Hi Dan Slater wrote a recent article on evolutionary psychology and dating behavior. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/opinion/sunday/darwin-was-wrong-about-dating.html It takes (in my view) an extremely simplistic perspective on the area and the comments reveal just how poorly many people think about psychological research (or social science research more generally). Many comments reflect as simplistic a perspective as the author, noting (quite rightly) possible limitations of the described research (e.g., being based on Western participants) and theories as described (e.g., evolution accounts for everything). One certainly does not expect lay readers to be knowledgeable about areas of research, but it is disturbing that many assume the researchers have never thought of and addressed these problems. Buss and Schmitt (who are cited), for example, have studied many different cultures. So you end up with a vicious circle: negative attitudes toward psychological research + poorly written article on an area = even more negative attitudes toward psych research. Is it really true then that there is "no such thing as bad publicity?" Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor & Chair of Psychology [email protected] Room 4L41A 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax Dept of Psychology, U of Winnipeg 515 Portage Ave, Winnipeg, MB R3B 0R4 CANADA --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=22861 or send a blank email to leave-22861-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
<<attachment: Jim_Clark.vcf>>
