On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 13:30:05 -0600, Michael Smith wrote: > Mr. Palij. *Mister* Palij? Okay, Mr. Smith. Just be careful with those wontons. They can take an eye out.
-Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Link to the TIPS archive > From: "Michael Britt" <michael.br...@thepsychfiles.com> > Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 15:45:27 -0400 > X-Message-Number: 9 > > I'm sorry to ask this and I promise to write this down as soon as I get > the info: what is the link to the TIPS archive? > > Thanks, > > Michael > > > -- > Michael Britt, Ph.D. > Host of The Psych Files podcast > www.thepsychfiles.com > mich...@thepsychfiles.com > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: Spanking - an idea that won't go away > From: Don Allen <dal...@langara.bc.ca> > Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 21:44:23 +0000 (GMT) > X-Message-Number: 10 > > <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 (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) >> > > Don Allen > Dept. of Psychology > Langara College > 100 W. 49th Ave. > Vancouver, B.C. > Canada V5Y 2Z6 > Phone: 604-323-5871 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: Spanking - an idea that won't go away > From: Michael Smith <tipsl...@gmail.com> > Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 19:39:41 -0600 > X-Message-Number: 11 > > lol > > Yes! > > --Mike > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Don Allen<dal...@langara.bc.ca> 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 (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) >>> >> >> 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 (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) >> > > > > --- > > END OF DIGEST > > --- > To make changes to your subscription go to: > http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
