Hi All: I've deleted a message which I believe came some time ago suggesting that the latest issue of Scientific American's Brain series (I believe they do this about once a year) seemed more like psychobabble than science.
I bought the issue and so far have skimmed it; some of the articles I skimmed pretty closely because I was more interested in them than in others. Overall, I would have to disagree. I thought that some of the articles omitted other information they could have included, but that the information presented was fairly represented and represented a subset of good science. They concluded each article with web links to extremely legitimate sources--although I have not tested the links. Psychological science is becoming much more complex. Some of it (well, lately it seems more and more of it) is extremely difficult for me to digest and many of my students are really overwhelmed by some of the biological and mathematical underpinnings. When trying to reach the general public I think it is a fine line we tread between becoming so obtuse that we loose people completely and they give up on it, and making it understandable to a person with an 8th grade education. I thought this issue did a fair job of treading that line. I have recommended several of the articles to 'lay' people I know who have been involved with some of the issues. Other opinions are welcome. Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Department of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
