Annette, I, of course, agree with you that "the general public really doesn't understand psychological research." But I also think you are being unrealistic in the level of discourse you expect from a blog's comments section. Calling something "opinion" is not merely an error. It is a rhetorical maneuver that calls into question the seriousness with which the reader should take the piece in question. Because no one wants to be seen as a dupe (naively taking something seriously that should not be taken so), and because skepticism is often equated with sophistication (a ploy ironically, that scientists are particularly adept as using), many unwary readers will immediately lower their evaluation of the piece if anyone in the comments section dismisses it as (mere) "opinion."
Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 [email protected] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================== [email protected] wrote: > In reading responses to this blog post I note that one person calls it all > "opinion". This further suggests to me that the general public really doesn't > understand psychological research nor the citation format of the paragraph. > > Annette > > Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. > Professor of Psychology > University of San Diego > 5998 Alcala Park > San Diego, CA 92110 > 619-260-4006 > [email protected] > > > ---- Original message ---- > >> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 08:51:55 -0700 >> From: "Frantz, Sue" <[email protected]> >> Subject: [tips] Rick Steves: Travel guru reports on a little psychology >> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" >> <[email protected]> >> >> Rick Steves, best known for his PBS travel shows >> wrote this in a recent blog. >> >> ************************** >> >> Bungled Risk Assessment and Tragic Road Trips >> >> Having a daughter studying at Georgetown means I >> have a steady stream of interesting reading coming >> into my email box. Jackie loves studying in >> Washington DC. Here's an excerpt from something >> Jackie just sent that is thought-provoking: >> >> This is from her psychology textbook, Psychology: A >> Concise Introduction, Second Edition by Richard A. >> Griggs: >> >> "Availability in memory also plays a key role in >> what is termed a dread risk. A dread risk is a >> low-probability, high-damage event in which many >> people are killed at one point in time. Not only is >> there direct damage in the event, but there is >> secondary indirect damage mediated through how we >> psychologically react to the event. A good example >> is our reaction to the September 11, 2001, terrorist >> attacks. Fearing dying in a terrorist airplane crash >> because the September 11 events were so prominent in >> our memories, we reduced our air travel and >> increased our automobile travel, leading to a >> significantly great number of fatal traffic >> accidents than usual. It is estimated that about >> 1,600 more people needlessly died in these traffic >> accidents (Gigerenzer, 2006). These lives could have >> been saved had we not reacted to the dread risk as >> we did. We just do not seem to realize that it is >> far safer to fly than to drive. National Safety >> Council data reveal that you are 37 times more >> likely to die in a vehicle accident than on a >> commercial flight." >> >> -- >> Sue Frantz >> Highline Community College >> Psychology, Coordinator Des Moines, >> WA >> 206.878.3710 x3404 >> [email protected] >> >> Office of Teaching Resources in Psychology, >> Associate Director >> >> Project Syllabus >> >> APA Division 2: Society for the Teaching of >> Psychology >> >> >> >> APA's p...@cc Committee >> >> >> >> >> >> --- >> To make changes to your subscription contact: >> >> Bill Southerly ([email protected]) >> > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([email protected]) > > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
