others of us are not.  Must everything be point
counterpoint, or is there room for contemplation and negotiation? Is
there a place for us OTHERS on psycgrad too?  Can we explore these other
merits and disadvantages?
I hope so.  Most of us probably don't wear furry mittens,
either.

Confrontation?  Agreement?  Understanding and Negotiation?

Chris at KU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 06:32:56 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         C150630@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Prescription Privileges
X-To:         FRESCO@UNC.BITNET

I used to think it would be quite appropriate for psychologists
to complete a rigorous course sequence and develop competence in
prescribing medications.  However, it is necessary for patients to
be monitored for adverse physiological symptoms; and I don't think
we would be ready to do that.  Hold on!  I know there are many
physicians out there who blithely write out prescriptions and do
not rigorously keep up with their patients.  That should not set an
acceptable precedent for casualness.
*******************************************
*Pollyana Brown                           *
*Bitnet: C150630@MIZZOU1                   *
*Internet: C150630@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU    *
*Dept. Educational & Counseling Psychology*
*University of Missouri-Columbia          *
*Columbia, MO 65211                       *
*******************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.ST-AND; 31 AUG 92 10:35:03 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:34:05 BST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Julie Marie Williams <jmw1@ST-ANDREWS.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: Warm fuzzy science

Kate was asking about life experiwnces and work.  Now this is a very funny
 thingsince only last week I was thinking about asking the same thing (even
 though I
don't recall reading the message that prompted Kate to write).
You see, it occured to me that in my department- no, infact, more specifically,
in my research group, I have a disabled colleague who is running a project on
disability, and I myself work on asthma, having been a sufferer since
 childhood.Another colleague, having just dropped out of her perception PhD, is
 applying
for a post as a research assistant on a project looking at depression, having
herself recovered from the condition only a few years ago.  (Actually, now I
think of it, it was her application for this job which started me thinking
about this experience/work connection.
Being in the health field myself, I make no apology for the fact that these
examples are completely biased.
What I was going to put to you all, however, were 2 questions:-
1)  Are there similar examples from other fields?
2)  Do people think that it helps, or hinders, one's research having had
 persoanl experience of the subject matter oneself?

On the latter question, from my own persoanl experience I find that my own
 illness, although prompting my interest in the subject, has to often be forced
 into
the background since it would be dangerous to base any investigation purely on
your own experience of a very diverse illness.  What I tend to do is assume
that my own experience is actuall totally unique and hence base anything I do
on other peoples' experiences, often being surprised at the amount of
 concurrence between the two!
Anyway, does anyone else have any examples/opinions on this?

Julie
St Andrews

PS.  No, I am not incapable of spelling "personal"!!- I just seem to keep on
pressing the keys at the wrong time, in my haste!!
Via:      UK.AC.HULL.SEQ;  4 SEP 92 15:29:10 BST
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Original-Sender: psp.dasilvaalvo@uk.ac.hull.seq
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 10:38:57 -0400
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "psp.dasilvaalvo" <psp.dasilvaalvo@SEQ.HULL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: PSYCGRAD Project Announcement

>
> It seems there are several psycgradders who want to signoff.  While
> listowner Matthew is away on honeymoon, there is probably no help
> available.  (This is my stoic opinion- I asked Matthew for help
> directly, but my timing was bad- it was the weekend of the wedding!)
>
> By the way, Congratulations and Best Wishes to the NewlyWeds!
>
> Polly Brown    C150630@MIZZOU1
>
Hi Polly and psycgradders who want to signoff,
you can do it by sending the message   SIGNOFF PSYCGRAD to
 LISTSERV@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA  or LISTSERV@BITNET.UOTTAWA
To cut off mail delivery send the message  SET PSYCGRAD NOMAIL  to the
LISTSERV address (as above).
I hope this helps.
Jorge.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jorge daS. Alvoeiro,                Tel:(0482) 465778
  Dept. of Psychology,                Fax:(0482) 465599
  Hull University,                    E_Mail: psp.dasilvaalvo@uk.ac.hull.seq
  Cottingham Road,
  Hull HU6 7RX,
  England
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 20:49:55 -0500
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was
From:         11ASONES@GALLUA.BITNET
Subject:      Unaccessible...

Shalom and I would like to respond to Steve Hardy's e-mail concerning
accessiblility for us deaf folks. I, myself experienced difficulty in
getting a sign language interpreter for the APA ball. Needless to say
I approached the administration regarding this issue and they told me
that if I'm not satisfied then I can leave the ball!  Am I allowed
accessibility in a place where only my eyes can hear what my ears
cannot?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu>
Posted-Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 1:47:00 EDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL10]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:47:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Eric Zorrilla <zorrilla@CATTELL.PSYCH.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Prescription Privileges
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BitNet@pucc.princeton.edu

Robin at Emory writes:

> One good point
> that they raised was that psychoactive medications also have effects
> on many other organs of the body,

Granted.

> and understanding of these other
> organ systems (as well as understanding the consequences of
> medication mixes) would be neccesary to gain prescription privileges.

Granted.

>  Such training would add at least two years to present training time.

No way.  Most MD's rely on the PDR for interaction info, contraindications,
etc (ESPECIALLY GP's who make up the bulk of psychoactive medication
prescribers).  In regards to learning about secondary, ancilliary, etc.
effects of psychoactive medication on peripheral organs, 2 years?!?!  For
most medications, this is a standard part of learning about the medication -
particularly those that neatly fall into certain structural classes (benzos,
tricyclics, etc.).  I don't see how either of these would be additional time
in a well-administered psychopharmacology course.

>  I'm not sure that many of the clinical psychologists who are calling
> for prescription rights would be willing to engage in such an
> involved training process.

I for one would be.

> If someone was really dedicated to both the research/clincal
> training of
> the clinical psychologist and the medical training of a psychiatrist,
> the logical solution would be an MD/PhD!

When 3/4's of my medical training as extraneous to what I plan to do as a
research/clinician, I'd be wasting far more time being an MD/PhD than
being a PhD with two or even three years of certification for prescription
privileges.

Moreover, you can get an equivalent MD training (w/out the clinical exposure)
from within your PhD psychology program and save time by avoiding time-wasting
rotations that are not relevant to your objectives.

Eric Zorrilla
University of Pennsylvania
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:58:07 PDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Stephanie Fishkin <fishkin@ALUDRA.USC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Stats: Power Analysis
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BITNET@VM.usc.edu
              92 1:32 pm

Tim:

This sounds as if it would be a good posting on psycgrad, so why don't you
post your questions and any advice you recive to the net?
*******************************************************************************
Stephanie Fishkin, Dept. of Psychology, USC, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1061
fishkin@aludra.usc.edu

             x x     x
                x    x     x x
                  x  x    x
                   x x x x
                     x
                     x
                     x

"Truth happens to an idea.  It becomes true, is made true by events." W. James
*******************************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <HOPE@UKANVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:44:15 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Mike Babyak <HOPE@UKANVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Introspectionism
              31 Aug 1992 11:18:59 -0400 from
              <jdaniels%unlcdc2.bitnet@UTCS.UTORONTO.CA>

On Mon, 31 Aug 1992 11:18:59 -0400 <jdaniels%unlcdc2.bitnet@UTCS.UTORONTO.CA> sa
>    Reading the discussion about "wearm fuzzies," (actually, that should
>read "warm"!), I am reminded of Wundt's (was it he?) trained
>introspectionists.  You remember, he examined his own internal
>thoughts, feelings, etc.,.  It seems that this method has been
>abandoned in favor of the more quantifiable methods.  Does this mean
>that it is hoakey?  Julie, you may consider this when studying
>your own illness.  The key point was objectivity.
>     Final point:  Can we ever be objective about ourselves?

It is an article of faith in mainstream American Psychology that
research that does not use quantifiable variables is notvaluable,
and that such research is necessarily less rigorous or mushy-headed
than traditional techniques.  But there is no sound logical
principle to support this.  I have mentioned before on this list,
I think, that Wundt has been misrepresented by American Psychology,
particularly Boring and Titchener.  They focused on his attempts to
make psychology more like the sciences, but ignored his view that
lab experiments, etc will only ever be one part of a useful and
fruitful psychology.  Danziger has written some interesting papers
on the supression of Wundt's real aims.

MIKE BABYAK UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS         *THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE HOME*
HOPE@UKANVM
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU