Re:[tips] NY Times Article on Reproducibility
Psychologists have been using poor research methods for so long that we think our current methods are valid. We have been wise enough to detect these problems and often comment on them, and even study them, but we don't change them because there is essentially no correction. It's like the old quote about the weather: everybody talks about it but no one does anything about it. A good example I use in stats classes is reliability. Psychologists have actually made contributions to the study of measurement because our measures are so unreliable. I wonder how many studies will not replicate or have stable effect sizes if the dependent measures only have reliabilities of .8? If the dependent measures can't be improved, we still forge on using them as if they were perfectly valid and reliable. Of course, one consequence of this is a poor rate of replication. Mike Williams Drexel University On 9/3/15 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: RE: NY Times Article on Reproducibility From: "Mike Palij"Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:54:34 -0400 X-Message-Number: 1 On Tue, 01 Sep 2015 08:02:05 -0700, Jim Clark wrote: >Hi > >Piece in NY Times by psychologist defending the discipline. >http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/opinion/psychology-is-not-in-crisis.html?emc=edit_th_20150901=todaysheadlines=26933398&_r=0 > >Judging by comments, readers aren't buying the argument. Maybe Scott Lilienfeld should write an Op-Ed piece because of his background on reviewing psychology as a science vs being a pseudoscience. He hasn't commented on the reproducibility project but one imagines that he may have some useful insights as well as explanations that go beyond "this is just an example of the self-correcting nature of science". -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5=T=tips=46630 or send a blank email to leave-46630-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Lillienfield Article on Why Ineffective Therapies Appear to Work
I found the article a superb summary on all the possible defects of psychotherapy outcome research. I succumbs to many of the defects it summarizes by asserting that any of the research method fixes actually fix anything. They fail for two major reasons: 1) self-report measures (e.g. Beck Depression Inventory), the backbone of all dependent measures used in outcome research, are not independent observations or measurements. Human participants are not passive agents in the research study, providing objective assessments of their mental state. 2) Humans are interactive as they participate in the study. They form ideas about which treatment they are experiencing. It is easy to tell when you are in the control group. The IRB occasionally gets complaints from subjects because they were assigned to the control condition and they expected free treatment. This factor makes it impossible to have a blinded study of psychotherapy. This also applies to outcome studies of psychotropic medications. If you have a dry mouth and constipation, you are in the drug treatment group. There has never been a double-blind study of psychotherapy outcome. For this reason, even the empirically validated studies are not valid. I honestly don't know how to solve these problems. The first step might be to recognize that humans will never behave like passive laboratory rats and just survey them concerning factors like expectation bias. How large an effect on self-report measures does expectation bias produce? It is as large as the effects stated in the past as treatment effects? Mike Williams Drexel University On 7/25/15 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Lillienfield Article on Why Ineffective Therapies Appear to Work From: Michael Brittmich...@thepsychfiles.com Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:59:21 -0400 X-Message-Number: 2 Just finished discussing this article on my podcast: Why Ineffective Psychotherapies Appear to Work: A Taxonomy of Causes of Spurious Therapeutic Effectiveness http://www.latzmanlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Lilienfeld-et-al-2014-CSTEs.pdf http://www.latzmanlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Lilienfeld-et-al-2014-CSTEs.pdf Really worth reading. I’d go so far as to say that it might be considered required reading for grad students studying to be therapists. We all know how many pseudo-scientific therapies there are out there. If we can’t conduct good research on them then we might as well at least be aware of some of the reasons why we think they work when they don’t. Anyway, great article Scott and colleagues. Michael Michael A. Britt, Ph.D. mich...@thepsychfiles.com http://www.ThePsychFiles.com Twitter: @mbritt --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=46119 or send a blank email to leave-46119-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Longest Time To A Ph.D. Oral Defense EVER!
This is a great story. A small part of it is a testament to the role of the Medical College of Pennsylvania and Hahnemann University in training women and minority doctors in Philadelphia. In those days, the Dean of the Medical School interviewed every medical school applicant. Unfortunately, both institutions no longer exist. They were part of a larger system that went bankrupt. The remnants were incorporated into the Drexel University School of Medicine. Mike Williams On 6/11/15 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Longest Time To A Ph.D. Oral Defense EVER! From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 14:10:10 -0400 X-Message-Number: 2 There is a remarkable story in the popular press about a German woman getting her Ph.D. in neonatology after passing her oral defense. The remarkable part is that she is 102 years old and had to wait almost 80 years to get to do her oral defense. It's a story about racist German Nazis and rabid U.S. anti-communists and, ultimately, resolution. Several outlets have the story but with varying degrees of detail. For those in a hurry, here's the story on the US News and World Reports:website http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/06/09/102-year-old-jewish-woman-to-receive-doctorate-in-germany and from the BBC website: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33048927 The Wall Street Journal article has the greatest amount of detail, explaining why after coming to the US and getting an MD degree she and her husband would go back to Germany, to East Berlin, in the early 1950s after the US Joseph McCarthy's House Un-American Activities Committee (see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy ) got interested in their involvement with the US communist party. For the Wall Street Journal account see: http://www.wsj.com/articles/from-nazi-germany-a-tale-of-redemption-1431576062 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=45349 or send a blank email to leave-45349-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] A Clinical Trial Undone
Here is an interesting NT Times news story on a clinical drug trial gone bad. I plan to discuss it in my stats class. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/business/seroquel-xr-drug-trial-frayed-promise.html?_r=1 On aspect of the article highlights how desperate recruitment becomes for the drug companies. So much more could have been said about this. In my experience, the stock of the companies rests on the drugs they have in development. If a trial ends for any reason, the stock values fall. Since the trial monitors and others are all given stock options, their personal finances diminishes if a trial is ended early. As a result, they apply pressure on the investigators to get patients in the trial at all costs. The investigators are also paid a set amount when a subject completes the trial. These factors also work to keep the trials as short in duration as possible. Treating Borderline disorder in 8 weeks and getting positive findings is just expectation bias influencing the self-report measures. Most people are also unaware of what the drug companies have done to the IRB process. Virtually all the trials are now reviewed by for-profit centralized IRBs. This makes the review much more efficient but presumably reduces local oversight by the institutions involved in the trials. Mike Williams Drexel University --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=44390 or send a blank email to leave-44390-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Brain and Mind
Both of these systems are still mediated by the brain. Since the software/hardware controversy and plasticity are widely accepted as possible models for brain function, and discussed in the neuroscience literature, the Neurohacks article just sets up some straw men and implies that non one believes the brain is plastic. I didn't learn anything new from it. I'm preparing two papers on brain development using DTI imaging and came across three great papers. The papers by Bucker Krienen and Neubauer Hublin are two of a small number of papers that hit my brain like a bucket of cold water. I was hanging on every word. They represent theories of brain development that do incorporate a balance between hardware and software development (especially Buckner). Mike Williams Stiles, J., Jernigan, T. L. (2010). The basics of brain development. Neuropsychology review, 20(4), 327-348. doi: 10.1007/s11065-010-9148-4 Buckner, R. L., Krienen, F. M. (2013). The evolution of distributed association networks in the human brain. Trends in cognitive sciences, 17(12), 648-665. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.017 Neubauer, S., Hublin, J.-J. (2012). The Evolution of Human Brain Development. Evolutionary Biology, 39(4), 568-586. doi: 10.1007/s11692-011-9156-1 On 12/19/14 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: (1) to have all aspects of this system's functionality hardwired, in this case, embodied in form of individual neurons, neural networks, and systems of neural networks, or (2) to have all aspects of this system's functionality as software, in this case, general purpose neurons that are highly adaptable (e.g., stem cells), that can form general purpose neural networks that can be specialized to handle specific forms of information (e.g., representations of visual information or auditory info or etc.), and systems of such neural networks. On 12/18/14 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: With all of the wack and rank neuroscience being promoted these days, it's easy for people to think that brain function is that same thing as cognitive function. One popular media article that points out some of the problems with this view is an Neurohacks article on the BBC website; see: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141216-can-you-live-with-half-a-brain --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=41205 or send a blank email to leave-41205-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Haters of Neuroscience
I found the essay reasonably supportive of the neuroscience investigations. The questions he raises would be great to investigate. Neuroscience research like this has great potential in resolving many of the Nature v Nurture controversies. The one thing about fMRI research that makes it different from most psychology research is that it is empirically driven and not influenced by the expectations of the researcher or the subjects. In this way, the field is similar to studies of obesity. The pattern I get from the scanner is the pattern I have to live with. The major reservation I have with the field is publication bias. The investigators jump all the hurdles to get a study with positive findings published. With negative findings, they tend to move on to the next study and neglect to publish the negative findings. Mike Williams On 7/13/14 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: For Haters Of Neuroscience... From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 08:28:20 -0400 X-Message-Number: 2 And you know who you are. The NY Times has an opinion piece by NYU's Gary Marcus titled The Trouble With Brain Science which goes into some of the difficulties that recent initiatives (e.g., the EU's Brain Initiative) have since we don't seem to have the basic questions right; see: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/12/opinion/the-trouble-with-brain-science.html?emc=edit_th_20140712nl=todaysheadlinesnlid=389166_r=0 NOTE: No dead salmon were involved. -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=37558 or send a blank email to leave-37558-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Whose IQ Is It?
Paul A. McDermott, P A, Watkins, M W Rhoad, A M (2014). Whose IQ Is It?---Assessor Bias Variance in High-Stakes Psychological Assessment, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 26, No. 1, 207--214 http://edpsychassociates.com/Papers/IQassessorBias(2014).pdf http://edpsychassociates.com/Papers/IQassessorBias%282014%29.pdf This is a remarkable paper. If you need to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of IQ tests, here is a new angle. From the point of view of clinical assessment, my summary is that the findings indicate how the Wechsler Scales are so poorly designed. This exposes some big holes in the scoring of the tests that could be easily remedied by design changes. Take the examiner out of the scoring. Subtests in multiple choice format did not suffer from examiner defects in scoring. I was surprised by the magnitude of error. The examiners were probably just expressing the uncertainty in assigning scores that apply to any group of examiners. The first sentence of the Discussion (see below) is a compelling indictment of the profession and the Wechsler scales. Maybe we can get the blinders off and fix the tests. It is unlikely we can fix the examiners. The degree of assessor bias variance conveyed by FSIQ and VCI scores effectively vitiates the usefulness of those measures for differential diagnosis and classification, particularly in the vicinity of the critical cut points ordinarily applied for decision making. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=37468 or send a blank email to leave-37468-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] The Monty Hall Problem
Hello All. I wrote a standalone program to simulate the Monty Hall problem. This problem is a good example of the contrast between intuitive and actual probability. It is a great exercise for stats classes when you cover probability. If you have not heard of it, there are a number of web sites that explain it. There are also other web-based simulators. I could not find one that allowed the user to set up their own n of trials so I wrote this one in Livecode. Mike Williams Presentation: http://www.learnpsychology.com/monty/Monty_Hall_Presentation.pptx Mac Version: http://www.learnpsychology.com/monty/Monty_Hall_Problem.zip PC Version: http://www.learnpsychology.com/monty/Monty_Hall_Problem.exe --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=36993 or send a blank email to leave-36993-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Psychopaths' Brain
I discussed these studies briefly with Kent when I attended one of his workshops sponsored by the MIND Institute. The imaging work they do is first class. The only reservation I have about psychopathy (and many areas like this in Psychiatry) is the determination of the independent variable. They use an elaborate interview, self-report questionnaire and records review. They are as thorough as possible. Unfortunately, they still can't partial out psychopathy from correlated factors that may produce brain imaging differences, in particular, drug use and traumatic brain injury. The patterns they find are also essentially random areas roughly within the limbic system. The pattern doesn't explain psychopathy. If they examined a random sample of TBI patients, they would get similar results. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608003/Study-Half-jailed-NYC-youths-brain-injury.html Although many people on this list are disparaging of neuroimaging, this is a good example of how its done well and how complex it is. In contrast to virtually every other area of psychological research, the investigator and the subjects are unable to manipulate the dependent measure: What you get is what you see. It's very hard for a subject who knows the hypothesis to manipulate his grey matter density; it's very easy to endorse a lower level of depression if I don't want more ECT. Mike Williams On 4/19/14 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: The website for Wired has an interesting interview with the researcher Kent Kiehl who has studied psychopaths for 20 years; the interview is here: http://www.wired.com/2014/04/psychopath-brains-kiehl/ The interview is partly a shill for Kiehl's new book The Psychopath Whisperer which is geared for the general public (i.e., it is a money book, that is, a book a scientist writes not for a limited scientific or academic audience but to appeal to a broad audience and is expect to make a fair amount of money -- most popular science books are money books though not all of them make a lot of money). Anyway, Kiehl has his own mobile MRI scanner (there is a picture of him next to trailer that contains the scanner) so he's not doing too badly. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=36243 or send a blank email to leave-36243-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Construct Validity and IQ
I think many of the responses to the IQ and g discussion have mistaken models of cognition and validity that underlie them. I will just summarize these by making two points. The first is that measurement devices, such as IQ tests, are valid or reliable and do not embody multiple validities or reliabilities. Since there are a few ways validity and reliability are estimated, the tendency is to think that a measurement tool embodies multiple validities and reliabilities. There is only one validity and this is determined by 1) the logical integrity of the theory that defines the construct and the 2) mapping of the construct on to a measurement device. The measurement device can include a multiple choice test, recall test, self-report questionnaire etc., whatever matches the theoretical model of the construct. Empirical studies are then conducted to test hypotheses about the mapping of the theory to the device. These studies have been given different names that we are all familiar with, such as criterion validity, concurrent validity etc. This suggest that there are different validities for each test. There is only one validity, construct validity, and this is estimated using a variety of empirical studies. However, no empirical study can provide evidence for the validity of a measurement device if the theoretical model defining the construct is vague. Since this is a teaching forum, the example I present in class is a set of validity coefficients for a test I refer to as the Spelling Test from the Wide Range Achievement Test. These include factor analyses and prediction studies, using the test to predict grades and other criteria. I then reveal the test items. The first item is the first item from the Arithmetic subtest of the WRAT, something like 7+5=?. The correlations I presented were all studies of the Arithmetic subtest. They appear very convincing and they are generally in the same range as the correlations of the Spelling subtest. The point is that the constructs were extremely different and the correlation patterns were indistinguishable for both constructs. The only way I know this is because I have theoretical models of Spelling and Arithmetic that are clear and distinct. Validity (i.e. Construct Validity) is in the theoretical understanding of the theorist, not determined by empirical studies. IQ and g are not theoretically clear. Their validity is consequently unknown even if the device called an IQ test correlates with other measurements in expected directions and magnitudes. Once you get to the level of IQ battery subtests, many of these problems become clear. Just as an example, it is clear from item examination and factor analyses that the Information, Vocabulary, Similarities and Comprehension subtests of the WAIS just measure a better-defined construct called Semantic Knowledge. If you are familiar with the subtests, just think about this as a theoretical possibility. For example a Comprehension subtest item, Why do we pay taxes? requires the semantic knowledge associated with the word taxes. It is just another way of asking for the definition of the word taxes. These subtests are grouped by the test developer under a construct called Verbal Intelligence. All the Performance subtests group together because they are timed tests. They may also measure other constructs but their common variance is based on the subject solving problems quickly. However, the grouping is given the name Performance Intelligence. The odd couple, Arithmetic and Digit Span, group together because they share variance on Sustained Attention. Kaufman called the grouping Freedom From Distractability. The General IQ score is just the average of all these scores in comparison to the population average of the scores. No factor analysis has ever supported averaging all the subtests. This would require that Semantic Knowledge correlate highly with Sustained Attention etc. The constructs of Semantic Knowledge, Sustained Attention and Timing are much better defined than the constructs Verbal Intelligence, Performance Intelligence and Freedom From Distractability. IQ has no clear definition as a measurement construct; Semantic Knowledge does. The WAIS should be called the Semantic Knowledge, Sustained Attention and Timing Test. There is no g in the WAIS that I can discern. The correlations of the WAIS IQ scores with other tests, grades etc., exists because there is a correlation of semantic knowledge with these other measures. Semantic Knowledge exists but intelligence does not. In as much as semantic knowledge is acquired through reading and education, the correlations of the WAIS with any other measure is just the correlation of one measure of education with other education measures (e.g. grades), or other criteria that are also influenced by education (e.g. occupation success, salary etc). Somehow, psychologists were
[tips] How Intelligent is IQ
I couldn't agree more with Mike Palij's analysis. IQ and g never existed. IQ is just an average score; g is just an artifact of factor analysis. Neither represent cognitive or brain processes. They don't explain anything and they are hard to define. Any vague construct has unknown construct validity. Check out Muriel Lezak's INS presidential address (IQ: RIP): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3292568 Mike Williams On 4/9/14 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Re: How Intelligent is IQ? - Neuroskeptic | DiscoverMagazine.com From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 15:18:45 -0400 X-Message-Number: 8 John, Create 10 random variables via SPSS or your favoriate statistical package. The distributions don't matter (for simiplicity's sake, they can all be random normal variate but for generality sake use a different probability distribution for each variable). The correlation matrix of these 10 variables will have a rank = 10 (i.e., cannot be reduced to a smaller matrix because the rows and columns are independent). This is how modules are supposed to work. But why then do we get correlations, especially in cognitive tests? Chomsky might argue that for tests of language, the correlations are artifacts of measurement or from other sources because the language module is independent of all other cognitive modules. And Chomsky will argue until the cows come home that language is an independent module, so take it up with him if you are feeling feisty.;-) Of course the real problem with g is that it is not theory of mind but a mathematical consequence of factor analyzing correlation matrices. Stop and consider: one theory of cognitive architecture for g is that there is a single process that serves as the basis for thought. This breaks down as soon as we make a distinction like short-term memory versus long-term memory or declarative memory versus nondeclarative memory or [insert you own favorite distinction]. What is g supposed to be besides an mathematcal entity? Or consider the following: let's call the performance of racing cars g which represents winning races. All cars can be rank-ordered on the basis of how many races and g explains performance. Cars high in g win more races than cars low in g. g is the general ability of cars to win races. How useful is that as a concept? NOTE: assuming g in this case does not require one to know anything about automotive engineering, just how well cars perform. Now change cars to people and races to tests. g is the general ability of people to do well on tests. How useful is that as a concept? -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=35982 or send a blank email to leave-35982-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Help! Learning Styles are Eating the Brains of Our Young
Fortunately for every GS in the world there are 10 mentors or advisers who thought the best for you. Whatever the intellectual talents of a GS, their over-compensating attitude will leave them with no students who want to work with them. Mike Williams On 3/30/14 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Re:Help! Learning Styles are Eating the Brains of Our Young From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:02:23 -0400 X-Message-Number: 2 On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:11:27 -0700, Mike Wiliams wrote: When responding to the research of students in high school or undergrads, I go by a simple maxim: What would Mr. Rogers say? They need to feel that the work is important and that they are important. They can have the drivel shaken out when they get to grad school. I don't know if Mike Williams has lapsed into Louis Schmierism (i.e., uncritical, unconditional positive regard that is usually safe only for tenured professors and ill prepares students for learning how to deal with professors and colleagues who will ruthlessly exploit them in their quest for fame and fortune) but let me provide a counterweight to the Mr. Rogers' position by asking what would one of the most difficult professors I ever had might do (and by difficult, I mean that in all possible senses, from being intellectually opaque -- if you could not understand him it was because you were too stupid -- to emotionally distant -- the don't bother me with the reasons why you can't make a deadline/get work done/need a social life/etc, there are others who can do your job). I'll refer to this professor as GS and ask the question What would GS do? A little more background: when GS was hired for his professorship, he initially taught a course at the undergraduate and graduate level. After the first semester, the complaints from the undergraduates were so great that the university administration (who viewed GS as a prized faculty member and a jewel in its crown) decided that GS didn't have to teach undergraduate courses, only graduate level courses (presumably he would cause the least amount of damage with graduate students). GS's level of productivity (often through the efficient and effective use of graduate students) and ability to get grant money secured his position in the university -- his teaching was secondary to all of this. So, he would become a power in the psychology department, in the university, and in the field, ultimately making him a member of the National Academy of Sciences. So, what would GS do? I imagine that he would argue that we should not encourage people who cannot do good science or are unable to distinguish between good science and bad science from engaging in anything that can be construed as science given the view that most of what passes for scientific research is flawed, misleading, and a waste of precious resources. With respect to high school students doing research projects, I think that he might say that bad science has to be nipped in the bud. Perhaps the student would be better off doing something more suited to their intellectual abilities, such as selling real estate or becoming a politician. This, however, is just speculation on my part; I don't think GS would have cared what the student did with their life -- there are far too many more important things to be concerned about. I'd like to point that I have come across other faculty/researchers who came from the mode that made GS: some legitimately brilliant but lacking in empathy and compassion, some who just seemed good at denigrating and exploiting people even though they never accomplished much in their own career. I have stopped being amazed that people like this seem to rise to high levels of power in the discipline because that seems to be a primary goal (though some can't get to a very high level because they are B list or C list academic superstars, but an academic superstar is still a superstar from the perspective of administrators). In the situation of reviewing a student's work on learning styles, I would try to point out what the strengths and weaknesses are of the research but would recommend that the student engage in scholarship on the topic and to be mindful of the confirmation bias, of only looking for research that supports one's favorite hypothesis or position. They need to come to their own realization of the limitations of their understanding of the phenomenon -- like most of us, they probably won't really follow the advice given to them. But one has to look on the bright side of this situation: the student could have attempted a replication of one of Bem's PSI experiments and had a successful replication. Who would wants to explain that retroactive causation doesn't really exist and that the results are probably due to expectancy effects and other problems? What if the student's faculty sponsor actually believes such stuff? Good luck. -Mike Palij New York University m
Re:[tips] Psychology and Politics
Richard Redding wrote a nice paper on this issue for the American Psychologist: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11315246 Am Psychol. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11315246# 2001 Mar;56(3):205-15.Sociopolitical diversity in psychology. The case for pluralism. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=35051 or send a blank email to leave-35051-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] SAT and High School grade study
Given the level of education debt in the country, it's obvious that colleges and Universities are making far more money than test companies. Has anyone ever calculated how much information is lost by converting a perfectly good test average into a letter? Did I say letter? We actually convert scores into letters? Imagine if we converted IQ scores into letters. Does anyone know the history of using letter grades? The error in grading as a measurement device contributes to the lower predictive power of grades. If we scored courses better, I am willing to bet that they would be completely redundant with SATs etc and standardized testing would have no unique predictive power. Mike Williams On 2/20/14 12:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Assessment companies and the test prep companies that live symbiotically off of them make a great deal of money. The test score is held up and apart from the grades as being somehow more fair. So I think they invite the scrutiny. I think any individual grade from the student's middle school or high school record might be less useful than an aggregate GPA. The 20-30 instructors together make an index with considerable predictive power. Not that they shouldn't be held accountable also. But it's unlikely that all 20 or so are grading too easy or too hard. And no individual instructor has the same financial investment in his or her product than the handful of institutions making coin from theirs. That being said, SES, for both grades and test scores, is a problematic variable to tease out from merit/ability to succeed in higher education. Nancy Melucci Long Beach City College Long Beach CA -Original Message- From: Mike Wiliamsjmicha5...@aol.com To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu Sent: Tue, Feb 18, 2014 11:10 pm Subject: Re:[tips] SAT and High School grade study These studies of SAT and grades as predictors or criterion just highlight how grades are poorly designed as a measurement device. What is their reliability and validity as measures of performance. Somehow the college board and SAT makers get the scrutiny that we don't apply to ourselves as grade makers. The error goes both ways. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=34403 or send a blank email to leave-34403-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] SAT and High School grade study
These studies of SAT and grades as predictors or criterion just highlight how grades are poorly designed as a measurement device. What is their reliability and validity as measures of performance. Somehow the college board and SAT makers get the scrutiny that we don't apply to ourselves as grade makers. The error goes both ways. Mike Williams On 2/19/14 12:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Re: SAT and High School grade study --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=34371 or send a blank email to leave-34371-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Re-Imagining HM's Brain
I'm in the middle of the book-length summary of HM by Suzanne Corkin, entitled Permanent Present Tense. It's a masterpiece. It includes everything about HM, from his personal experiences to all the testing they did with him through the years. I have learned a lot from it and I thought I knew everything. I also attended a session by this group at a conference. They plan to make all the images available at the site below. Mike Williams On 1/26/14 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Re-Imagining HM's Brain From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 22:12:19 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2 There's a couple of news articles on a project that is constructing a 3-dimensional representation of the famous Henry Molaison or HM's brain. The New Scientist has one such article; see: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24944-neurosciences-most-famous-brain-is-reconstructed.html#.UuXK1vso7bQ At the end of the above article, there is a source given but neither the journal (Nature communications) or the DOI seem to work. For more information about the project, go to the Brain Observatory website that contains more info on this and other aspects of HM; see: http://thebrainobservatory.org/hm -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=33519 or send a blank email to leave-33519-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] For your friends who question tenure...
IRBs are not completely independent. Aside from the obvious dependencies resulting from the fact that the institution pays everyone's salary, the designated institutional official can override any IRB approval of research. The IRB decision to disapprove a study cannot be overridden. Mike Williams On 1/23/14 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Re: For your friends who question tenure... From: MiguelRoigmiguelr...@comcast.net Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:59:30 + (UTC) X-Message-Number: 1 Those of you interested in IRB angle of Willingham's research may be interested in this 1-page document that was posted yesterday to the IRB forum: http://research.unc.edu/files/2014/01/Willingham-media-clarification-1-21-2014.pdf A line that kind of jumped at me was this one: The IRB at UNC operates with a very high degree of independence and authority, as it was intended. 'High degree of independence'? Shouldn't that have been 'complete independence'? Miguel --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=33016 or send a blank email to leave-33016-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] For your friends who question tenure...
Why don't we compel the professional sports organizations to start farm clubs for Football and Basketball, like we have for Baseball? It would resolve this hypocrisy, improve the sports and probably help the economy of smaller cities. I find it tragic that students at large Universities with essentially professional sports teams cannot play on the school football and basketball teams. Get the farm clubs out of the Universities and these problems will be solved. The IRB did the right thing by exempting her research. Even if they don't exempt the study, and review it, she will likely be approved. Fortunately, one of the positive things about IRBs is that they are essentially independent of the administration. If anyone in the administration tries to influence the deliberations, UNC could get into a lot more trouble than bad news about their athletes. The administration is between a rock and a hard place. If this was research about something other than the University itself, they could prohibit the research based on its poor quality. Since the object of the research is the University, prohibiting the study makes it appear that the administration is suppressing the study. Although tenure has a general bearing on the issues, I did not read that the investigator was tenured. This case suggests that a free press (CNN) may keep the University fair and honest. Mike Williams On 1/20/14 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: For your friends who question tenure... Subject: For your friends who question tenure... From: Christopher Greenchri...@yorku.ca Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:44:25 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2 For those of you (probably not many on this list) who might have thought that tenure is unnecessary in this modern era to protect the integrity of research from the political motivations of a vindictive administration. UNC IRB suddenly reverses its decision AFTER THE FACT on whether research that shows many of its athletes to be functionally illiterate requires oversight. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/20/u-north-carolina-shuts-down-whistle-blower-athletes Sheesh! Chris --- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=32939 or send a blank email to leave-32939-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Useful Hardware and Software for Computer Lab?
The Memory Screening Test has an interesting history and the only reason to describe it for the list is the observation that it represents a test that cannot be normed. I heard about the test indirectly from Charles Long when traveling back from a conference. He went to a session in which someone was following a tumor patient using a memory recognition test in which the examiner would present a card with 6 figures, point to one and ask the patient to remember that a particular figure had been indicated. After presenting 15 cards, the examiner then presents the first card and asks, Which one of these did I point to before?. The standard amnesic response is, You never showed me these before. The examiner then proceeds through the 15 cards asking the same question. All the patient has to do is point to, or name the figure indicated on the first presentation. The test is eloquent, simple and portable. It was a perfect substitute for the testing I was doing while following trauma patients in the ICU and acute hospital setting. I could administer the test every day as the patient recovered memory. When the patient obtained 13/15 correct, I would administer a regular memory test and other neuropsych assessment. The test was normed with the Memory Assessment Scales (MAS). However, after giving it to approx 800 subjects, I observed that there was no variance among normal subjects. Maybe 10 normal subjects made an error. A test with no variance among normals cannot be normed. This was one major factor that encouraged me to rethink how norms are constructed and what they really mean. This problem of low variance includes many tests used in neuropsychology. In my experiences with patients at very low levels of ability, I have come to the realization that cognition is either on, and working within normal limits, or essentially, off. For example, the idea that memory increases monotonically with the memory score is a fallacy. There may be major characterizations of memory disorder that might correspond to levels of ability but the idea that it increases and decreases monotonically with a memory score is just incorrect. I also think that the scaling and construction of conventional norms reifies small differences reinforced by a bell curve model of ability. The amount of variance in the raw score describing normal is much smaller than we think. The raw score levels corresponding to norms are not reported because test publishers wish to protect their norms. They consider them proprietary. The scaling of ability using standard scores reinforces the interpretation that small differences in ability appear large. Compare your memory to that of Commander Data on Star Trek and you will have an idea of what a large difference might be. When it comes to memory, a normal level is essentially impaired. If one of the drug companies invented a medication that improved memory by a standard deviation, I would not be impressed. iPads, iPhones and continuous internet access have increased our memory ability much greater. I made iPad versions of the screening test and the Hahnemann Orientation and Memory Examination (HOME). These were portable tests I developed to track trauma patients. The data I collected was reported in Williams, J. M., (1990). The Neuropsychological Assessment of Traumatic Brain Injury in the Intensive Care and Acute Care Environment. In C. J. Long, L. Ross (Eds.), Traumatic Brain Injury, New York: Plenum. Mike Williams P.S. I also sell a beautiful Naming Test that also cannot be normed. Check Brainmetric.com. On 12/11/13 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Re: Useful Hardware and Software for Computer Lab? From: Michael Brittmich...@thepsychfiles.com Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 06:08:53 -0500 X-Message-Number: 3 Mike, I'm curious about your Memory Screening Test. The description in iTunes mentions some norming work that has been done on the test. Do you have any published research on it? Michael Michael A. Britt, Ph.D. mich...@thepsychfiles.com http://www.ThePsychFiles.com Twitter: @mbritt --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=31273 or send a blank email to leave-31273-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Useful Hardware and Software for Computer Lab?
This is a shameless plug for software I designed myself. They are all sold through brainmetric.com. Although they were originally designed for research studies, I have always had in the back of my head that many would be useful in teaching labs. I also developed some programs for teaching statistics. If you have E-prime, Presentation and systems like these installed, many researchers have developed procedures in these systems that could be used in class. Mike Williams Drexel Univesity --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=31209 or send a blank email to leave-31209-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Higgs Bosons and the tenure system
This past June, Marcus Raichle was awarded the Talairach award by the Organization for Human Brain Mapping. The award was given for his discovery and examination of the Resting State. Now, we take resting state scans as a matter of routine, just in case we might think of a study in the future. The person reviewing Dr. Raichle's background and presenting the award actually made the comment that Dr Raichle would never make it as a PI today since he only published 6 papers a year. I really have no proposed solution to this problem. People in academic life are wasting so much time publishing ruminative and redundant work. It seems that all the great discoveries come from outside this system. Somehow the reward system has to shift from counting publications to counting discoveries. Mike Williams On 12/7/13 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: TIPS Digest for Saturday, December 07, 2013. 1. Random Thought: Tis The Season To Be Grateful, II 2. Higgs Bosons and the tenure system 3. Why is this Funny? 4. Re: Why is this Funny? 5. Re: Higgs Bosons and the tenure system 6. Re: Why is this Funny? 7. Re: Higgs Bosons [and Barbara McClintock] -- Subject: Random Thought: Tis The Season To Be Grateful, II From: Louis Eugene Schmierlschm...@valdosta.edu Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 10:54:45 + X-Message-Number: 1 Gifts have been bought, shipped, and some given. Getting ready for some grandmunchkin spoiling. Tis now the season of being consciously grateful. So, I especially was thinking about my two sons. I deeply admire them, deeply. My Silicon Valley Michael always wants--needs--the challenge and excitement of something new; my artist-with-food Robby is always looking for a culinary new (oh, you should taste his pickles, bacon, and lox). Neither are status quo people. Old hat doesn't fit them. They're always deftly on the move in their professions and lives. A risky let's see if and an unsuccessful oops are not their enemies; fearfully stymying am not, paralyzing can't and atrophying won't are. They experiment; they're not one-and-out people. They're not embarrassed or diminished by doesn't work. They know behind every one of their accomplishments there were a host of attempts. Perseverance and practice are their names, commitment is their game. Th ey've learned through trail and error. They don't stick with one chiseled in stone habit of doing one thing one way, over and over again. They adapt, adopt, invent, create, generate, discard, modify, adjust. They venture out into new worlds to pass milestones rather than being weighed down and slowed by millstones.. They're really humble, knowing that too much pride can rob them of their confident I wonder if. They know so much about what they don't know. They know that mastering their craft has taken a lot of time and pain, but they've learned to learn to put in the time in order to convert that pain into gain. I am truly thankful to have them as my sons and humbled to have them call me dad. Love them both. I've decided to keep them. And, when I see them in the coming weeks, I will hug them, kiss them, and tell them, thank you for becoming you--and spoil their kids rotten. Susie and I would like to wish one and all a merry, happy, and all that. Make it a good day -Louis- Louis Schmier http://www.therandomthoughts.edublogs.org 203 E. Brookwood Pl http://www.therandomthoughts.com Valdosta, Ga 31602 (C) 229-630-0821 /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /^\\/ \/ \ /\/\__ / \ / \ / \/ \_ \/ / \/ /\/ / \/\ \ //\/\/ /\ \__/__/_/\_\/\_/__\ \ /\If you want to climb mountains,\ /\ _ / \don't practice on mole hills - / \_ -- Subject: Higgs Bosons and the tenure system From: Lilienfeld, Scott Oslil...@emory.edu Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 19:42:20 + X-Message-Number: 2 Hi All TIPSTERs: I thought that some of you might this piece worthy of discussion and debate: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system ...Scott Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D. President, Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy Professor, Department of Psychology Emory University Atlanta, Georgia 30322 This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
Re:[tips] Psychology Apps
Check out the software and mobile apps at Brainmetric.com Mike Williams -- Subject: Good Psychology Mobile Apps From: Michael Brittmich...@thepsychfiles.com Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:17:10 -0400 X-Message-Number: 1 I'm preparing a video episode for the podcast in which I'll be showing some of what I consider to the better psychology-related mobile apps. As you can imagine, there is a lot of pseudo-scence in the psychology apps available for mobile devices. I have a draft of my list which anyone is free to take a look at - feedback welcome - here: http://list.ly/draft/3e8618ef9ff62f89e12b17545049c7db --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=27758 or send a blank email to leave-27758-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Satel Lilienfeld book (Re: Watch A Legend In Action)
I just returned from the annual meeting of the Society for Human Brain Mapping (http://www.humanbrainmapping.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=1). No one presented any of the extreme misinterpretations that Satel Lilienfeld bring up in the book. The hyperpole they criticize is derived completely from the world of press release science that we live in. I attribute all this to the inability of the press to criticize itself. They create the misinterpretations in trying to create and push a story, and then criticize the investigators when the interpretations get hyped. Brain activations in fMRI are facts. The interpretation of these facts are subject to all the strengths and weaknesses of human reasoning. The undercurrent of the Satel and Lilienfeld book is a push-back to the blame the brain explanations that keep getting overhyped and rankle all of us. Neuroimaging is being used to support this but I have a feeling that fMRI studies will produce findings that will cause people to qualify the reductionist, genetic models and finally understand how the systems work. After all, fMRI is used to image environmental influences. There is no activation pattern to interpret (except for resting state) unless the investigator presents a stimulus to the subject. Since it is functional, fMRI has embedded within it the capacity for pushing our understanding of how the brain mediates complex function. It keeps getting better. Five years ago, 1.5 and 3T scanner could only image the entire hippocampus. At this meeting there were presentations on high resolution imaging of parts of the hippocampus. DTI imaging and spectroscopy keep getting better. Data analysis keeps getting better. The Allen Institute was present and integrating gene expressions with imaging is just beginning. I saw high resolution structural scans of leukemic children from St. Jude hospital illustrating white matter lesions that were not imaged before when I worked there in the 1980s. The clinical applications of fMRI, DTI and the new methods in neurological diseases is just emerging. There are many applications of imaging in clinical neurology and neuropsychology that have nothing to do with the God center, psychopathology or abstract psychological functions. Five or ten years ago, I thought the technology had run its course. It is just beginning. It's the media hype that has to run its course. The media is presenting a bizarre picture of the science. Mike Williams On 6/25/13 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Satel Lilienfeld book (Re: Watch A Legend In Action) --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=26231 or send a blank email to leave-26231-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Subject: Re: Support Our Troops bumper stickers
I meant powerless in the sense that they could not influence how the media and special interests depicted them. Someone had to be blamed and they were easy targets. I regret you had to choose one way or the other. I was in the last group to register for the draft and I honestly don't know what I would have done. I was fortunate to be just a year or two younger than those who had to make the choice. I did keep my draft card, although I don't know if many people today realize its significance as a souvenir of those times. We ceremoniously burned two things in the 1960s, bras and draft cards, sometimes in the same fire. Mike Williams On 5/30/13 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Mike- They weren't powerless. They could have refused to serve. I did. -Don. - Original Message - From: Mike Wiliamsjmicha5...@aol.com To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:45:30 AM Subject: Re:[tips] Support Our Troops bumper stickers These expressions to support the troops and honor their service are part of a general reaction to the way the troops were treated when they came back from the Vietnam War. I think it also reflects a general appreciation for the service of WWII veterans who have received a lot of attention in movies and documentaries. The Vietnam era veterans were blamed for losing the war by conservatives and blamed for atrocities by liberals. They were powerless scapegoats: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obama-recalls-vietnam-vets-treatment-as-national-shame-vows-it-will-not-happen-again/ We can still argue about Iraq. It should have nothing to do with supporting the troops. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=25805 or send a blank email to leave-25805-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Support Our Troops bumper stickers
These expressions to support the troops and honor their service are part of a general reaction to the way the troops were treated when they came back from the Vietnam War. I think it also reflects a general appreciation for the service of WWII veterans who have received a lot of attention in movies and documentaries. The Vietnam era veterans were blamed for losing the war by conservatives and blamed for atrocities by liberals. They were powerless scapegoats: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obama-recalls-vietnam-vets-treatment-as-national-shame-vows-it-will-not-happen-again/ We can still argue about Iraq. It should have nothing to do with supporting the troops. Mike Williams On 5/29/13 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: TIPS Digest for Tuesday, May 28, 2013. 1. Re: Support Our Troops bumper stickers -- Subject: Re: Support Our Troops bumper stickers From: Joan Warmboldjwarm...@oakton.edu Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 17:46:01 -0500 X-Message-Number: 1 These ongoing ceremonies to support and honor our troops has effectively wiped-out any further contemplation or discussion of our original ill-conceived rationale for invading Iraq. As you state Beth, to question our motives for going to war has been effectively distorted into a critique of the motives and honor of our soldiers. Personally, I feel this is an instructive example of the use of indoctrination 'in the free world' that could be an interesting focus of discussion in our classes. Joan jwarm...@oakton.edu On 5/25/2013 9:18 AM, Beth Benoit wrote: Giving thanks to our military on Memorial Day reminds me of my aversion to the yellow Support Our Troops bumper stickers in the U.S.Who DOESN'T support the soldiers themselves? If you are not in favor of invading a country with warlike intentions, does that also mean you don't support our troops? We may not all support the momentum that has sent our troops wherever they are ordered to go, but is there anyone who doesn't want them all to come home safely? Years ago, when the war centered on looking for weapons of mass destruction, I had a bumper sticker that said: Support Our Troops. Bring Them Home. Someone thoughtfully scrawled TRAITOR across it with a Magic Marker. Sadly, those yellow ribbon bumper stickers seem to have become icons that just indicate that the driver is a politically conservative person. Beth Benoit Granite State College Plymouth State University New Hampshire --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: jwarm...@oakton.edu mailto:jwarm...@oakton.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=49240.d374d0c18780e492c3d2e63f91752d0dn=Tl=tipso=25740 http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=49240.d374d0c18780e492c3d2e63f91752d0dn=Tl=tipso=25740 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-25740-49240.d374d0c18780e492c3d2e63f91752...@fsulist.frostburg.edu mailto:leave-25740-49240.d374d0c18780e492c3d2e63f91752...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: jmicha5...@aol.com To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13285.491159b91b3f6bfcebca81f03ebeee71n=Tl=tipso=25777 or send a blank email to leave-25777-13285.491159b91b3f6bfcebca81f03ebee...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=25779 or send a blank email to leave-25779-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] The evidence based bandwagon
Evidence-based practice and Standard of care are important concepts in medicine that are strongly related to Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code based reimbursement for health care services. If you do not provide an evidence-based standard of care, you will not get reimbursed for services. This is basically a good idea because physicians, dentists and others were providing all kinds of essentially ineffective, unusual therapies in order to maximize reimbursement. Restricting reimbursement to the effective treatments will obviously reduce health care costs. Clinical psychologists have joined the chorus and a number of groups are working on specifying the standard of care for psychological disorders. I was peripherally involved in this regarding neuropsych assessment and the CPT codes used for clinical fMRI. I would like to make two points about this. The first is the cognitive behavioral therapists are using this to further criticize psychoanalysis and other therapy schools that are not their own. The second point is that the standard for empirical validity in medicine treatment is the randomized, double-blind clinical trial. There has never been one of these for any psychological treatment, including cognitive-behavior therapies and psychotropic medications. By not examining the blinding, the drug companies have been very crafty in convincing the FDA that the studies were actually blind when a simple survey of the subjects would probably reveal that they know whether they were in the treatment condition or placebo. The onset of dry mouth and constipation are sure signs you are not getting the placebo. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24997 or send a blank email to leave-24997-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE:[tips] Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16)
I got the numbers from another Tipster and just plugged them in. I think they are correct now. Mike On 4/8/13 2:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: TIPS Digest for Sunday, April 07, 2013. 1. RE:Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16) 2. RE:Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16) -- Subject: RE:Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16) From: Mike Wiliamsjmicha5...@aol.com Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 01:09:25 -0400 X-Message-Number: 1 I updated the spreadsheet. It now includes an analysis for both samples. Mike Williams On 4/7/13 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: RE:Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16) From: David Epsteinda...@neverdave.com Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 12:58:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Number: 5 On Sat, 6 Apr 2013, Mike Wiliams went: I did the spreadsheet quickly and I hope there are no errors. http://www.learnpsychology.com/Men_Woman_ChildDepression_Example.xlsx It's a little less bad (less bad than the p = .57 on your spreadsheet) when you use the author's denominator, which is the subset of people who had actually wanted to have children: 67 out of 108. The numbers are then: male female depression 8 14 22 no depression8 37 45 16 51 67 And the p value is .09, two-tailed. But that's by far the biggest difference of the half dozen differences he reports. --David Epstein da...@neverdave.com --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24844 or send a blank email to leave-24844-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE:[tips] Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16)
I updated the spreadsheet. It now includes an analysis for both samples. Mike Williams On 4/7/13 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: RE:Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16) From: David Epsteinda...@neverdave.com Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 12:58:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Number: 5 On Sat, 6 Apr 2013, Mike Wiliams went: I did the spreadsheet quickly and I hope there are no errors. http://www.learnpsychology.com/Men_Woman_ChildDepression_Example.xlsx It's a little less bad (less bad than the p = .57 on your spreadsheet) when you use the author's denominator, which is the subset of people who had actually wanted to have children: 67 out of 108. The numbers are then: male female depression 8 14 22 no depression8 37 45 16 51 67 And the p value is .09, two-tailed. But that's by far the biggest difference of the half dozen differences he reports. --David Epstein da...@neverdave.com --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24831 or send a blank email to leave-24831-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE:[tips] Childlessness hits men the hardest (n = 16)
I used this example in class today because part of my introduction to stats involves examples of why statistics makes you think better. It went reasonably well. I quickly made up a 2x2 chi-square example using the depression frequencies reported in the article. I also made a link to the article in the Blackboard site for the course. Although we haven't covered chi-square yet, I think the example is simple enough that students can grasp the logic. Here is a link to the spreadsheet. I like Excel for examples because I can change data vales and immediately present what happens to the statistics when the change is made. I did the spreadsheet quickly and I hope there are no errors. http://www.learnpsychology.com/Men_Woman_ChildDepression_Example.xlsx Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24815 or send a blank email to leave-24815-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Nothing Personal: The questionable Myers-Briggs test | Science | guardian.co.uk
This is another example of using a false measure that appears objective in order to enforce variance among people that does not exist. In business and many other areas, the problem is selecting one person for a job from 100 applicants (or more) who are largely the same. We need to appear to use objective measures that appear to discriminate one applicant from another. We want the selection to look objective. Since the screening process has usually filtered out anyone objectively low on any reasonable selection variables, the remaining pool contains people who are the same. The only reasonable and fair solution to this is to use a lottery. They have a lottery for admission to Philadelphia Charter kindergarden that everyone endorses as fair. Although no one provided a rationale for this lottery, I think all involved understand that there would be no fair method to select the children based on tests or some other factor. We need to use lotteries more often in these situations. We could even make a standard for constrained variance that would kick in a lottery when the screened group becomes too similar. That would be fair and applicants would know why they were or were not selected. Mike Williams Drexel University On 3/23/13 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Nothing Personal: The questionable Myers-Briggs test | Science | guardian.co.uk From: Christopher Greenchri...@yorku.ca Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:15:14 -0400 X-Message-Number: 1 Here's a good article about the problems of the Myers-Briggs test that might be useful to pass along to students who ask about it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/brain-flapping/2013/mar/19/myers-briggs-test-unscientific?CMP=twt_fd Chris --- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24482 or send a blank email to leave-24482-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] AAUP recommends more researcher autonomy in IRB reform | Inside Higher Ed
If you would like to get some control of the IRB process, compel your institutions to use the Huron IRB management system: http://www.huronconsultinggroup.com/Insights/Webinar/Education/IRB_Automation_Best_Practices.aspx We just went to this system and I estimated that I saved 30% of the usual aggravation and time. The system has a set of checklists and worksheets that clarify the actions of both the investigators and the IRB. They include every detail that should be included to satisfy the regs, and no more. I am also on the IRB and the Huron system constrains the behavior of the research department and IRB such that feedback to the investigators includes only information consistent with the regulations and no more. It also saves the IRB considerable time. Since the checklist are so clear and have been refined as a result of practical use by hundreds of IRBs, we discuss and argue/ruminate very little. The general result is efficiency that improves the relationship of investigators to the IRB and probably saves collectively thousands of hours of time. The system is worth much more than what it costs. Many of the unfortunate examples mentioned on this list would not have happened using the Huron system. I should also state that I have no relationship to Huron. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24208 or send a blank email to leave-24208-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] AAUP recommends more researcher autonomy in IRB reform | Inside Higher Ed
This will have no impact since investigators are not represented in AAHRPP or PRIMR. These organizations are sustained by more and more regulations. They ignore the interests of investigators and essentially treat investigators like they are all intent on harming subjects. It is a real them vs us attitude and there is essentially no check on their behavior. If there is one thing that the Republicans got right is that when you create regulations, you great and industry and special interest that feeds off supporting them. http://www.primr.org/ http://www.aahrpp.org/ Mike Williams On 3/7/13 12:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: AAUP recommends more researcher autonomy in IRB reform | Inside Higher Ed From: Christopher Greenchri...@yorku.ca Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 09:02:04 -0500 X-Message-Number: 1 A very interesting development in the history of the IRB. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/06/aaup-recommends-more-researcher-autonomy-irb-reform Chris --- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=24167 or send a blank email to leave-24167-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] The Man Who Mistook...Though Not Perfect Still Quite Amazing
I'm not sure what you mean by not perfect. As far as I know, all the case reports are valid. You have to keep in mind that Sacks is following the tradition of Luria's romantic mode of science. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGqLfP-LtgE). The cases are not objective, clinical descriptions only. They expand on the humanistic aspects of having these disorders. They are his best descriptions of the life of the patient with the remaining abilities rather than a disability. His Island of the Color Blind includes wonderful descriptions of life without color. The PBS special is a great video for classes in Sensation Perception: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM06G26X-rQ Mike Williams On 2/13/13 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: The Man Who Mistook . . .Though Not Perfect Still Quite Amazing From: Joan Warmboldjwarm...@oakton.edu Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:04:58 -0600 (CST) X-Message-Number: 2 This is not a perfect book as I'm sure others who recommended it would agree. But it has so very much to offer. How many other books focused on brain function provide a glimpse into the lives of people with such an extraordinary variety of brain malfunction and the consequences thereof? --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=23714 or send a blank email to leave-23714-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] TED talks and lectures
This is a style of course construction that I follow now that still includes some form of lectures: 1) Computer-mediation: Everything is stored in a course within Blackboard. I have written some programs using Livecode that provide for demonstrations and interactive lab exercises. (see Windows version: http://www.learnpsychology.com/courses/spcourse/Limulus.exe; Mac version: http://www.learnpsychology.com/courses/spcourse/Limulus.zip). There are many sources for commercial software that do many of the things I programmed. 2) All the course content is divided into sections that students can reasonably study in one week. This includes conventional readings from the text book and/or other sources, all my Powerpoint lectures recorded by me, movies and the interactive software that pertains to the unit. The advantage of recording the lectures is that the student does not have to take it all in within 50min. They can pause, rewind etc. The lecture pace is under their control. 3) The units also contain a test on the material that is taken on-line using test construction and administration tools offered by Blackboard. All the test items I used in the past for midterms and finals were incorporated into these unit tests. I was also able to add many more questions since the tests were not packed into a single testing session. I also don't waste class time giving tests. The students can take the tests when they finish studying a unit at any point in the course. They must have them all done by the end of the course. 4) The classes are now filled with questions, discussion, interactive lab exercises and a short presentation like a TED talk that most often include clinical cases, sometimes I present movies segments from the units as a way to start discussions. They are also given a short, on-line quiz on the interactive exercises by the end of the class. They can't take the quiz if they don't come to class. This serves as some incentive to come to class. During the exercise on Limulus, I show a short video on horseshoe crabs. Their great breeding event at the full moon is nearby in Delaware. Did you know that their blood is blue and based on Copper, not Iron (kind of like Vulcans)? They were also used to study vision etc. This is how Lateral Inhibition works in a horseshoe crab - then we go into the short Limulus interactive program. The quiz includes relatively easy items on Lateral Inhibition and the location of Cape Henlopen. I usually take the quiz with them and give them the answer if someone doesn't shout it out before me. 5) The students also have the Blackboard discussion forums and email. I find that they do most of the discussion in class. In short, my lectures are treated like the textbook readings. Classes are now interactive sessions. The course is also more self-paced. Since the tests are open-book (even this term is an anachronism - with Google, life is open book), most no longer cram for exams. Since there is never enough time to look up every answer, they must still study to get a good grade. I can also ask questions that are more abstract and require more synthesis. After they take one or two of the tests, they know that they cannot breeze through if they want a good grade. I think one of the most important elements is that the students have more control over the pace of the course. The pace isn't dictated to them. They probably perceive the class sessions as more interesting since they are doing something. Finally, I don't have the burden of lecturing more than once. All my effort is put into inventing class activities getting them interested in the material. After you do all this once, it becomes far easier to conduct future classes. Mike Williams P.S. This course is Sensation Perception. On 1/27/13 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: re: Aren't TED talks just lectures? From: Annette Taylortay...@sandiego.edu Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:44:46 + X-Message-Number: 2 I just don't get the brou-ha-ha over lectures. I lecture. I make no excuses for that. There is a lot that can be done to make lectures relatively interactive. It's not rocket science. The pause for students to think about a question asked during a lecture, and then providing a CORRECT answer! the pause for students to formulate an answer, maybe a little pair and share, and then solicitation of the responses. I use lots of embedded demos, especially in cognitive. It does not have to be 100% delivery, but for most of my classes I'd say it's about 80% delivery with short film clips, demos and embedded questions. Let's face it, discovery learning does not work especially well. Students are are likely, if not more likely, to hit upon a wrong answer and then convince their classmates of the wrong information. Go back and check the archives for many of Hake's postings for evidence to
Re:[tips] my crummy knowledge of stats
You can use a conventional paired t test. Although you have dichotomous scores that does not mean they are categorical. Correct/incorrect is a ratio scale of 1 unit. Green/Red, Accountant/Psychologist are the type of categorical dichotomies that bring in the nonparametric procedures like Chi-square or ranking tests. Just calculate a mean difference and variance for each item and analyze them the usual way. You might also try some of the test reliability stats that are now in SPSS, such as coefficient alpha. Alpha is a general index of how well the items intercorrelate or hang together. Mike Williams - Original Message - From: Annette Taylortay...@sandiego.edu To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 6:21:42 PM Subject: [tips] my crummy knowledge of stats I know this is a basic question but here goes: I have categorical data, 0,1 which stands for incorrect (0) or correct (1) on a test item. I have 25 items and I have a pretest and a posttest and I want to know on which items students improved significantly, and not just by chance. Just eyeballing the data I can tell that there are some on which the improved quite a bit, some not at all and some are someplace in the middle and I can't make a guess at all. That is why we have statistics. Yeah! hbleh. As far as I know, the best thing to do is a chi-square test for each of 25 items; but of course that will mean that with a .05 sig level I will have at least one false positive, maybe more, but most assuredly at least one. This seems to be a risk. At any rate I can use SPSS and the crosstabs command allow for calculation of the chi-square. I know that when I do planned comparisons with multiple t-tests, I can do a Simes' correction in which I can rank order my final, obtained alphas, and adjust for the number of comparisons and reject from the point from which the obtained alpha failed to exceed the corrected-for-number-of-comps alpha. But as far as I know, I cannot do that with 25 chi square tests. There is probably some reason why I can no more do that, that relates to the reason for why I cannot do 25 t-tests in this situation with categorical data. Is there a better way to answer my research question? I need a major professor! Oh wait, that's me... drat! I need to hire a statistician. Oh wait, I'd need $$ for that and I don't have any. So I hope tipsters can stand in as a quasi-hired-statistician and help me out. Oh, I get the digest. I don't mind waiting until tomorrow or the next day for a response, but a backchannel is fine.tay...@sandiego.edu I will be at APS this year. Any other tipsters planning to be there? Let's have a party! I'd love to put personalities to names. Thanks Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Professor, Psychological Sciences University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 tay...@sandiego.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=23097 or send a blank email to leave-23097-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] famous psychologists and federal grants
Just a few points: 1) The base rate of grants available to psychologists is too low to fund any reasonable number of tenured faculty. This is just another manipulation of criteria designed to cut costs. We are headed for faculties composed of instructors, post-docs and depressed nontenured assistant professors who spend each waking moment applying for grants they have a small chance of acquiring. 2) I have never seen grant acquisition stats just for psychologists. It must be low because we don't have our own institute. Each major discipline has its own funding institute. NIMH is for psychiatry and neuroscientists who believe that all mental disorders are a neurotransmitter disease. Psychologists get a few grants out of guilt. The reviewers support their own disciplines. It is only in the areas of obvious psychological influence, such as obesity, smoking cessation and drug addiction that receive any reasonable funding for psychologists. Most of the funding in those areas still goes to neuroscientists who write grants supporting theories of obesity, drug addiction etc as brain disorders. Even nurses have their own institute. After the nurses advocated for their institute, they began to get grants on their own terms. 3) The R01 has become the currency of academia. It has already become standard practice in the biomedical sciences to fire people because they don't get grants, even before they go up for tenure. The longshoremen recently shook the foundations of our fragile economy by just suggesting they might go on strike over a minor compensation issue. Maybe it's time to join a union. Mike Williams On 1/2/13 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: famous psychologists and federal grants From: Lilienfeld, Scott Oslil...@emory.edu Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 22:57:07 + X-Message-Number: 1 Hi TIPSters...happy New Year. I beg your indulgence for just a bit, as this message doesn't have much direct bearing on the teaching of psychology, although I do think it carries a number of implications for how we think about academia and what we value or do not value in our colleagues. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=22664 or send a blank email to leave-22664-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] IQ RIP
The discussion of g reminded me of the International Neuropsychological Society presidential address of Muriel Lezak. Neuropsychologists and many others who use IQ tests every day recognized that the tests were measuring a variety of independent cognitive abilities. The average performance did not capture the lost and retained abilities of people who sustain brain illness and injuries. Unfortunately, the largely meaningless summary scores are still reified. http://www.learnpsychology.com/papers/general/Lezak_IQ_RIP.pdf Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=22491 or send a blank email to leave-22491-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] MRI Diagnosis
Two features of the study seem fishy. The first is the manual designations of individual brain areas. Although they studied the reliability of the designations and appeared very careful, there must be some persistent error in defining the brain areas. The second is that people making these designations may have a systematic bias in the brain areas they think are associated with various disorders. This is different than being blind to the subject diagnosis. We did something similar in a study that required designating the hippocampus. I noticed that each person on the team had a different idea of where the hippocampus ended and the parahippocampus began. There were other uncertain areas. Each rater just had to make a decision. However, if the raters in this study systematically sampled more of the hippocampus for the depression group and less for the schizophrenia group then the classifications might represent such a systematic difference. Since they did not use a normalized method common across all the subjects, this could have happened and they should have examined it. The second is the high rate of classification compared to the reliabilities of the diagnostic methods. The SCID reliability varies from approx .6 to .9, depending on the diagnosis. Presumably their classification rates should be lower, given the error in making anatomical designations and measurements and the error in making diagnoses. The extremely high rates of classification suggest that some systematic bias is linking the brain measurements to the diagnostic clusters. Finally, these overly empirical and descriptive studies do not enlighten us concerning how the brain mediates these disorders. Mike Williams Assaf, B., Mohamed, F. B., Abou-Khaled, K., Williams, J. M., Yazeji, M., Haselgrove, J. Faro, S. (2003). Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the Hippocampal formation in temporal lobe epilepsy. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 24, 1857-1862. On 12/8/12 11:00 PM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: MRI Diagnosis From: don allendap...@shaw.ca Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 10:15:55 -0700 (MST) X-Message-Number: 3 I just read the following study in PLOS one titled: Anatomical Brain Images Alone Can Accurately Diagnose Chronic Neuropsychiatric Illnesses. It can be found here: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0050698 The claims of the study seem impressive: In MRI datasets from persons with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, Schizophrenia, Tourette Syndrome, Bipolar Disorder, or persons at high or low familial risk for Major Depressive Disorder, our method discriminated with high specificity and nearly perfect sensitivity the brains of persons who had one specific neuropsychiatric disorder from the brains of healthy participants and the brains of persons who had a different neuropsychiatric disorder. The research design seemed to be adequate (at least to me) but I don't have enough detailed information about MRI to know whether this is a really important breakthrough or just another soon-to-be-forgotten study. The fact that it was published in PLOS one rather that Science or Nature makes me suspect the latter. Would anyone with more expertise in interpreting MRI data like to provide some comments on the study? Thanks, -Don. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=22259 or send a blank email to leave-22259-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Is p .05 ?
Sounds like your students need to eat more organic food. Mike Williams On 10/6/12 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Is p .05 ? From: Wuensch, Karl Lwuens...@ecu.edu Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:44:23 + X-Message-Number: 3 Remember my rant about students not being able to tell which of two numbers (both between 0 and 1) is larger? Well look at this statement from one of my students: The mean IQ of freshman at East Carolina Unviresitysic (N = 17, M = 107.65, SD = 9.95) was significantly less than that of the general population (100),... Now 107.65 is less than 100. Cheers, Karl L. Wuensch --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=20966 or send a blank email to leave-20966-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] TED talk on Publication Bias
I guess it's all pseudoscience. Of the drug trials I have worked on, publication bias is just the tip of the iceberg. Drug companies have an antagonistic relationship with the FDA. They are also very sensitive to reporting any information that reduces the company stock values. Since most of the drug trial managers have stock options, the conflict of interest is obvious. They are not responding to publication bias. They would not report negative findings even if there was no publication bias. As Goldacre reports, they have been dragged kicking and screaming by the FDA to report all their trials. They are still are not cooperating. If it wasn't for the FDA regulating them at the current level, we would be back to the days of patent medicines when cough syrup contained alcohol, heroin and cannabis extract: http://antiquecannabisbook.com/chap25/BlackSheep_1.htm Drink enough of that stuff and you will definitely stop coughing. Mike Williams On 10/3/12 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: TED talk on Publication Bias From: Jeffrey Nagelbushnagel...@hotmail.com Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 20:44:00 + X-Message-Number: 8 I strongly recommend the recent TED talk by the wonderful Dr. Ben Goldacre. His focus is on publication bias that makes it very difficult for even doctors to know much about the drugs they prescribe. He does mention the Bem precognition study in the beginning. http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_what_doctors_don_t_know_about_the_drugs_they_prescribe.html Jeffrey Nagelbush Social Sciences Department Ferris State University --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=20890 or send a blank email to leave-20890-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] IRB Training
CITI training just allows the institution to have standardized training that meets the regulations. Otherwise, the institution has to develop and maintain their own training and it may not meet the regulations. CITI solves the problem. I wish I thought of it. It's a great lesson in the way regulations generate an industry to support them. Every institution will go to a CITI program or something like it, just as a short-cut to standardization. Mike Williams On 9/22/12 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: TIPS Digest for Friday, September 21, 2012. 1. question about IRB training 2. Re: question about IRB training 3. Retirement For Bonzo -- Subject: question about IRB training From: Carol DeVolderdevoldercar...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:46:22 -0500 X-Message-Number: 1 Hi all, If you submit work to your institution's IRB, I assume you have to show some sort of training certification, either from the NIH or an equivalent. How many of you know if your institution is affiliated with CITI, and if so, why did your institution go that route? Backchannel is fine. Thanks, Carol --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=20577 or send a blank email to leave-20577-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] IRB Training
You do not need to have all your students take the training, unless this is an educational exercise. The only people who need training are the PI and others on the IRB submission, especially those taking consents. The NIH and CITI training probably meet the requirements, but who knows? The IRB regs are a moving target. A great book on the subject is Ethical Imperialism, by Zachary Schrag. Mike Williams Subject: Re: IRB Training From: Paul C Bernhardtpcbernha...@frostburg.edu Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 13:27:53 + X-Message-Number: 3 We go directly to NIH's website. I have no idea if it costs us anything, but I'm pretty confident it does not. I'm doing a study now that required about 10 undergraduate research assistants and they are all just going to the site for training. http://phrp.nihtraining.com/users/login.php Paul --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=20596 or send a blank email to leave-20596-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Critique of Ethics Procedures
Hello In regard to IRBs, I thought it might be helpful to point out some things that most investigators do not know about the process. I don't claim I know everything but I recently went through IRB Chair training that included attending the PRIMR conference (http://www.primr.org/) and working with a consulting group named Huron (http://www.huronconsultinggroup.com/researchdetails.aspx?articleId=1506). Most investigators do not know that PRIMR even exists. It is also not referred to in any of the documents like the one from the AAUP. PRIMR is a professional society of IRB Chairs and administrators. All the IRBs have a budget for training that usually means periodic attendance at PRIMR and each year thousands of IRB staff attend. There is also a system for accrediting IRB professionals. They convene sessions in which the outline is the same: rationalize the intense review of protocols by citing all the abuses of investigators and then itemize all the additional ways research should be regulated to stop the investigators from harming people. I attended a training session and the course leaders asked how many people were in each major category (Chairs, Vice-chairs, IRB members, investigators etc.) Approx 3 people raised their hands admitting they were investigators. The conference has a few sessions for investigators but these are usually just sessions used to inform investigators about new regulations. There is one thing that the Republicans have correct: If you have a set of laws or regulations, you will create an industry that has an interest in protecting and extending the regulations. That is what has happened, thousands of people now have a vested interest in keeping and extending the domain of IRBs. They make money from these reviews and they need them to be a complicated as they can be. The ambiguity present in the IRB regulations has fed this interest and PRIMR rationalizes all this because PRIMR itself feeds off the regulations. Now, enter Huron. The Huron system is a marvel of administrative process. It has a worksheet for every decision and clear models for every process. It even includes a model Thank You letter you might send to people who consult to the committee. At Drexel, we are going to this system and it will be worth far more than the price. Temple University now uses these forms and you can see them here: (http://www.temple.edu/research/regaffairs/irb/index.html). I just completed a set for a study I will do with Temple. If you want to see what we have to go through at Drexel now, check this page: (http://www.research.drexel.edu/compliance/irb/medical_irb.aspx). It represents the idiosyncratic, common sense and overly-complicated system that most IRBs use. Using the current Drexel system, and many others, represents hours of wasted preparation time. Imagine if Temple and Drexel used the same forms. Imagine if all the IRBs used the Huron system. The Huron system also keeps the IRBs grounded. Every decision is mediated by a worksheet. IRBs don't fly unguided. Most of the poor IRB decisions occur because the regulations are unclear and the IRBs have no guidance or supervision. Since it is a system developed external to the IRB, and represents the best interpretation of the regulations, the Huron system implicitly supervises them. Millions of wasted hours and considerable frustration would be saved if every IRB was required to use the same forms and review process. Most of the people writing the pronouncement papers like this one from the AAUP have obviously never consulted their colleagues who work on the IRB. There are many aspects of the IRB process that could actually be changed for the better that are never proposed because the authors are unaware of the IRB systems. Mike Williams Subject: Critique of Ethics Procedures From: Jim Clarkj.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 06:20:14 -0500 X-Message-Number: 1 Hi A strong critique of current research ethics practices from the AAUP, with many implications for most psychology research if its recommendations were adopted (i.e., much would be exempt from IRB approval). http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/3F016909-1388-43DE-872B-18D7F1C373AC/0/IRBREPORT29August2012.pdf Perhaps there is some hope that the flawed current practices will be revised? And should we be educating our students not only about the current regulations, but also about their weaknesses? Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology and Chair j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca Room 4L41A 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax Dept of Psychology, U of Winnipeg 515 Portage Ave, Winnipeg, MB R3B 0R4 CANADA --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=20236 or send a blank email to leave-20236-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Smell Cilia
The main problem with these studies is the use of a pathology that does not exist in nature. The authors: ... the relevance of IFT88 mutations to human pathology is unknown. The logic follows the line that, We produced a mouse that doesn't have protein IFT88 and this protein is necessary for cilia growth. We discovered that when we give the mouse a treatment that increases protein IFT88, they grow cilia. An IFT88 protein deficit is not a natural illness. It was apparently produced by a type of selective inbreeding. It reminds me of the attempts to treat scopolamine-induced memory disorder. A number of medications were effective but none panned out as effective with any naturally-occurring memory disorder. I wonder if the hearing and balance systems are poor in these mice. The cilia in these systems are much more important than smell. Mike Williams On 9/4/12 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: TIPS Digest for Monday, September 03, 2012. 1. What's That Smell? 2. What's That Smell: Dogs Orcas Edition 3. Re: What's That Smell: Dogs Orcas Edition 4. The Effective But Forgotten Benezet Method of K-8 Education -- Subject: What's That Smell? From: Michael Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 08:59:40 -0400 X-Message-Number: 1 Some new research involving gene therapy in a mouse model shows promise for treating a group of disorders called ciliopathies which are dysfunctions of the cilia. Most psychologists are familiar with cilia from the role they play in hearing, seeing, and smell. The new research focuses on how to repair the cilia in mice that have genetically disabled olfactory cilia, that is, mice who are born without a sense of smell. If such gene therapy is effective in humans, then a number of ciliopathies might be cured or significantly improved. The popular media has picked up on the story and here is one example of their presentation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19409154 A pop science presentation on the Science Daily website is available here (it provides much more detail and additional links): http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120902143147.htm Some of the researchers involved in the study are at the University of Michigan and the U of M media office provided this press release: http://www.uofmhealth.org/news/archive/201209/smell The original research is published in Nature Medicine: http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nm.2860.html The reference for the article is: Jeremy C McIntyre, Erica E Davis, Ariell Joiner, Corey L Williams, I-Chun Tsai, Paul M Jenkins, Dyke P McEwen, Lian Zhang, John Escobado, Sophie Thomas, Katarzyna Szymanska, Colin A Johnson, Philip L Beales, Eric D Green, James C Mullikin, NISC Comparative Sequencing Program, Aniko Sabo, Donna M Muzny, Richard A Gibbs, Tania Attié-Bitach, Bradley K Yoder, Randall R Reed, Nicholas Katsanis, Jeffrey R Martens. (2012). Gene therapy rescues cilia defects and restores olfactory function in a mammalian ciliopathy model. Nature Medicine, 2012; DOI: 10.1038/nm.2860 I suspect that if this research is successful in humans, then olfactory abilities lost to toxins and age might be successfully treated. It may be particularly useful in the elderly who have developed a diminished sense of smell. -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu P.S. One point for the person who can guess which movie the subject line is from. ;-) --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=20198 or send a blank email to leave-20198-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] One Ring to bind them into a tight social cluster
I thought the paper referred to by the Columbia student was a good example of quantitative rumination and a good example of how statistics is only descriptive and helps us reveal patterns in the data. The interpretation is still up to our theories. http://iopscience.iop.org/0295-5075/99/2/28002/ By analysis of the social networks, the authors compared mythological accounts to the characteristics of real social networks. The presumption is that if a myth such as Beowulf depicts true social networks it is more likely to have been an historical account rather than a fictional one. They also analyzed the Iliad, an Irish epic, Tain, The Fellowship of Ring, the Marvel Universe and Harry Potter. These accounts obviously vary in the social networks they depict. The Fellowship, Iliad and Harry Potter all depict a small group of close friends fighting adversity. The Lord of the Rings has the weakest analysis. In the Appendices of The Lord of the Rings and other works, Tolkien mapped out the explicit genealogies and built the story around these: http://lotrproject.com/hobbits.php The Fellowship of the Ring, the only part examined by the authors, refers to nine guys representing all the races of Middle Earth set against nine ringwraiths who were formerly men given rings of power by Sauron. In a strange way, Sauron was bringing people together. His overall plan was to bind the ringbearers into one tight crew: One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. If the authors had analyzed the Lord of the Rings thoroughly, they would have discovered that it is a complete, internally consistent history. Tolkien attempted to depict his understanding of England as it existed in Anglo-Saxon times, when Grendel, Beowulf and the Elves were still here. He even invented the languages that he believed existed at the time. Since the authors only examined the first book of the Lord of the Rings, they missed depicting the complete social structure that existed in Middle Earth. This reminds me of an analysis done of a possible new poem by Shakespeare comparing the number of new words used in the poem to the population distribution of new words used by Shakespeare: http://www.learnpsychology.com/movies/infer_onescoresm.mov It strikes me that the authors should have compared the mythical accounts to historical accounts of the same period and culture (e.g. compare Herodotus to Homer). Including the Marvel Universe was really odd. Mike Williams Hi A Columbia psychology graduate student gives an incoherent diatribe against scientific approaches in the humanities and social sciences, including psychology.http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/2012/08/10/humanities-arent-a-science-stop-treating-them-like-one/ Well, this kind of critique is not new though her incoherence and apparent lack of historical knowledge of the nature of psychology is troubling. This is particularly so, given some of the research that she has been involved in. Ms. Konnikova's bio on the Scientific American website is kind of vague on what she's doing and who she is working with at Columbia; see: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/about.php?author=314 EndFragment --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=19731 or send a blank email to leave-19731-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Odd-ball Multiple Choice Questions
These odd formats just force variance that doesn't exist. The variance on the test is corrupted by items that test examination skill rather than the construct they were designed to measure. Since people who take tests will get higher scores on the test then people who don't figure out the puzzle, simple item analyses will show that test items like this appear to work. However, test taking skill is now an extraneous factor. You may as well teach people how to take tests. I see this all the time in medical school classes. The instructors are obsessed with getting a normal curve because a skewed distribution makes them look too easy. The variance in knowledge of the course content just doesn't exist. Since they are so highly selected as studying machines, virtually all medical students know the answers to all the questions on the tests. The only way to force a normal curve is to manipulate the tests so that even students who know the answer have a hard time responding. There is no theoretical reason that all the students should not get high scores in every class they take. If you did a good job teaching then the scores should be skewed. Isn't that the goal? Mike Williams I don't like these question formats because I believe they evaluate puzzle-solving rather than specific learning outcomes related to knowledge of content, application of a theory or model to a new problem, or other skills I am interested in evaluating. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=19299 or send a blank email to leave-19299-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Neuroimaging Statistics
Subject: Re: Some Problems with Neuroimaging From: Michael Palij m...@nyu.edu Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 08:54:06 -0400 X-Message-Number: 2 On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 23:09:57 -0700, Mike Wiliams wrote: However, the distribution of false positives across the voxel locations should be random. Depends upon how defines random. Consider: (1) For all t-tests, is N1=N2? I know that you say you're using paired t-tests but what guarantee is there that there is always a matching value? How is such missing data treated? There is no missing data. The whole brain scans are replicated for active and rest phases of the study. There is a measurement taken of signal strength for every voxel for every whole-brain scan. I am conducting a paired t-test for a single voxel and subtracting the mean for the active condition from the mean for the rest condition. The number of measurements (N) is the same for each condition. (2) How are violations of the assumptions of paired t-tests handled? Variance away from the mean values are stochastic error and there is no skew. If the distribution was abnormal and variances unequal then there would be something wrong with the scanner. This would be obvious in the artifacts produced in the scans. |The fact that the Salmon's randomly significant voxels clustered |in the Salmon's brain cavity I consider extremely unlikely. What |are the odds of this pattern occurring by chance? Oh, so we're turning Bayesian now? ;-) Let's start by asking what is the baserate? |There was likely some artifact that produced this, like they |moved the Salmon's head slightly at the end of every activation run, |or there was an intentional manipulation of the data. Uh, yeah. |From a random distribution of 1,000 t-tests, how many times to t-tests |numbered 98,99 and 100 come up significant and all the others come |up nonsignificant? I don't understand your sentence above. If you're asking what is the overall Type I error rate for 1000 t-tests, this is given by the formula: alpha-overall = (1 - (1- alpha-per comparison)**1000 Your formula specifies the probability of any voxel coming up significant by chance. Suppose you specify an alpha of .05. 5% of the voxels should be significant by chance. However, the significant t scores should be randomly distributed across the voxels and all areas of the image. What are the odds of chance activations only in the voxels making up the Salmon's brain cavity? What are the odds of just voxels 4,5,6 (the brain cavity) coming up significant and all the others coming up nonsignificant? The odds must be astronomical.Why were there no chance activations in other areas of the Salmon image? The odds of this occurring are so small that some kind of manipulation was conducted to produce this extremely rare pattern. But, if I am reading the literature correctly, the Pearson r and sample size and not routinely reported. Nor are the power levels associated with each test -- reducing alpha-per comparison will reduce the statistical power for each test, thus increasing the Type II errors. So, do the corrections trade Type I errors for Type II errors? In other words, what are you talking about Willis? The sample sizes are reported when the model is described. The number of whole brain scans for each condition in a block design is the sample size. I typically have 15 measurements for each condition for each voxel. The effect size for the BOLD response is more-or-less standardized. I just don't remember what it is. The % change in signal strength associated with the BOLD response was established very early and it has a classic pattern of onset, peak and diminishment that is well known and modeled in the analyses. Corrections are the default for the analysis software, such as SPM. You have to actively uncorrect the analysis if you want to see it uncorrected. It is also typical to reduce the voxel extent for clusters. Randomly distributed significant voxels don't usually cluster. By specifying a minimum cluster of 5 voxels, I can usually eliminate most of the random results. The hypotheses of neuroimaging are not at the single t-test, voxel level. The hypothesis is typically that a cluster of voxels, a region of interest, demonstrates a BOLD response under the active condition. When I administer a Naming Test, I expect a typical pattern of voxel clusters representing the language areas of the left hemisphere. This usually happens. The problems with fMRI are the same problems that hamper any research design: researchers with weak theories and hypotheses about brain function are essentially on a fishing expedition for fame and glory and not science. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=19001 or send a blank email to leave-19001-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df
Re:[tips] Some Problems with Neuroimaging
I used to have many of the blog author's reservations until I began to use fMRI in clinical cases and verifying basic brain functions. As long as you are not looking for the God Center, or verifying some crackpot cognitive theory, the results are reliable and valid. This surprised me since I expected more uncertainty and error. Most psychological tests do not have the reliability of fMRI. I know that sounds odd. The examples given by the blogger suggest a lot of statistical error, at least at the level of the usual cognitive test. However, if I administer a simple cognitive task, such as naming pictures, the fMRI analysis will show the same results every time. The left image shows the results of an fMRI study of a patient with a meningioma in the left parietal-temporal area: http://www.learnpsychology.com/neuropsych/images/tumors.jpg The Naming task is associated with BOLD responses in the occipital lobes and the language centers in the left hemisphere. Notice that the language activation actually outlines the margins of the tumor. The patient's language was normal. Knowing that language centers are under the tumor is extremely important in surgery planning. The image on the right shows a tumor in the right temporal lobe that is interrupting vision pathways connecting the Lateral Geniculate Body to the Occipital Lobe. Notice that the left Occipital Lobe is active but the right Occipital Lobe is inactive. The patient had a very clear loss of vision in the upper left quadrant of the visual field. The problems with fMRI that I endorse have nothing to do with the method itself. The fMRI method is continuing to be developed and its underlying evolution is proceeding well. New MRI scanners that can handle the data and give radiologists a turn-key technology for fMRI are available now. New connectivity modeling and other data analysis procedures are also moving fMRI along. If you come into the hospital today with a brain tumor, it is likely that you will get an fMRI study while you are in the MRI scanner getting your structural scans. The problems are all the result of people jumping on the bandwagon and trying to scoop the next sensational finding. This is actually hurting the method. We need to conduct the usual reliability and validity studies that psychologists are well known for in the development of new methods. Unfortunately, I don't think human brain function is as interesting as cognitive psychologists think it is. Most cognitive psychologists don't know enough about brain function to draw correct inferences. After you consider all the tissue mediating simple neurological and cognitive functions, there is not much left for all the complex cognitive abilities cognitive psychologists believe are there. When they conduct research that does not have explicit hypotheses connecting a cognitive ability or construct to specific functional brain systems, they can show any activation pattern and proclaim that the whatsy center has been discovered. Most activation patterns are not the result of error suggested by the blogger. They are usually the result of activation associated with the task that were not accounted for by the theory underlying the task. For example, many language tasks will activate language areas that are not the focus of a particular cognitive neuroscience language study. If the investigator is unaware of these then they will appear as false positive errors. I was also involved in one of the fMRI deception studies. Here, fMRI may actually pan out as a lie detector. Lies involve a simple inhibition of the truth and a construction of an alternate response. The truth just comes out. The former requires much more frontal lobe inhibition than telling the truth. We worked with an excellent polygrapher who educated me on many things about polygraphs and ways to study and detect lies. The first was that polygraphs are not designed to detect lies; they are designed to elicit confessions. That is why they are in widespread use by police departments but not admitted into courts. Here is a great video segment I use in presentations: http://www.learnpsychology.com/fmri/jerrypolysm.mov Mohamed FB, Faro SH, Gordon NJ, Platek SM, Ahmad H, Williams M. (2006). Brain mapping of deception and truth telling about an ecologically valid situation:An fMRI and polygraph investigation-initial experience./Radiology/, 238: 679-688. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=18960 or send a blank email to leave-18960-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] ECT Expectations, or how I learned to love the FDA
I am not going to beat a dead horse. Until someone conducts a double-blind clinical trial with random assignment, no psychological treatment can claim empirical support. We have to have some standard of empirical support. If that is black-and-white then so be it. The FDA is black and white. Studies that do not maintain a minimum standard of empirical analysis are pseudoscience. The motivation of the subjects are the expectation biases and Hawthorne effects build into all clinical trials. If I believe ECT works, I will endorse positive change on the self-report measures regardless of how depressed I feel. The use of sham ECT and blinding reduces these. If these were not important issues, why would the investigators of ECT have a sham condition? I hold neuropsychology studies to the same standard. If a clinical drug trial for dementia was not blind or did not use random assignment, both me and the FDA would declare the study invalid and I would call it pseudoscience. The issue of expectation bias is salient here as it is for depression clinical trials. However, it is very difficult for the subject's expectations to influence the scores on a memory test. It is very easy for the subject's expectations to influence the scores on a self-report memory questionnaire. It is well known that demented subjects do not endorse problems on memory self-report measures even when their memory scores are low and they demonstrate obvious memory disorder in everyday behavior. They are unaware of their memory problems for the obvious reason that they cannot remember memory errors. The opposite pattern prevails in depression. Depressed subjects endorse numerous problems on memory self-report scales but score in the normal range on memory tests (See Williams, Little, Scates Blockman http://www.learnpsychology.com/papers/mypapers/memory_complaints.PDF). Depressed subjects are hyper-aware of any kind of problem, including memory errors. It would be absurd to base the outcome of a dementia clinical trial on the self-report of memory problems. I was very involved in clinical trials of Xanex, Imiprimine and ECT as a grad student. I conducted a clinical trial of a medication to treat cognitive impairment following traumatic brain injury. I even did animal research investigating cognitive enhancing meds for traumatic brain injury in rats. I have also been involved as a secondary member of other large trials. I am now the vice-chair of one of the IRBs here at Drexel. My observation of the contrasting environments of a typical outcome study of CBT vs the environment of research among the drug companies is that CBT outcome studies are sloppy. They make a host of mistakes, including losing track of drop outs, numerous and undocumented protocol violations and neglecting control conditions and blinding. They don't even use consistent data collection methods, such as case report forms, let alone use the internet systems that are part of real clinical trials. If the CBT outcome studies were held to the same FDA standards as the drug trials, they would all be declared invalid. This is not black-and-white reasoning about science. It is maintaining a minimum standard of empirical analysis. Most psychologists are not involved in research with the drug companies and their research is not supervised by anyone, let alone a hard-headed organization like the FDA. They have a very flimsy idea of empirical support. You did not answer my question: Why do we blind clinical trials? Mike On 3/24/12 12:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Mike, no, actually I don't think you answered my question, unless I've missed it in the back-and-forth flurry of multiple emails (but I don't think so). I've asked, now three times, why depressed patients in controlled studies would be motivated to self-report that their depressed symptoms are improved (even when they're not) to avoid ECT, when they know that their participation is voluntary and that they can refuse treatment at any time. Mike's discussion of Hawthorne (spelled Hawthorne, not Hawthorn) effects below is interesting and raises some valid points, but it doesn't address my question. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=16921 or send a blank email to leave-16921-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] ECT
I will concede that some studies randomly assigned patients to ECT vs drugs. I claimed that I didn't know of any. Given that ECT was a choice, I would have to check that there was true random assignment. The subject offered the study who felt negative about ECT probably did not volunteer on the chance they might get assigned to it. My main gripe was not random assignment. My main gripe is that the studies cannot blind the subjects to the treatment condition. The strong expectation bias is the reason that the investigators and subjects are blinded to the treatment condition. If this was not an important factor, the FDA would approve clinical trials without it. The entire field of clinical trials ignores the fact that they are examining human beings who have the cognitive capacity to figure which treatment they are receiving. They should be compelled by regulations to ask the subjects to tell them which treatment they thought they were receiving as a check on the blinding method. This is never done. Expectation bias is a psychological phenomenon that psychologists should study. No one does this, presumably because they will discover factors that may account for all the treatment effects. The investigators don't even know that subjects talk to each other! They talk about the side effects with each other. They form a hypothesis of which treatment they received and behave consistent with it, regardless of the fact that they signed a consent form and participated on a voluntary basis. Wouldn't it be cool to study this? Expectation bias is presumably a strong influence on self report measures. These self-report measures are the major dependent variables used in these clinical trials of psychological disorders. Self-report measures are incidental in the study of drugs that do not involve psychological disorders. We don't use self-report measures in studies of antibiotics. It would likewise be absurd to ask someone receiving a statin if the they believed their cholesterol was lower. We ask the subjects to estimate the treatment effects with anti-depression treatments. You will notice that studies of the same drugs in animals are not blinded. We blind the human studies because humans have the capacity to make their behavior conform to the demand characteristics of the study. Rats can't do this. We neglect the simple fact that the investigators and subjects are human beings who interact with each other. These interactions and other expectation reactions influence the dependent measures. When Fisher was working out the basic treatment outcome designs and statistics we use today, he never figured that the plants he was studying would ever be cognizant of the treatment, talk to other plants, ask the investigators a lot of questions, drop out of treatment, miss appointments, decide to take other meds to mitigate the side effects of the antidepressants and so on. These are real people and there is an assumption they behave like laboratory rats (or plants). One of the positive things about ongoing IRB assessments is that we are discovering how common it is for subjects to drop out of treatment. My hypotheses is that they just don't like the treatment because of side effects, they got better while waiting on the control waiting list and any of a number of currently unstudied aspects of treatment. Investigators are holding blinders up and only see the world through a set of assumptions that support how they have been conducting research in the past. These factors deserve investigation on their own. We might discover new methods or come to the conclusion that current research designs are invalid with humans and dependent measures that require human judgments. In regards to neuropsych assessment, and neuropsychology studies generally, it was these experiences studying depression treatment in graduate school that pushed me toward neuropsychology. I realized that I might spend an entire career studying depression, anxiety, schizophrenia or other psychological disorders and never know if I ever made a contribution. Constructs like memory, language, brain tumor and traumatic brain injury have a conceptual integrity that makes them easier to study. Unfortunately, there are few treatment outcome studies in neuropsychology. I have conducted studies of changes and recovery of memory and cognition following illnesses such as traumatic brain injury, childhood leukemia and dementia. There are some treatment outcome studies of dementia treatments. Can you imagine using a self-report measure as a dependent measure in such a treatment study. People with dementia have no capacity to make judgments of their own memory ability. You have to use a test, or the ratings of observers, such as family members. Even in this situation, family ratings are influenced by expectation bias if the family members know which treatment the
Re:[tips] ECT
From Scott: Mike (and Paul B., if you'd like), can you please answer the following question: If so, why would patients be motivated to self-report that their depression is better if they know that the treatment team can't impose the intervention on them? I don't follow the reasoning here at all. I just wanted to make sure I responded to this question since questions posed this way are often at the core of a disagreement. The influence of expectation bias is more subtle than this. I am sure that Scott and others are familiar with Hawthorn effects http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect and other expectation biases. Their presence is the major reason studies are blinded in the first place. If I believe that ECT is effective and I am randomly assigned to the drug condition, I will have a bias in the direction of not endorsing change on the self-report measure. The self-appraisal of depressed mood, weight loss, constipation etc are subject to these biases presumably because the constructs do not lend themselves to objective, monotonic, linear ratings made by a humans: How constipated are you now? 1) Extremely constipated; 2) Very constipated; 3) a Little constipated; 4) not constipated. What do these items really mean? If a subject endorses a number of items on the self-report scale, such as I am constipated or I have recently lost weight, but does not endorse the item, I am sad., can the subject actually be depressed? This ambiguity in the dependent measure makes a bias easy to manifest as a simple push in endorsing items slightly one way or the other. The subject might do this because of beliefs about treatment or simply because they like the investigators and want to support them. They may do this because they don't like the treatment and think that if they say they are not depressed, they will get out of treatment sooner. Studies of Hawthorn effects suggest that it is the simple fact that they are in a study. The effect sizes of antidepressant treatments are well within the magnitude of Hawthorn effects. The investigators have the burden of proof in establishing that the Hawthorn effects are not present. The first step in establishing this is to simply ask the subjects, Which treatment did you think you received?, Were there any side effects?, Do you think the treatment worked? Did you discuss the treatment with other patients?, You decided to drop out of treatment. What was the reason?, etc. Since the blinding of treatment is essentially impossible for ECT, I don't think we will ever feel confident that ECT is effective. Since the blinding of treatment is essentially impossible for ECT, investigators have pretended that the research problem does not exist. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=16884 or send a blank email to leave-16884-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] ECT and the pseudoscience of clinical trials
Scott, I think I did answer your question. Subjects and investigators are manipulated by Hawthorn effects and expectation biases in ways they are not even aware of. If your interpretation of consent was valid then there would be no need to blind the clinical trials. Since you are into questions, what is the reason clinical trials should be blinded? It all comes down to the simple fact that no psychological treatment, including CPT, psychotrophic drugs or ECT, has the support of a single blinded clinical trial. They are all pseudoscience until this happens for at least one of the them. This conversation started up again because someone posted a paper on connectivity studies following ECT. The abstract begins, To date, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the most potent treatment in severe depression. PNAS paper http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/03/12/1117206109 Detect any bias here? Are they doing the study to test an hypothesis, or support their ECT clinical service? Now, Time magazine has picked up on this study and soon it will be full blown, press release pseudoscience: Time article http://healthland.time.com/2012/03/21/how-electroconvulsive-therapy-works-for-depression/ All they discovered is that ECT scrambles your brain. We now have firm confirmation of this with brain scans. I bet any induced seizures scrambles your brain. Since they had no nondrepressed control group, maybe we should volunteer to have an induced seizure for the sake of science. Mike P. S. Connectivity modeling in fMRI is brand new and no one has figured out what it really means. However, I do have high hopes for it and plan to apply it to an fMRI study of orienting the body in space. From Scott: Mike (and Paul B., if you'd like), can you please answer the following question: If so, why would patients be motivated to self-report that their depression is better if they know that the treatment team can't impose the intervention on them? I don't follow the reasoning here at all. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=16898 or send a blank email to leave-16898-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] ECT
I guess I will go point by point. (1) Even though most patients describe the procedure as no more threatening than a trip to the dentist, their report is not especially plausible or at least not plausible enough to be taken on its own merits (see Paul's message below); No one stated that ECT is more painful or otherwise more aversive than the dentist. Just the possibility of experiencing the side effect of an induced seizure is sufficient. People avoid the dentist too. Clients endorse positive change on self-report measures just to get out of seeing a conventional therapist they don't like. (2) Even though scores of published studies on ECT assure patients' that their self-report reports of depression are confidential, they somehow don't believe this assurance of confidentiality, and instead think believe the treatment team will gain access to this information and use it to decide on the course of future treatment; The published studies do not assure patients that their ratings are completely confidential. They are known by the treatment team. The information is not revealed to people outside of the treatment team. In addition, the team also usually completes the Hamilton Rating Scale. This includes an interview with the patient. (3) Even though most (today, probably all) patients in published controlled outcome studies of ECT give full informed consent regarding to whether to receive the treatment (and therefore the treatment is voluntary), they somehow don't believe that their participation is voluntary and instead believe that the treatment will be forced upon them against their will. ECT is sold to the patients. I don't know of any study that used random assignment of treatment types, unless it was to different types of ECT. It is very common to have random assignment of drugs or psychotherapy. Intractable patients are the ones offered ECT. (4) Even though patients in contemporary controlled studies of ECT are told they will be randomly assigned to either a treatment arm or an alternative treatment arm, they don't actually believe that the assignment is random, and instead believe that the investigative team can decide at will whether to alter the treatment plan on the basis of their self-reports. I know of no study of ECT that included other treatments in which the subjects were randomly assigned. The major point you are missing is that there can be no blinding of an ECT condition. The expectation biases associated with this are well known. They can account for the treatment effects associated with all the depression treatments. The investigators have the burden of proof in this and they neglect this problem in the same way that obesity researchers fail to notice that their entire science is based on the dieting behavior of young women. It has been a problem so long and impossible to fix that the entire field assumes that the problems don't actually exist. If an expectation bias exists then it could account for the treatment effect. The investigators have the burden to partial out this effect. I think it would be very illuminating if someone running a blind trial would just ask the patients to indicate which condition they thought they were in. The final point I need to make is that ECT may be effective. There is just no experiment that I can think of that will prove the effect. The main confound is expectation bias. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=16855 or send a blank email to leave-16855-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] How ECT Works
ECT is just the induction of a seizure. It should be just a matter of time before someone discovers that fMRI connectivity analyses shows a reduction of connectivity following a seizure. Notice that the measure of depression was still self-report. ECT has no valid control condition. Everyone who got ECT knows they received it. It amounts to the patient reasoning, What do I have to indicate on the self-report measure to get these people to stop? Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=16821 or send a blank email to leave-16821-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] depression as crutch
The comments on the adaptive nature of depression remind me of a character from the Dr Katz TV show. Referring to his mother, he stated: After Mom got depressed, she was put on so many medications that we never knew how she felt about anything. I am paraphrasing. I am usually happy to hear that a client is depressed. If the client is suicidal then I worry but a mild-to-moderate level of depression is a sign that the person is self-reflective. Experiencing life's turmoil without depression or anxiety is an indication of a personality disorder and a tendency to blame life's problems on external agents. The anti-depression treatments can make everything worse. Imagine losing your appetite, ruminating all day AND having dry mouth. Why are we using anti-depressants with such low treatment effects? There are drugs that have been available for years that will really make you happy. We don't use those, or anything derived from them. We use drugs that basically communicate to the patient: We will keep giving you this drug that makes you feel sick until you tell us that you feel better. After a sufficient bout of anticholinergic side effects, including dry mouth and constipation, the patient indicates in a session or by response to a self-report measure that the depression is lifting and they don't think they need more medication. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=16604 or send a blank email to leave-16604-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Cognitive Reserve
This concept emerged as a way to explain variance in loss of cognition with neurological disorders that produce a generalized cognitive decline, such as dementia related illness. The idea is that people with higher IQs have further to fall and hence they have a greater reserve of cognitive abilities. Higher cognitive function makes them more resilient to brain illness. They have more developed cognitive abilities to rely upon when they are injured. It is an archaic concept that neuropsychologists have largely abandoned. However, in practice we often quantify the degree of impairment by a direct reference to an IQ or similar score. The current practice of estimating pre-injury IQ with demographics and using this as a metric to quantify the presumed loss in IQ associated with a brain injury or illness incorporates the cognitive reserve concept. I can't imagine that anyone believes IQ is an amount of something that can be lost by monotonic units like water poured from a pitcher. After stating this, I have done a number of studies that assumed IQ had this relationship to severity (e.g. Williams, Gomes, Drudge Kessler, 1983, Journal of Neurosurgery). I predicted IQ from initial coma level. There was a significant correlation. This happens because neuropsych assessment itself is archaic and needs to develop to the level of neuropsychological theory. Many years ago, Muriel Lezak actually titled her INS Presidential Address, The Death of IQ. She was complaining that this unitary concept was a poor way to describe cognitive function after a brain illness. The IQ concept is still alive and kicking, like a zombie. Maybe we need to give it a clear shot to the head. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=15585 or send a blank email to leave-15585-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Watch Out! Here Come The Web-Based Textbooks!
The really strange thing is that there will likely be only a few of these textbooks and they will be used for every course taught on the planet. Presumably the best few or even the best one will surface and beat the competition. Everyone will be taught the same generic core of the topic. Both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were surprised that education had not been substantially influenced by the PC and the internet. Steve Jobs planned to develop these books for free as a way to sell iPads. Now that Apple has created a way for publishers to sell through the iTunes store and protect their intellectual property, the authors and publishers have a greater incentive to create these books than ever before. After teaching undergrad statistics a few times, it became clear that interactive models were the way to go. Here is a link to a set of them that I programmed using LiveCode: http://www.learnpsychology.com/courses/statcourse/programs.htm Now that Livecode has capability to save the programs as iOS and Android apps, I plan to group them into a set and sell them as a single app in the app store. If they do well then I will keep developing them. I would like to work one up for the general linear model. Good old Excel can actually be used for some interactive exercises. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=14950 or send a blank email to leave-14950-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Thank you Steve Jobs,but ...........
I guess the easiest way to deal with the contribution of Steve Jobs is just to quote this passage from his biographer, Walter Isaacson: The saga of Steve Jobs is the Silicon Valley creation myth write large: launching a startup in his parent's garage and building it into the world's most valuable company. He didn't invent many things outright, but he was a master at putting together ideas, art and technology in ways that invented the future. He designed the Mac after appreciating the power of graphical interfaces in a way that Xerox was unable to do, and he created the iPod after grasping the joy of having a thousand songs in your pocket in a way that Sony, which had all the assets and heritage, never could accomplish. Some leaders push innovation by being good at the big picture. Others do so by mastering details. Jobs did both, relentlessly. As a result, he launched a series of products over three decades that transformed whole industries: 1) The Apple II, which took Wosniak's circuit board and turned it into the first personal computer that was not just for hobbyists. 2) The Macintosh, which begat the home computer revolution and popularized graphic user interfaces. 3) Toy Story and other Pixar blockbusters, which opened up the miracle of digital imagination. 4) Apple stores, which reinvented the role of a store in defining a brand. 5) The iPod, which changed the way we consume music. 6) The iTunes Store, which saved the music industry 7) The iPhone, which turned mobile phones into music, photography, video, email and web devices. 8) The iPad, which launched tablet computing and offered a platform for digital newspapers, magazines, books, and videos. 9) iCloud, which demoted the computer from its central role in managing our content and let all our devices sync seamlessly. 10) And Apple itself, which Jobs considered his greatest creation, a place where imagination was nurtured, applied and executed in ways so creative that it became the most valuable company on earth. No, Steve Jobs did not invent the MP3 format. However, without the IPod, the MP3 format would have languished in the bowels of brain-dead MP3 players and the music industry would have been dead after a few years of rampant piracy. Steve Jobs brought his imagination to all these products. Without his imagination and incredible drive to change the world, we would likely still be using brain-dead products like CP/M. MSDOS, Wordstar, dBase-II, Sony Walkmans and Windows. Systat was the first stats package to try a GUI. The interface for SPSS is just plain brain dead: Legacy Menus? Steve Jobs also brought a philosophy of product development that proved incredibly successful. The software and hardware must be united. If you design using an open architecture, you design for a common element and not excellence. Bill Gates could never yell at the engineers at IBM, Dell or Gateway to make the hardware match his software. As a result, Windows was designed for the common medium, the mediocre. Jobs could demand that Bill Attkinson figure out how to layer the windows for a 9in Mac screen because all they had was 128K RAM to work with. Bill never had that control and Microsoft produced a brain-dead interface when he knew Windows could be better if he had Job's level of control. The legacy of Steve Jobs is independence, imagination and the reality distortion field. If we don't distort reality from time to time, we will remain stuck in a world of crappy, brain-dead products and systems. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=14626 or send a blank email to leave-14626-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Types of Brain Scans
One of my research areas involves the study of clinical applications of fMRI. Probably the best way to discriminate the methods is just to look at the different scans. The only scans that really look similar are PET and SPECT scans. They use a similar process and the spatial resolution of each is similar. CT Scans are very sharp structural images that are constructed from X-Ray images. CT scans have greatly improved in recent years and show structural lesions, such as skull fractures and hemorrhages, very well. They are also still less expensive than MRI scans. They have been improved by greater post-processing of the CT data. CT is still the first level of scanning for traumatic brain injury. The spatial resolution of MRI and CT scanning is much higher than PET, SPECT or EEG scanning. The temporal resolution of EEG is much higher than the others. MRI scans are built from our water molecules suspended in a very strong magnetic field. Most of them line up with the field. Send in a radio transmission and they precess away from the field because they absorbed some of the energy from the radio transmission. They would really like to line back up with the field. When they do this, they send out a tiny radio transmission that is picked up by an antenna coil wrapped around your head and body. This small radio transmission is analyzed and mapped in gray scale. This is obviously simplified but this is the basic process. MRI scans also render a structural image that depicts the soft tissues extremely well. It is the scanning workhorse of the hospital and medical diagnosis made a great leap forward when it was invented. The story of its invention is very entertaining and important for students to learn. It represents the best of American pragmatism and inventiveness. The guys involved were great characters. PBS did a nice story on its invention that you can use in class: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/brain/scanning/mri.html The best part was when they scanned the first person, one of the research team members. They got no meaningful data. They figured out that the reason was because he was too fat. They all then turned to the thin guy on the team. He stated that he would get in the magnet if nothing happened to the first guy for 6 weeks. Since no one had been scanned before, he felt there might be some harm caused by the magnet. After a time, they scanned him and graphed the data by hand coloring darker and lighter cells in graph paper. When they did this, his internal organs became visible. Then they knew they had it. The rest was history. MRI scans have been greatly improved by faster data collection, larger, open magnet cores, faster computer processing and stronger magnets. The images have become higher and higher resolution constructed faster and faster. Millions of MRI scans are conducted each year in the US. fMRI uses the same magnetic resonance data as the MRI scan. Sherrington discovered 100 years ago that neural activity causes a local increase in the flow of oxygenated blood. Ogawa showed that this increase in blood flow causes an increase in the MRI signal (BOLD). By subtracting the signal level at the a time when the brain is active to the signal level when it is not, I can map the locations of activity. By controlling the cognitive activity, I can image the locations of the activity. fMRI methods are improving with the improvements in MRI data collection in general. fMRI is also improving with better data analysis methods. The current emphasis is on methods to study changes in BOLD responses over time that reveals connectivity of brain areas that function over time. DTI imaging is also something I have studied and this involves the detection of movement of the water molecule. You can render the orientation of white matter pathways in a very detailed map. DTI imaging still uses the same MRI data collected using a special protocol. We used it to study lesions in seizure disorder. I think many people who are disparaging of fMRI are reacting to the sensational stories using it. I have used fMRI to study individual patients and I have been very impressed by its utility. We discovered patients who had receptive language (Wernicke's area) in the left hemisphere and expressive language (Broca's area) in the RIGHT frontal lobe, language areas that defined the margins of a tumor and clear evidence of a left upper visual defect caused by a tumor in the right temporal lobe. We are still in the early stages of developing fMRI. It is already the dominant method of studying brain function and this will only get better as the method improves. When I started in this area, it took about 3 hours to analyze the data for a single subject, and this involved a lot of staring at the computer while it crunched numbers. Now, the new scanners analyze the data on the fly and render an image after each active period. You can adjust
[tips] Making iPhone/iPad Apps for Education
If you are interested in developing education apps, I highly recommend LiveCode (runrev.com). After making your application on a Mac or Windows machine, you can save it for the Mac, Windows, Unix, Web application, iOS (iPhone, iPad), Android and soon Windows Mobile. LiveCode uses natural language and you can test each component of your application before compiling. LiveCode saves considerable time and trouble over the arcane programming languages, such as Object-C. LiveCode is a derivative of the incredible innovation of Steve Jobs and Bill Atkinson, the inventor of Hypercard. Think Different. You can check out my apps by searching for Brainmetric at the app store. I also have a number of education programs at my personal teaching site, learnpsychology.com Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=13461 or send a blank email to leave-13461-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] tips digest: October 07, 2011
I find comments like these remarkable. It reminds me of the old Mac vs PC arguments in the past two decades. All the computers and operating systems mentioned, especially CP/M, are dinosaurs that did not survive the meteor of the Macintosh and its GUI. Which of these systems still remain? The only systems we have now are Mac OSX, Mac iOS and a thing called Windows that is just the Mac OS done with crayons. Steve had the balls to risk everything for a vision of information management products that have absolutely changed the world. He did a remarkable thing: he saw needs that we didn't see and satisfied these needs with products that make us look cool. Mike Williams On 10/8/11 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: I could be wrong but Steve Jobs is just a bit player in this epic. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=13233 or send a blank email to leave-13233-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] CHRONICLE: Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker?
No, that was definitely NOT Mike's point. I was particularly appalled by Mike's statement that ECT is pure behavior therapy: 'Mr. Smith, we understand that you are unhappy. We will continue to induce seizures until you feel better.' After a few seizures, Mr. Smith endorses positive change on the Beck Depression Inventory. The psychiatrist stops inducing seizures. ECT is a punishment condition. ECT has been extensively studied for many years and the idea that it is a punishment condition has been thoroughly debunked. This is false. It has not been debunked. The expectation bias that existed back in the snake pit days is the same one used today: We will induce seizures until the patient changes for the better. These changes are manifested on the Hamilton or Beck or some other self-report measure. If I want the seizures to stop, I endorse positive change on the measure. Its a very simple mechanism of change that has nothing to do with depression. The investigators and supporters of ECT have the burden of proof to partial out this explanation and prove the punishment condition is not valid. This is difficult or impossible to do because of all the limits on constructing blinded conditions that I presented before. The most obvious objection to that idea is the the fact that modern ECT uses general anesthesia. The patient wakes up and doesn't know whether or not the ECT has been administered. This is false. The patients are not asked to indicate which condition they were in. Since the obvious intent of the anesthesia etc is to create a placebo, why don't the researchers just ask? I can only think the reason is because they are afraid of the answers. They may discover the placebo did not work and ECT patients were aware that seizures produce side effects (memory loss, extended lethargy etc) that were different than anesthesia. On our research floor, the ECT patients hang out with the patients receiving alternate treatments and they all talked to each other about the treatment. The research question is: How does the patient's understanding of the treatment condition influence ratings on the dependent measures. You could even design a study in which all the patients receive a sham treatment and you examine the difference associated with believing your in the treatment condition vs believing your in the placebo condition. The research hypothesis is obviously that subjects will endorse change consistent with their beliefs. If I believe I was receiving ECT and I would prefer not to continue receiving seizures, I will probably indicate that I am happier now than I was the last time I received the BDI. The general point is that every human in a research study thinks about which treatment or placebo they are receiving and makes dependent measure ratings consistent with their beliefs. I can't believe anyone thinks this is a radical idea. All the investigators have to do is study it. Why is it not studied? Besides, if it was such a punishment, a painful shock should be even more effective than a seizure. Its not. And eyes open ECT (much scarier) should be more effective than ECT done under anesthesia. It's not. And bilateral ECT, with it's severe retrograde amnesia, should be less efffective than unilateral ECT with its negligible retrograde amnesia. It's not. The expectation bias exists for all these conditions. If a patient feels they are receiving seizures and they don't like seizures, they will endorse positive change on the dependent measures in order to avoid more seizures. This is a classic punishment condition. It doesn't have to be related to pain dosage. The patients just endorse enough change to make it stop. Again, why don't the researchers just ask patients about their expectations? Mike's diatribe sounds more like a humanistic harangue than an informed opinion. Name-calling is not an argument. And while we're on the topic, would Mike be as critical of talk therapies than of biological therapies? Talk therapies are, of course, subject to most of the same criticisms that he levels at biological therapies. But that discussion gets even more interesting since one can argue that talk therapies ARE a placebo and that its practitioners are the institutionalized dispensers of placebos ) per Marvin Gross in The Psychological Society. And once said, is that a bad thing? I was critical of all psychotherapies on similar grounds. I don't think you read all the comments from other posts. The main difference is that the talk therapies are even worse. Since everyone in psychotherapy outcome studies accepts that placebo conditions are impossible to construct, they don't even ponder the consequences any longer. Placebo effects are real, powerful, and have a clear biological basis. There is no evidence placebos have a biological basis. They represent cognition working full time to produce expected changes on self-report or
[tips] CHRONICLE: Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker?
On 9/23/11 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Although it's probably futile to do so, since you have beeen consistently ignoring all contrary evidence to your claims (e.g. all the people who have pointed out that many treatment studies include objective observational measures and manipulation checks), I have not ignored any of these. There are no objective observational measures if all the observers know who is being treated. Please name a measure that is not influenced by expectation. The effect size for anti-depressant treatments was established using the BDI (self-report) and the Hamilton (other report), both measures that can be influenced by the expectations. My hypothesis is that the treatment effect may simply be the result of expectations, a factor well-known to influence dependent measures. How can you ignore this? I'll point out here that there is a long history of demonstrated placebo effects on non-self-report measures, including: heart rhythm blood pressure sensorimotor impairment gastric acid secretion in ulcer patients ACC, prefrontal, orbitofrontal, and amygdala activation dopamine levels immune system functioning asthma symptoms bronchitis symptoms respiratory depression I'm not sure what the point is here. Are these cited as evidence placebo is biological, or that there are measures that are not influenced by expectation? These are not measures used to measure the outcome of psychotropic medications. All the measures used to asses the effects of psychological treatment outcome are self-report or observer measures. These are good examples of dependent measures that are influenced by expectation bias in studies of medication to treat heart disease, high blood pressure etc. This manipulation of expectation is the reason placebo conditions were invented in the first place. I have never seen a study of depression or any other psychological treatment that included these measures. I think any reasonable point I made has either been well taken or masked by these curves. I have to admit that the posing such extreme qualifiers as all and every usually generates irritation and disbelief. The fact is that it is all and every study. I feel like Diogenese in modern times, looking for one, true, double-blinded study of psychological treatment. Mike --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12900 or send a blank email to leave-12900-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] CHRONICLE: Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker?
Hello All. I guess I should respond to Scott's comments point by point. Mike, I had thought your very point was because most studies of antidepressants aren't conducted in a strictly double-blind fashion (because of medication side effects...although you didn't address active placebo studies), we cannot draw clear-cut conclusions from them. But Mike, you are now saying that we can conclude with confidence that antidepressants have no treatment effect. One can't have things both ways - if the studies are categorically invalid (not merely imperfect) as you asserted in previous messages, then one can't draw conclusions from them one way or the other. Mike, I don't follow your logic here. Since the drugs are for sale, the FDA thinks they work. By your statement, we cannot draw clear-cut conclusions from them, we should logically conclude that there is no evidence the drugs work. Since the FDA must make a decision when a drug company makes an application, the FDA should assume the null hypothesis until there is evidence to support a treatment effect. My assertions that the drugs are ineffective comes from my own personal observations of patients who don't get better but endorse change on the measures. I admit that my personal observations of depressed people is not a basis for generalization. However, this is all I have since none of the studies are properly blinded and valid. I can't prove the negative. It is the burden of the drug companies to prove there is an effect before we give them to patients. The drugs are being given now as if the effect was proven. Mike, you also never responded to my points or Jim Clark's questions regarding your earlier claims that all of the dependent measures in antidepressant studies come from either clients or therapists themselves. When I pointed out (with references to meta-analyses) that this assertion was false, you merely continued to reiterate your previous points without acknowledgng our criticisms. These were just examples of a general point. I will rephrase it: find a dependent measure that is not influenced by expectation bias. They all involve someone making a rating of a psychological construct or ratings of behavior. All the people making the ratings are involved in the study and influenced by expectations for treatment effectiveness. This includes parents of children who are experiencing the side effects of the drugs. All the investigators have to do is study the expectation bias. Just ask the subjects after the study is completed to indicate which condition they thought they were in. This is rarely, if ever, studied. Studies of this will go a long way to explain the role of cognition in treatment and placebo. For humans, placebo is always a cognitive manipulation of expectation. Contrast this with a dependent measure that is mostly not influenced by expectation bias, body weight. Psychologists who study obesity treatment actually have a dependent measure that is very hard to manipulate by expectation. If I have an expectation bias that I'm in treatment, it is still very hard to lose weight (don't we know). It is very easy to rate my mood a point or two better on a self-report measure. A meta-analysis of 100 unblinded studies is a meta-analysis of 100 poorly designed studies. If all the individual studies are noise, the meta-analysis will just add up the noise. The meta-analysis should come to the conclusion: Since none of the studies were properly blinded, we cannot come to a conclusion that there is a treatment effect. Instead, the possible effects of an expectation confound is itemized and discussed at length. The lack of blinding is never measured or considered. It's only in the context of many side effects and treatment failures that issues like this even reach the surface. I have to confess that I'm finding this TIPS discussion regarding antidepressant and therapeutic efficacy increasingly troubling. It seems to be more of a discussion of ideology than science. It also seems to be marked by the kind of dichotomous, categorical claims (e.g., studies of therapeutic efficacy are invalid, antidepressants have no treatment effect, there is nothing there, ECT is pure behavior therapy, ECT is a punishment condition, the Beck Depression Inventory..is not a measure of mood) that we would rightly criticize in our students. This is just a veiled reference to my personal characterization of study findings. My qualifiers are extreme because the research deficits in this area are extreme. If all the studies are unblinded then none of the studies are blinded. I don't have to say some studies are unblinded because the truth is that all are unblinded. The studies remain unblinded by assumption and everyone behaves as if the studies are well designed. Referring to ECT as a punishment condition is just something you have never heard before. This is exactly the
[tips] CHRONICLE: Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker?
Reading this article brought back many memories and disillusionment with clinical trials. However, I believe there are opportunities to study what a placebo is, and how this condition influences our dependent measures. The only psychotropic medications that work are those that sedate patients who are anxious, manic, or actively psychotic. They actually help people because they chemically suppress the worst symptoms. They don't cure people and they are associated with so many adverse side effects that no one can take them day in and day out without becoming a zombie. The other medications, including all the antidepressants, have no treatment effect. The effects represents the manipulation of the patients to endorse positive changes on the dependents measures. As a result of the expectation biases I described before, the patients endorse change on the measures but their mood stays the same. Anyone who describes placebo as a treatment effect is just trying to extract something positive from ingesting these chemicals when there is nothing there. The positive change endorsed by the subjects is not a positive change. The validity of the depression measures have been compromised by the expectation bias. The Beck Depression Scale is now a measure of expectation bias and not a measure of mood. ECT is pure behavior therapy: Mr. Smith, we understand that you are unhappy. We will continue to induce seizures until you feel better. After a few seizures, Mr. Smith endorses positive change on the Beck Depression Inventory. The psychiatrist stops inducing seizures. ECT is a punishment condition. Just to belabor the point: There are no double blinded studies of psychotropic meds and any psychotherapy interventions. Given this situation, we are currently ruminating about the significance of noise. Mike Williams Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker? By John Horgan Several generations of psychotropic drugs have proven to be of little or no benefit, and may be doing considerable harm. http://chronicle.com/article/Are-Psychiatric-Medications/128976/ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12790 or send a blank email to leave-12790-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Blinded Studies
Hello All. This is starting to look like a response to journal reviewers. Rather than make a long list of point-by-point responses, I would like to just state some points that might generate a paradigm shift in how we think of outcome research. The major point I want to make is one that everyone will agree with but no one has thought of the consequences. This point is that humans are sentient beings who attempt to understand and figure out which treatment condition they are in. After they make a judgement about this, they behave consistent with the social demands of the research setting and other expectation biases that are consistent with their judgments. All the research design guides, such as Campbell and Stanley, assume that the subject is a passive agent in the process and does not interact with the research design. Some of the threats to internal validity suggests something like this but they really need a chapter called, How Human Cognition Screws up Research. Imagine you could create a placebo that had the same side effects as the medication but did not have an active agent. Both groups would have the same side effects. You then randomly assign the meds and placebo and the subjects and investigators are not told who got which one. Now, I'm a subject in the placebo condition and I start experiencing dry mouth and constipation. I infer from this that I am getting medication. I then endorse positive change on the Beck Depression Scale because I want to help out the researchers or otherwise demonstrate an expectation bias. Some proportion of the subjects in the placebo condition behave like they were treated on the self-report measures. This is a scenario in which the side effects are controlled and the result is still noise. I understand that some of you will counter that you could inform all the subjects that they might experience side effects. This is always done on the consent form. However, it is commonly understood that placebos do not cause effects and subjects will reason consistent with this. There is also a limit to which any side effects can be emphasized because you run the risk of actually suggesting that subjects should experience a side effect. It is understood that all psychotherapy outcome studies cannot be blinded. It is so widely understood that people don't think about its consequences any longer. If the standard for empirical validation is one blinded study showing a treatment effect then no study of meds or psychotherapy meets the standard. I think this area would be fascinating to study. Survey the subjects and ask them which condition they thought they were in and why. Maybe we should only analyze the data of subjects whose beliefs were consistent with the treatment condition they were actually assigned to. Someone should at least analyze the relevant groups to see if there is a difference. If the FDA mandated that the drug companies verify the blinding, the research reps would piss their pants. They know they are passing off a flimflam to make millions on psychotropic meds. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12706 or send a blank email to leave-12706-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Blinded or Blind Studies
Hello All. I thought I would take on each of Mike P.'s points: It should be noted that drug treatment studies can be conducted with within-subject designs such as crossover designs where one group receives a drug treatment first and, after a washout period, receives a placebo treatment. Another group has placebo first and drug later. In any event, a competent researcher will make sure that the design they use addresses threats to the different types of validity involved in the study and try to make sure that their effect is negated or minimized. All the patients experience dry mouth and constipation at every cross-over in the design. They all know when the treatment has changed. This does not control for the problem. It might be a somewhat useful to follow the research heuristic that all treatment/medication studies involving human are invalid but, as with all heuristics, there will be situations where it fails and situations where it is right but for the wrong reasons. This is not a heuristic, it is a fact. If the studies are not blinded then they are not valid. They have no internal validity. But if one uses an outpatient population where the participants have no contact with each other, it is hard to see the merit in Williams' critique. Outpatients still get dry mouth and constipation. (3) A minor point: I would assert that though one's own personal experience is, perhaps, a useful guide to think about things, it does not necessarily constitute a valid guide. It I was using my own experience as an example. It was also the only way to assess this threat since none of the research studies survey the subjects or investigators. I wonder why? (4) I have conducted the statistical analysis for a few drug studies as represented in the following publications: Your personal experiences are apparently not relevant (see 3 above). Trying to claim that all studies are invalid or all studies are valid is logically invalid from an inductive perspective -- it is as foolish as claiming that All swans are white. Those without experience with black swans will swear the all swans are white if that has been their lifelong experience. If it barks like a duck and walks like a duck, it must be a swan. What underlies my criticism is that humans will reason their way through a study and if they are given basic information like side effects, they will infer the presence of treatment or placebo. All the great research guides assume that the subjects are passive agents of the treatment research design. The idea that they would interact with the design causes great problems in our own inferences. I generalize to all studies simply because I cannot think of a way anyone, including myself, can get around the problem. When problems like this exist the very human researchers put their collective heads in the sand and say its not so. We can never be confident that any study of a psychological intervention ever worked. We have to accept that none of these interventions will ever meet an objective standard of empirical support. Constipation trumps all. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12657 or send a blank email to leave-12657-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE:[tips] Clinical training: Boulder and Denver
Hello All. When I was a grad student, we were conducting a clinical trial of Imipramine vs Xanex in the treatment of severe depression. The study was conducted on an inpatient research unit in the hospital. The patients lived there and I noticed that they would sit in the day room in the evenings and discuss their treatment. Although the medications were assigned randomly and the researchers did not know the assignment, the patients with dry mouth and constipation knew they were taking the medications. Those given placebo knew this because they did not suffer constipation and dry mouth (the anticholinergic side effects). The patients knew which treatment they were receiving and they communicated this to the investigators because the investigators constantly monitored the side effects. The constant monitoring of side effects unblinds the study. This happens in every clinical trial of psychotropic medications. This problem is even more obvious in every clinical trial of psychotherapy. All these studies are invalid. I could explain why they are invalidated by referring to the gigantic literature on expectation biases. Since all the dependent measures involve a judgement by the patient or the investigator that the disorder got better or worse, they are all influenced by the expectation bias that the treatment worked. I think many subjects want to help the researchers and they endorse small positive changes on the dependent measures. The people who get placebo behave consistent with this because they know they never got treatment. All the investigators have to do is anonymously survey the subjects. The results will blow their minds. To my knowledge, this obvious, simple assessment has never been made. Now you may be able to understand why the treatment effect size today for antidepressants is the same as the placebo effect for some studies in the past - its all noise. Mike Williams __ Hi Mike: This is a very interesting point but I am not sure that I follow the argument completely. Please expand your argument, dotting the 'i's and crossing the 't's. Ken On 9/12/2011 3:00 AM, Mike Wiliams wrote: Clinical Psychology psychotherapy and psychotropic medication therapies will never have sufficient empirical support simply because the subjects are never blind to the treatment condition. * All the investigators are doing is training the subjects to endorse change on the dependent measures. ** That's why the meta-analyses conclude that any therapy is effective. I have never seen an analysis that addressed this research problem. It's similar to the obesity researchers who never notice that their entire field is based on the dieting behavior of young women. Mike Williams Drexel University --- Kenneth M. Steele, ph.d.steel...@appstate.edu Professor Department of Psychologyhttp://www.psych.appstate.edu Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 USA --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12612 or send a blank email to leave-12612-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] How to blind a treatment study of psychotropic meds or psychotherapy?
Hello All, Its interesting how Scott and Mike P. dismiss the threat to internal validity as if a meta-analysis balances out the defects. All a meta-analysis does is add up the defects. The Meta-analyses can only present the data that is collected in the individual studies. As far as I know, no blinded subject has ever been asked whether they were in the treatment condition or not. No blinded investigator has ever been asked if they could identify the treated subjects. I definitely could identify them from their report of side effects. All the investigators could have done the same by examining the adverse event reports. The observer ratings that Scott refers to can all be influenced by the same internal defect. All the observers, including parents, know that the children are taking a medication because of the side effects. All these same people know when a child is being treated with a behavior intervention because it appears very different than a waiting list control or other control conditions. All the drug companies and the psychotherapy outcome investigators need to do is survey the subjects and the investigators to verify the blinding. They don't do this because they know that these studies can never be blinded. They interpret the results as if they are. Until a genuinely blinded treatment study is conducted, all the effect sizes in all these studies could be the result of the internal bias that Campbell, Stanley and Shadish so eloquently present. If anyone can present a study that was correctly blinded, or even present a way this could be done, it would advance the field 100% since all the studies done up to this point have presented noise. The research defect I described doesn't exist among studies in which the blinding isn't threatened by side effects and other clear indications of the treatment condition. Until a genuinely blind treatment study is conducted, these drugs and psychotherapy interventions have no empirical validation. No insurance company should pay for these treatments until they are empirically validated. Isn't anyone but me curious about why placebos are sugar pills? Why not try a salt pill? The control condition must be similar to the treatment condition for humans or they quickly figure out which condition they are in and they are very influenced by the social setting of research. Mike Williams On 9/14/11 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Mike W. is right to raise useful questions regarding the internal validity of psychotherapy designs, but I agree with Mike P. that he is wrong to categorically dismiss all of them simply as invalid. Surely, no study is perfect, but many of them yield highly useful inferences. In addition to Mike P.'s endorsement of Don Campbell's writings on internal validity, I'd like to add Campbell's helpful principle of the heterogeneity of irrelevancies. The most helpful inferences derive the consilience of multiple independent studies, all with largely offsetting flaws. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12633 or send a blank email to leave-12633-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE:[tips] Clinical training: Boulder and Denver
Thought I would chip in since I have been teaching in PhD Clinical Psych programs and graduated from one. I have also taught at a clinical program within a medical school (Hahnemann) and those from traditional Arts Sciences (Memphis, Drexel). I am pessimistic that Scott's future world of BA's working in medical centers supervised by PsyDs and PhDs will ever work. Medicare does not reimburse anyone below the licensed doctoral level. The focus on empirically supported treatments is not something invented by cognitive-behavioral psychologists who conduct a lot of research. It is a process of review put in place by insurance companies to deny treatment. Psychology is such a minor cost that I am sure they could care less to even get documentation from us. The insurance companies will always up the anti and require higher and higher levels of empirical support that only obvious, life-saving medical interventions will be compensated. I find it very interesting how the empirically supported therapies arguments have factored into the theoretical differences in clinical psychology. Groups that have been at it for years, such as psychoanalytic and other dynamic therapies vs behavior therapies are fighting it out over who has empirical support. Since CBT and BT have always had more empirical study than the others, the advocates for CPT and BT have held that these therapies are superior to therapies that are unstudied. Clinical Psychology psychotherapy and psychotropic medication therapies will never have sufficient empirical support simply because the subjects are never blind to the treatment condition. All the investigators are doing is training the subjects to endorse change on the dependent measures. That's why the meta-analyses conclude that any therapy is effective. I have never seen an analysis that addressed this research problem. It's similar to the obesity researchers who never notice that their entire field is based on the dieting behavior of young women. The best research in my specialty of neuropsychology is done in the clinic. There are even private practice neuropsychologists who conduct a lot of research. You can't sit up in an Ivory Tower and conduct clinical psychology research. I'm sure that Scott has noticed that the number of available PhD slots is getting smaller. It reminds me of the history of the English and French in Quebec. The French just eventually overpopulated the English. If clinical psychology is just practitioners then we have failed. We had a chance of being unique with the Boulder or Vail models. My interpretation of the models was that we should train practitioners who conduct clinical research. Many of our PhD graduates actually do this. There are actually PsyD graduates who do this. Working in a medical setting, I was often consulted by physicians because of my research training. Although physicians often master the most esoteric calculus, molecular biology and genetics in order to get into and through medical school, they are often surprised by this thing called the t test. We have this unique scientist practitioner training that is best implemented when a trained scientist is confronted with a real, clinical problem. The last point I want to make is that the base of academic jobs is not high enough to employ all these Ivory Tower, academic-only graduates. Mike Williams Drexel University --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=12595 or send a blank email to leave-12595-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Factor Analysis of Dichotomous Variables
Any variable set that produces valid correlations can be factor analyzed. FA is just the reduction of a correlation matrix. I even asked clinicians to generate a correlation matrix for the WAIS subtests and then factor analyzed the matrices. Everyone was remarkably consistent in rarifying the factors. They all believed that the subtests were much more intercorrelated than they are and they were all apparently strong believers in Spearman's G. IQ reigns! It was very difficult for people to incorporate noise into their judgements. Since you have an hypothesis about the item clusters, you should look into confirmatory factor analyses. You basically give the procedure the model you have and the analysis tests the hypothetical factor matrix against the pattern in the data. Mike Williams Drexel University --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=11716 or send a blank email to leave-11716-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] Puzzling Alzheimers diagnosis
Its a ploy by the drug companies and the people they support to have more stages for drug development and treatment. Imagine the market if you can sell a drug to treat mild cognitive impairment. The drug companies tried this before. They called the disorder, age-associated cognitive impairment. The FDA did not approve the trials here so they did most of the research in Europe. These trials did not result in significant results. Mike Williams Subject: Puzzling Alzheimers diagnosis From: michael sylvestermsylves...@copper.net Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 16:12:32 -0100 X-Message-Number: 1 The new guidelines for evaluating Alzm distinguish among three stages,namely,a pre-clinical.mild cognitive impairment,and dementia.It is the pre-clinical(stage without symptoms) that I find puzzling.It would seem that if there are no symptoms that condition does not deserve to be called a stage.Or virtually all conditions will have a pre-clinical stage.I guess we are all in a pre-clinical stage for developping schizophrenia. Come on,I can envision a post-clinical stage,but pre-clinical? Michael omnicentric Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=10183 or send a blank email to leave-10183-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] B vitamins, Alzheimer's, and telling the whole story
It appears to me that we have been struck once again by publication bias and press release science. The authors can't simply state negative findings because no one will publish the paper. I also expect the study would never make this discussion list if the findings didn't show an effect. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=4730 or send a blank email to leave-4730-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] tips digest: Magic Tricks
Here is a trick I actually use in Perception class. I usually throw it in during the color section: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppvGwKpUfMQ The decks are reasonably priced and the trick is easy to learn. It always gets them. I think it also can work when you want to explain how expectations influence perception. The deck is tricky because the viewer is expecting a pick any card - type trick and no one expects the deck to change color. People also have expectations about what a card deck should be and have great difficulty getting their minds out of the box in order to figure out what appears to be an easy trick. Mike Williams Drexel University --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=4507 or send a blank email to leave-4507-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] tips digest: July 18, 2010
The groups with special protection are pregnant, children, prisoners and subjects with mental impairment. A flagrant schizophrenic would fall in the last category. The reason PETs are still done is because they render a spatially ambiguous image that the psychiatrist can interpret any way the diagnostic wind blows. The only imaging technique that should be conducted these days is fMRI. The best consenting process still does not protect subjects from bad procedures. Mike Williams On 7/19/10 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: dangers of imaging studies From: Annette Taylortay...@sandiego.edu Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 06:39:39 -0700 X-Message-Number: 1 Here's an article from the LA times. I guess I had never thought about the fact that there are no special protections for mentally ill people in terms of giving consent for research. There are other protected groups. I wonder how the mentally ill slipped through those cracks in the code. So someone who is flagrantly schizophrenic would not be required to have a legal guardian sign for them; and often they simply do not have one because they have never come under the purview of the legal system. Safety violations at N.Y. brain lab may have bigger fallout http://www.latimes.com/news/health/la-sci-columbia-20100718,0,782909.story Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Professor, Psychological Sciences --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=3667 or send a blank email to leave-3667-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
[tips] on-line stats textbook
I found the materials very short on explanation. Some of the demos gave me ideas I might use in my stats classes. Mike Williams Please check my stats demos and let me know what you think. I have been translating Runrev applications into web apps: http://www.learnpsychology.com Subject: On-line stats text From:roig-rear...@comcast.net Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 00:11:08 + (UTC) X-Message-Number: 5 Our chairperson sent us the following URL,http://onlinestatbook.com/index.html , for an on-line stats textbook. I would appreciate comments about this resource from anyone who has used it. Miguel --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=3329 or send a blank email to leave-3329-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] U.S. Tax Dollars at Work Part 982,542: Pretest But Don't Posttest for Brain Injury
The ANAM is not a conventional neuropsychological test battery. It consists of a number of computer-mediated tasks (a good thing) that are very sensitive to sustained attention and high levels of cognitive abilities. It is best used when you want to decide who among the Navy Seals should be selected as a Delta Force member. ANAM does a good job discriminating impaired pilots from unimpaired. Even in this situation, some pilots are likely deemed impaired when they could probably function well as pilots. Since they are compared to a norm of other pilots, they may appear disabled. The absolute level of cognitive abilities need to competently fly an airplane is largely unknown. When you administer this test to typical soldiers, an incorrect number appear disabled (false positives). That is what I mean by too sensitive: it is extremely sensitive to small changes in high levels of ability. A clinical test with the same problem is the PASAT. This results from the design of the tests and may be a result of norming. I don't know enough about the norms to make a judgment about them. The fact that the person representing the tests described them as, no better then flipping a coin, suggests that someone did a validity study and found that the specificity/sensitivity approached random levels among typical soldiers. I wonder what they used as an external standard for TBI? The fundamental problem with this whole approach was found when psychological assessments were used to predict violent behavior among people discharged from mental institutions. The predictive power was low. It was low because the incidence of violence is so low. If I have a violence test with an accuracy of 90%, I still end up identifying a large number of people as potentially violent who will not engage in violence. The ANAM, or any test battery, has the same problem. If the base rate of TBI is low (5%) then it will be impossible to detect with a neuropsych battery that is insufficiently valid and reliable to detect an effect that small. When you add in extraneous factors like malingering and psychological depression, then it will appear that many soldiers have cognitive impairment when they do not. Someone with PTSD and no head injury will bomb the ANAM. Some of the tests are so sensitive to attention that a poorly placed sneeze will lower your score. A sensible program would be to assess with the ANAM and conventional clinical tests any soldier who was rendered unconscious or had other evidence of a head injury. The money being used to test all these soldiers could be better spent on the rehabilitation of the ones who have valid TBI. Mike Williams Drexel University On 6/16/10 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: Re:U.S. Tax Dollars at Work Part 982,542: Pretest But Don't Posttest for Brain Injury From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:21:38 -0400 X-Message-Number: 3 On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:09:17 -0700, Mike Wiliams wrote: The ANAM battery is far too sensitive for a general application like this. What are the specificity and sensitivity for the ANAM? Also, what do you mean by too sensitive? One interpretation is that it is good at detecting cases with brain injury (sensitivity) while the article suggests that it produces false positives (i.e., 1 - specificity). In addition, the base rate of TBI among returning soldiers is so low that a screening with a test like this will be far too expensive for what it is intended to do. Please explain this to me. From what I have heard, the rate of TBI is much higher than (a) that experienced in previous wars and (b) in the general population. If TBI can be researched in these groups, why shouldn't it be researched in soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan? If I interpret the article correctly, the pretesting and posttesting was part of an ongoing study which can be interpreted as gathering baseline data under different conditions and in different groups. This seems to me like a worthwhile thing to do unless the ANAM has really bad diagnostic accuracy which raises the question of why it was chosen in the first place. In any event, the premature cancellation of posttests means that the pretest data makes it much more difficult to reach any conclusions at all (outside of supporting the confirmation bias).. The obvious approach is to only test soldiers who have some history of head injury, especially those who were rendered unconscious. Do they really expect that soldiers serving in low risk assignments will come back with a brain injury and PTSD? Although I agree that soldiers with a documented case of head injury or concussion should be used but you seem to suggest that multiple control groups should not be used. I assume that prettesting will identify a certain percentage of people with pre-existing problems -- are soldiers with pre-existing
Re:[tips] U.S. Tax Dollars at Work Part 982,542: Pretest But Don't Posttest for Brain Injury
The ANAM battery is far too sensitive for a general application like this. In addition, the base rate of TBI among returning soldiers is so low that a screening with a test like this will be far too expensive for what it is intended to do. The obvious approach is to only test soldiers who have some history of head injury, especially those who were rendered unconscious. Do they really expect that soldiers serving in low risk assignments will come back with a brain injury and PTSD? The other thing they must include is an assessment of malingering. The military disability support system is very ripe for abuse. It is a waste of tax dollars to conduct these assessments without checks on malingering. Mike Williams Drexel University On 6/15/10 1:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest wrote: Subject: U.S. Tax Dollars at Work Part 982,542: Pretest But Don't Posttest for Brain Injury From: Mike Palijm...@nyu.edu Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:33:32 -0400 X-Message-Number: 7 A news story is making the round on how the U.S. Pentagon initiated a program of neuropsychological testing using pretest (i.e., prior to deployment to combat areas) and posttest (i.e., return from deployment) but apparently has stopped administering the posttest because its false positive rate is too high. For one source see: http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/EMIHC267/333/8014/1369167.html?d=dmtICNNews The test in question is called the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metris or ANAM. Anyone familiar with it? -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=3096 or send a blank email to leave-3096-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Legal Fight Delays Paper on Psychopathy Scale 3 Years
I plan to write an opinion review criticizing Psych Corp and Pearson for arbitrarily changing the Wechsler Scales and creating new editions just to churn the scales and squeeze more money out of us, in similar fashion that Pearson is churning up textbook editions to squeeze more money out of our students. Do you think Pearson will sue? Since APA has a major publishing arm, do you think APA will support Pearson, or me? It's time that APA spun off its publishing arm as a separate company. These conflicts of interest between its financial interests and its ethics guidelines will come up again and again. Mike Williams --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5n=Tl=tipso=3079 or send a blank email to leave-3079-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu