HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Original-To:  PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:30:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         ACCNEWS@HOFSTRA.BITNET
Subject:      Anima

From: drmljg@hofstra.bitnet
Subject: Anima

I am not sure if this subject is appropriate for this newsgroup, so please
excuse me if it is not. A friend recently mentioned that in her opinion I
have serious trouble with my anima. I have had a lifetime of failed romances
and relationships, and am feeling quite a sense of hopelessness about ever
having a fulfilling love relationship. Can anyone suggest any books, exercises,
or share with me any insights into the matter? I am currently reading "Dark
Hearts: The Unconscious Forces That Shape Men's Lives" by Loren E. Pedersen.
I am finding it helpful, but I would like to understand the dynamics of my
situation better. Any suggestions? Please write to me directly. Thanks in
advance.

Laurence Galian
IN%"DRMLJG@VAXC.HOFSTRA.EDU"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:50:02 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Michelle Bengtson <bengtson@PSY.PSYCH.NOVA.EDU>
Subject:      reply to Cynthia Earle
              "@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU:PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET" at Aug 24,
              92 9:47 am

Hi Cynthia,
Yes, I am in the Doctoral program at Nova and I'd be glad to answer all
of your questions personally if you send me your email address, so as
not to bother other neters who aren't interested in the info.

Write soon,
Michelle Bengtson


Michelle Bengtson, M.S.
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
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:04:25 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Matthew Simpson" <054340@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject:      Finding Addresses
              25 Aug 1992 15:49:33 EDT from <psy9wml@CABELL.VCU.EDU>

On Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:49:33 EDT Walter M. Lakey said:
>Matthew,
>     The "From" message in the header of your most recent missive
>reads: From: Matthew Simpson
>     On my pc, there is no address included for the individual
>sender; just the network address.
>     Should I have your personal address?
>     If so, how can I configure my local ELM on UNIX to have it
>included?
>

Ah, here we have a case of "Matthew spoke too soon without knowing enough."
What else is new?  Another way of getting addresses of all of the
users of PSYCGRAD is to send the command, REVIEW PSYCGRAD, to
   listserv@acadvm1.uottawa.ca
or listserv@uottawa.bitnet

This can help you out whenever you want to know someone's address.

O======================================================================O
 | _  l  _  * Matthew Simpson          * BITNET:                      |
 |  \_l_/   * School of Psychology     * 054340@uottawa.bitnet        |
 |    l     * 145 Jean Jacques Lussier * INTERNET:                    |
 |    l     * Ottawa, Ontario K1N 8P5  * 054340@acadvm1.uottawa.ca    |
O======================================================================O
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: PSYCGRAD@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA
XGW-Version: IMail SMTP Gateway v1.54 1/16/92
XGW-To:   PSYCGRAD@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:58:00 MDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Lora L. Harpster" <PSYLLH@FREUD.SBS.UTAH.EDU>
Subject:      Mostly OK
X-To:         PSYCGRAD@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA

******   START OF FORWARDED MESSAGE   ******

Received: from vm.usi.utah.edu by pcmailgw.cc.utah.edu with SMTP
        id AA176485 ; Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:56:26 UTC
Received: from UTAHUSI by VM.USI.UTAH.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R1) with BSMTP id
0272;
   Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:01:34 GMT
Received: from UTAHUSI (PCYLHP) by UTAHUSI (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 6722;
 Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:01:34 GMT
Resent-Date:  Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:01:26 GMT
Resent-From:  PCYLHP%UTAHUSI@VM.USI.UTAH.EDU
Resent-To:    psyllh@freud.sbs.utah.edu
Date:     Fri, 28 Aug 92 11:25 GMT
From:     <NARBYD%SERVAX@VM.USI.UTAH.EDU>
Subject:  Mostly OK
To:       pcylhp@utahusi
Original_To:  @LOREE.ADR



----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I have to keep messages to a minumum, as phone time is valuable here,
but our VAX is back up, and most FIU people are unharmed.  Some are homeless
(in our department; I suspect many are throughout the university), but
otherwise OK.  Brian and I (and our spouses) are fine.  The Cutlers still
don't have power yet, but all people and property are OK.  The South part of
Dade County is basically gone.  I was down there helping out two days ago,
and
it simply defies description. Thanks for asking.  You can forward this to the
list, if you want.  Not much outcry on the list compared to the riots....

 _______________       ____
<                \____/    \  Douglas J. Narby
 \___________   __          \  Psychology Department
             \_/  \          \   Florida International University
                   \          \    North Miami Campus
                    \          \    North Miami, FL 33181
                     \          \    PH: 305 940-5975
                      |          \    E-mail: NARBYD@SERVAX.BITNET
                      /           \           NARBYD@SERVAX.FIU.EDU
                     |             |
                      \            |
                        \          |
                          \  FIU>*/
                            \ ____|
                                 /
                               /
                             /
                            '
                          '


******   END OF FORWARDED MESSAGE   ******
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:02:06 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Matthew Simpson" <054340@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Trapping is Male?

In activity X is viewed as perpetuating stereotype Y,
and stereotypes may or not be true,
then activity X may or may not truely perpetuate stereotype Y

??

O======================================================================O
 | _  l  _  * Matthew Simpson          * BITNET:                      |
 |  \_l_/   * School of Psychology     * 054340@uottawa.bitnet        |
 |    l     * 145 Jean Jacques Lussier * INTERNET:                    |
 |    l     * Ottawa, Ontario K1N 8P5  * 054340@acadvm1.uottawa.ca    |
O======================================================================O
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:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:22:00 PST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Don Gallogly <EUP_DG@CWU.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Results of cheating Q.

Mike Babyak writes....

>I often am interested to hear people speak of the
>difference between hard and soft data.  I would like to hear various
>definitions of these two categories.  I am not convinced
>that the distinction is so clear, especially depending on what we are
>interested in understanding about a phenomenon.

I think you're right.  Like (nearly?) all things, there is no dichotomy here.
However, I used the term to differentiate between data which is reported by a
subject (with all its problems with bias, expectation, and so on), and that
which can be reliably recorded by some impartial machine.

>But even given problems with measurement, no matter how hard  the data are,
>the route from data to interpretation to understanding is filled with
>unprovable assumptions and discretions.

You're absolutely right on that point.  Whenever interpretations are to be
made they must be done thoughtfully and with those assumptions in mind.  For
that reason and the methodological problems associated with surveys and low
response rates, I made no interprettation of the data I collected in the
cheating questionaire.  I presented all the data as it was collected.

Don Gallogly
EUP_DG@CWU.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  JNET%"psycgrad@uottawa"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:25:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         NANCY BRITON <BRITON@NUHUB.BITNET>
Subject:      discussion versus "trapping"

I agree that there are other, more satisfying ways to discuss than setting
"traps" and watching others stumble into them so you can say, "aha! gotcha!"

I think it's sad that conversation and discussion is reduced to a competition
where one person must "lose" so that the other can "win."

It also perpetuates stereotypes about men: that they are unable to
cooperate with one another and are only interested in fighting.  I
hate to see people perpetuating sex-role stereotypes.

nancy at northeastern
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
From: callan@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Joel E Callan)
Subject: Re: Results of cheating Q.
Originator: callan@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: callan@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 05:31:26 GMT

From article <PSYCGRAD%92082616581415@UOTTAWA.BITNET>, by         HOPE@UKANVM.BITNET:
> I often am interested to hear people speak of the
> difference between hard and soft data.  I would like to hear various
> definitions of these two categories.  I am not convinced
> that the distinction is so clear, especially depending on what we are
> interested in understanding about a phenomenon.
> There is a classic article by a biostatistician (the citation for
> which I'll dig up soon) who disputes the notion that things like lab
> values, eeg's, etc are as hard as we would imagine them.  Anyone
> know this paper?  Think the title is literally something like:
> Hard vs Soft Data.  It is argued largely from a measurement theory
> perspective.
> But even given problems with measurement, no matter how hard  the data are,
> the route from data to interpretation to understanding is filled with
> unprovable assumptions and discretions.
> 
> MIKE BABYAK UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS         *THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE HOME*
> HOPE@UKANVM

Various "true sciences" have known long ago that facts are dependent on the
observations made, and those are observations are only as good as the
instruments used and the technician using those instruments. 

Needless to say (but I'll say it anyway) the water has always been a bit
dirty when it comes to obtaining facts. We too often don't get enough or
incorporate the extraneous values as being important. When will we ever have
enough of what is "true" and "real" to explain the phenomena we can plainly
"observe"? We are imperfect creatures, with imperfect instruments...

Call me a pessimist, but I've seen how little we know about ourselves and the
world around us. But hey, we've come a long way... how far, no one knows for
sure.

No matter what the data, someone will refute the "facts", instruments and
observations will change. 

Joel Callan       callan@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
-- 
 In the meantime, happy computing!
         May you sit on the tack of success and rise to the occassion...

  /`-_                               !!!  
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <zorrilla@cattell.psych.upenn.edu>
Posted-Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 0:05:55 EDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL10]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:05:55 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Eric Zorrilla <zorrilla@CATTELL.PSYCH.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Psych-iatry vs -ology?
X-To:         PSYCGRAD%UOTTAWA.BitNet@pucc.princeton.edu
              92 9:24 am

> Dermatology is an unfortunate example, it is usually a short 2
> week rotation, but internal medicine, cardiology, gerontology, and neurology
> (to name a few) sure seem relevant.

These are certainly all relevant, but the NECESSARY information that would
be needed to be learned from these fields, in my opinion, is quite manageable
in a relatively short class (w/follow-up supervised clinical practica)

>      I have what may be a dumb question (and not rhetorical, believe me): Why
> do clinical psychologists want prescription privileges?

A point also raised by Tim...

From my own point of view:

	1)  Research can be performed much easier if appropriately trained
psychologists have autonomous prescription privileges.  If I want to examine
the roles of CNS-opiates in stress-mediated immunomodulation of natural
killer cell cytotoxicity, I don't want to have to be running to one of my
colleagues every time I want to prescribe naltrexone hydrochloride.

	2)  Therapy goes in a coordinated fashion, both from the patient's and
the therapist's point of view.  In many hospitals, patients get mixed signals
about what treatments are important because of psychology-mistrustful psych-
iatrists and psychiatry-envious psychologists.  Drug regimens and psycho-
therapeutic interventions may not be coherently managed.

	3)  Politics - In the public mind, the power to prescribe inherently
puts psychiatrists ahead of psychologists in prestige and, often, compliance
with treatment.  They are DOCTORS.  We are SHRINKS.  How often are you asked,
you're a psychologist?  You won't be able to prescribe medicine then, right?
(with in implicit tone of condescension).

Comments?

Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 09:45:00 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Kathryn Irene Snyder" <IRENES@UNC.BITNET>
Subject:      looking for programs in attention

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
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:15:55 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Tim Tumlin <UFTRT@NERVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: psychiatry vs ology

Irene Snyder's question is to the point. Psychiatrists lose a lot of ground
with prescripton privileges; losing exclusive hospital admission rights
really cuts into them. Docs are trained to be the person in charge of
any person's case in a hospital -- everyone else is supposed to be
subordinate to them. Our chair once proposed that we hire a psychiatrist
to be on our clinic staff to dole out prescriptions to our patients,
the psychiatry people were aghast! A psychiatrist acting as some kind of
employee of a psych dept. seemed unnatural. The lambs hiring a lion.
   This brings up another point: Aside from taking the Holy Prescripton
Pad away from psychiatrists, is the right to write scripts worth it?
Would you want to spend an extra year learning that, increase your
liability insurance heavily and worry that you may be messing up your
patients' bodies?  Most private practitioners I know develop a relationship
with a doc for prescriptions. My sister, e.g., hasn't found a psychiatrist
she can workwith but she sends her patients to a GP she trusts for medication
consultations.
   By the way, nurse practitioners, who are masters-level nurses,are allowed
to write prescriptions and the docs don't get upset about it. My point is
that I'd rather find a doc or nurse-prac I trust; It's less liability and
work for me and a well-selected medical colleague will undoubtedly do a
better job than I will.
Tim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.ST-AND; 26 AUG 92  9:40:57 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:39:04 BST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Julie Marie Williams <jmw1@ST-ANDREWS.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: Good Vitae for Grad School?

Matthew,

Wow- quite a list.  How many of you lot out there actually have all these
qualifications??
I, for one, fail on at least four of these counts (one being ability to type
>100 words/minute!!!)

Julie
St Andrews
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:03:21 CDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         James Canaday <CANADAY@UKANVM.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Results of cheating Q.

I found the results interesting, Don.  However, the Psycgrad sample you em-
ployed suggests an extension of this study.
     Find a demographically similar group of psych graduate students who do not
participate on Psycgrad.  Once you've collected the Cheating questionnaire data
 on them, you can then assess the burning social question: does Psycgrad
participation have a relationship to cheating history or propincity?
    thanks for operating this questionnaire, with all of it's attendant  limita
tions.
-
with tongue in cheek,
jc
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
From: jonathan@psych.psy.uq.oz.au (Jonathan Dwyer)
Subject: more academic-job-related material
Followup-To: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Organization: Psychology Department, University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:56:18 GMT

Another to add to your list is this cynical little gem:

AUTHR: Van den Berghe, Pierre L.
TITLE: Academic gamesmanship : how to make a Ph.D. pay
PUBLR: New York : Abelard-Schuman [1970]
DESCR: 116pp. x 22cm

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS: LB1778.V351970


Jon.
--
           ____
   /\  /\ / __ \ Jonathan Dwyer (FAX+6173654466) 
  / / / // / / / Department of Psychology
 / / / // / / /  The University of Queensland
/ /_/ // /_/ <   St. Lucia, 4072. AUSTRALIA 
\____/*\_____/*  jonathan@psych.psy.uq.oz.au  

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.ST-AND; 31 AUG 92 10:21:35 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:20:38 BST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Julie Marie Williams <jmw1@ST-ANDREWS.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Psychologists & Medications

Jeff,

Now THIS is more like the way to encourage sensible discussion!!
Congratulations!

Julie
St Andrews
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:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 12:10:00 PST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Don Gallogly <EUP_DG@CWU.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Results of cheating Q.

Loree Harpster writes...

>I find the last sentence interesting as
>well.  On a more abstract level, do you think that if subjects in our serious
>studies don't respond appropriately it doesn't really make much difference?
>I'm not trying to challenge you, I just think it would be an interesting idea
>to discuss.

Honestly, no.  There were maybe 3 or 4 questionNaires with "b or c" types of
answers, and fewer who just said "It depends".  And then, usually, on only one
question.  If half those people (out of the 18 total) commit to "b", for
example, instead of being tossed into a new catagory (or out), it wouldn't
have made a large difference.  It's not exactly saying something untrue when
you respond "b", but you mean "sometimes b, sometimes c".  Very few people
failed to commit to a response.  Half of those, for example, "b or c" would
pick "b" and the other half "c" and everything would have been fine.  If you
think committing to an answer that is only true sometimes makes a large
difference in the results, imagine what throwing out those responses entirely
would do.

>But if you can't remember the last time
>you had a bad feeling of any kind, how can you know what a "good" feeling is?

It was a joke.

Don Gallogly
EUP_DG@CWU.bitnet
From: Shiv Kaul
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Subject: Re: Introduction
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:09:35 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium
Organisation: University College London

Hello!  I am also working in Memory.  My interest is in Memory Consolidation
and the mechanisms involved during sleep to achieve this.  I have been in
the Physiology Department at UCL here in the UK for about a year now.

Here's hoping someone with similar interests reads this!

Shiv

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Physiology       : Tel: (071) 387 7050 x3248 : 
University College London      : Fax: (071) 383 7005       :  
Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT  : Email: s.kaul@ucl.ac.uk   :    
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:00:50 EDT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         "Matthew Simpson" <054340@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject: Re: discussion versus "trapping"

On Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:15:05 EDT Someone said:
  (In Response to the use of a "trap" as a metaphor)....
>Second, I otherwise agree that this sort of interaction is unnecessarily
>hostile and indicates an agenda other than the interchange of ideas.

Hostile in what way?  What is the hidden agenda your thinking of?

RE: "trap"
It's only a metaphor used as an invitation for responses, as far as
I can see.  I hope no one is left feeling bad because I used this
sort of metaphor while trying to open some discussion and debate.
Please don't think that I had hostile intentions.  I think we should all
feel secure in the idea that no one is *really* out to get anyone here.
We're all safe here.  We are all friends.

>I
>have long disliked the idea of devil's advocates,etc. rather than
>candidly exploring one's knowledge and lack of knowledge.

Beyond knowledge, there lies technique.

>   There are plenty of ways we can offer up lively conversation without
>playing games. We are all rather bright people with heads full of facts
>and overflowing with opinions. We don't need to be baited.

Response 1: Name one way to "liven up a conversation" that cannot be
            described as "playing games."

Response 2:
Well, yeah, we don't really *need* anything other than food, shelter,
air, and water, right?  But we still do lots of other things than eat,
breath, drink and live.  So I won't argue that we *need* to be baited.
I won't even argue that you have been baited.

What's wrong with an open challenge?  Is this too threatening?
Is this too hostile?

[Read this next paragraph out loud with a soft, soothing, falsetto voice...]
(Please insert a nice warm-fuzzy feeling in your body right about here.
 Please imagine someone with nice pleasant intentions typing away at
 this letter with a pair of warm-fuzzy mittens on his hands).

I really like you.  Have fun!
Sincerely,  <---extra emphasis to add sincerity

Matthew Simpson

O======================================================================O
 | _  l  _  * Matthew Simpson          * BITNET:                      |
 |  \_l_/   * School of Psychology     * 054340@uottawa.bitnet        |
 |    l     * 145 Jean Jacques Lussier * INTERNET:                    |
 |    l     * Ottawa, Ontario K1N 8P5  * 054340@acadvm1.uottawa.ca    |
O======================================================================O
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU