lol Yes!
--Mike On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Don Allen<[email protected]> wrote: > <snip> "That is, a wonton disregard for proper citation" > > Is a "wonton disregard" when you turn down an offer of soup at a chinese > restaurant? ;o) > > -Don. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Michael Smith > Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2009 12:30 pm > Subject: Re: [tips] Spanking - an idea that won't go away > To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" > >> Mr. Palij. >> >> We have had conversations about this before. I have not included the >> original statements to which you responded, but I have responded to >> some of your comments (you will find them in brackets). Those to which >> I have not responded suffer from the same weaknesses. Please >> take note >> of them they are important to your potential career as a psychologist. >> >> > This is not a new point but your handling of it is "inelegant". >> (References?) >> >> > This is a broad brush which ignores that many researchers are >> > in fact self-critical and do acknowledge other viewpoints. >> (Again, References please Mr. Palij) >> >> >A researcher who believes that mental >> > representations are analog will ask different questions that a >> > researcher who assumes that all mental representations are >> > digital. For example, if one is concerned with whether 2-D >> > and 3-D visual mental images have different psychological >> > properties will probably find much more relevant research >> > among other analog researchers (e.g., Roger Shepard, Stephen >> > Kosslyn) than among digital/abstract researchers (e.g., Zenon >> > Pylyshyn). >> (It isn't enough to just include a researcher's name: Please >> check the >> latest APA style guide.) >> >> >In either cases, because the assumptions and predictions >> > are different, using references in a "compatible" research area >> > is more likely to occur than using references in an incompatible >> > research area even though one is familiar with it. This might >> > seem like a "confirmation bias" but it is not. >> (Again, Mr. Palij. It is not enough simply to state your opinion about >> what constitutes "confirmation bias", you must provide relevant >> references!) >> >> > Methinks thou oversimplies things but I don't have the time >> right now to explain it to you. >> (This is a poor conclusion Mr. Palij, and the wording is colloquial). >> >> Your entire response suffers from the same overall weaknesses. That >> is, a wonton disregard for proper citation and the presentation of >> your opinion for established fact. >> >> Please see me after class. >> >> -- Dr. M. A. Smith >> >> --- >> To make changes to your subscription contact: >> >> Bill Southerly ([email protected]) >> > > Don Allen > Dept. of Psychology > Langara College > 100 W. 49th Ave. > Vancouver, B.C. > Canada V5Y 2Z6 > Phone: 604-323-5871 > > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([email protected]) > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
