Re: brain pick for TIPSTERS

[Scott Lilienfeld]

Hi Danny: Almost all of the clinical faculty, with one possible exception, felt that the questions were challenging, but entirely appropriate.  I agree with your excellent point that asking tough questions is an implicit indication of respect, and have made the same point myself to several of the clinical students.  I also think that your suggestion regarding affective tone is an intriguing one.      I resonated to Christopher Green and Marie Helweg-Larsen's thoughtful comments. As interim director of our clinical psychology program, I've thought seriously of "assigning" some television viewing to our clinical students.  Specifically, I suspect that the "Prime Minister's Questions," shown on C-SPAN in the U.S. (it is available on any Canadian stations?), would be therapeutic.  Many Americans are taken aback at the blunt and often rambunctious questioning that arises during these sessions of the British parliament; indeed, the first time I witnessed such a session I was struck by the remarkable difference in content and tone from a typical U.S. presidential press conference (in fact, I recall a presidential press conference last year in which a few reporters were pilloried by some members of the U.S. press for asking Bush a few tough and slightly obnoxious questions, which pale in comparison with the kinds of questions asked of Tony Blair during these sessions).  But this wide open and rough-around-the edges give and take is par for the course in the U.K., and it can often be a surprisingly effective means of weeding out error in one's web of beliefs.  It is not, however, for the thin skinned.      Indeed, I've long wondered whether the modal attitude toward challenging questions and tough, constructive criticism differs in academia in the U.K. versus the U.S.  That has certainly been my anecdotal impression, but I'd love to hear what some of our TIPSTERs from across the pond think.  .....Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Scott, Thanks for bringing this up. At the risk of saying the obvious (I'm pretty sure, you've already done that), I think that it is also quite important to remind our studetns that asking tough or challanging questions is actually a compliment or implicit sign of appreciation for the presenters. That is, we consider them to be competent enough to deal with such questions. By the way, how did the faculty feel about it? Needless to say, her/his role-(modeling) in this regard is quite critical. Sincerely, Danny PS, Often times, people react to the "how" more than to the "what". You might also wish to consider good readings/training on correctly identifying the "affective tone" of such questions. There is one, Drew Westen, in your program that I believe knows one or two things about this (I used to work with him) :) Warm regards. Quoting Scott Lilienfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Dear TIPSTERS: I'm writing with a "brain pick" for all of you dealing with graduate education in psychology (I hope that questions regarding graduate education are acceptable on this listserv; if not, I apologize). My question was prompted by a recent talk in our clinical psychology program in which a non-tenure track faculty member, assisted by a beginning graduate student, presented the preliminary results of some psychotherapy outcome research. The faculty and students (unexpectedly) encountered a large number of difficult and challenging questions from other faculty, none of which (in my view or that of virtually all of my clinical psychology colleagues) were in any way inappropriate or unprofessional. Nevertheless, a sizeable number (apparently a minority, but a nontrivial minority) of our graduate students were extremely upset by the nature of the questions, believing that it was somehow cruel for faculty to ask numerous tough questions of one of their fellow colleagues (and of one of the beginning graduate students). A few of them even took the steady line of questions as an "attack" or "assault" on the speakers, even though none of the questions was even remotely ad hominem in any respect. In reality, most of the questions were no tougher than one might encounter at a typical high-level professional conference. In reflecting on this incident, it occurred to me that some of the fault probably lies with us as faculty members. Specifically, I don't believe that we've done as good a job as we could of socializing our graduate students, and in particular of helping them to recognize the crucial difference between tough substantive questions and personal attacks. So here's my (perhaps naively broad) question...can any of you recommend good readings on the role of constructive criticism (including challenging but respectful questioning) in graduate education in psychology, or in graduate education in general? Either full list or backchannel responses (to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]) would be greatly appreciated. Thanks very much in advance....Scott -- Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Psychology, Room 206 Emory University 532 N. Kilgo Circle Atlanta, Georgia 30322 (404) 727-1125 (phone) (404) 727-0372 (FAX) Home Page: http://www.emory.edu/PSYCH/Faculty/lilienfeld.html The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice: www.srmhp.org The Master in the Art of Living makes little distinction between his work and his play, his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his education and his recreation, his love and his intellectual passions. He hardly knows which is which. He simply pursues his vision of excellence in whatever he does, leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing. To him – he is always doing both. - Zen Buddhist text (slightly modified) --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Psychology, Room 206 Emory University 532 N. Kilgo Circle Atlanta, Georgia 30322 (404) 727-1125 (phone) (404) 727-0372 (FAX) Home Page: http://www.emory.edu/PSYCH/Faculty/lilienfeld.html The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice: www.srmhp.org The Master in the Art of Living makes little distinction between his work and his play, his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his education and his recreation, his love and his intellectual passions. He hardly knows which is which. He simply pursues his vision of excellence in whatever he does, leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing. To him – he is always doing both. - Zen Buddhist text (slightly modified) --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]