RE: [tips] Students who attend class but are not there

[FRANTZ, SUE]

I can't help with the cointoss -- although for some students calculating 50% 
may be a problem.  I've seen students take out calculators (or cell phones) to 
add up 5 single digit numbers.  
 
For other things where there is a right or wrong answer, like the penny, some 
students would probably prefer to not participate rather than be wrong in front 
of their peers.  
 
I'm a proponent of clickers for the latter reason -- they won't help with the 
math issue.  For instance, I do a demo for the availability heuristic.  
Students are asked to estimate the number of shooting deaths in our county 
(large metro area), and then they are asked to estimate what percentage were 
homicides, suicides, and accidents.  When I used to ask for a raise of hands or 
for students to volunteer what they thought, I got very little response.  With 
clickers, I get 100% response -- and after the correct answer is revealed, 
students can see that they weren't alone with their wrong answers -- AND 
they're willing, en masse, to talk about why they were wrong.  
 
--
Sue Frantz Highline Community College   
PsychologyDes Moines, WA
206.878.3710 x3404[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://flightline.highline.edu/sfrantz/ 
--
APA Division 2: Society for the Teaching of Psychology
http://teachpsych.org/  
Office of Teaching Resources in Psychology
Associate Director
Project Syllabus
http://teachpsych.org/otrp/syllabi/syllabi.php 
 



From: William Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 2/19/2008 5:45 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: [tips] Students who attend class but are not there



In an intro class today I did a demonstration meant to show them the absence of 
psychic abilities. I had them predict a coin toss on 20 throws. I had planned 
to have those who succeeded by more than 50% then predict on another series of 
coin tosses and show the effect of the normal curve. After the first round, I 
asked how many got less than 50% right. About one quarter of the class raised 
their hands. Then I asked how many got more than 50% right and another quarter 
of the class raised their hands. What the ...!! I have concluded that the 
current students have found a way to send 3dimensional holographic avatars to 
class so that they can appear to be there, but they actually are still back in 
their dorm rooms sleeping.

The same sort of thing happened a few years ago when I did a classic 
demonstration of choosing the face of a one cent piece. I asked the students to 
raise their hands regarding which of the different representations of a penny 
they chose. As I went through the options, I ended up with about 50% of the 
class still not claiming one as I got to the last one, which none of them 
admitted to choosing at the end.

Perhaps these new clicker systems that allow us to do anonymous class polls 
might help, but I really would like to know why students come to class but 
don't take part in it.

Bill Scott


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])



---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])<>

Re: [tips] Students who attend class but are not there

[Robin Abrahams]

I can't answer that question, but I can tell you what I did about it: when I 
was teaching, attendance in my classes consisted of 1) your body, 2) your 
supplies (if applicable) and 3) an appearance of involvement. If any one were 
missing, you were considered absent. (I'd give people a warning about #2 and 3, 
so that they could remedy the situation.)

I told them that they didn't *really* need to care about what I was teaching, 
but they absolutely had to ACT like they cared. I pointed out that pretending 
that you care is a lifetime skill that will serve you well in all kinds of 
career situations; that, in fact, it is impossible to have a successful career 
if you cannot or will not, at times, feign an enthusiasm or at least an 
engagement that at the moment you do not possess. I also pointed out that I 
wasn't always interested in what went on in faculty meetings, either.

This actually worked fairly well. 

William Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Perhaps these new clicker systems that allow us to do anonymous class polls 
might help, but I really would like to know why students come to class but 
don't take part in it.






Robin Abrahams
www.boston.com/missconduct

Notices at the bottom of this e-mail do not reflect the opinions of the sender. 
I do not "yahoo" that I am aware of.
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

[tips] Students who attend class but are not there

[William Scott]

In an intro class today I did a demonstration meant to show them the absence of 
psychic abilities. I had them predict a coin toss on 20 throws. I had planned 
to have those who succeeded by more than 50% then predict on another series of 
coin tosses and show the effect of the normal curve. After the first round, I 
asked how many got less than 50% right. About one quarter of the class raised 
their hands. Then I asked how many got more than 50% right and another quarter 
of the class raised their hands. What the ...!! I have concluded that the 
current students have found a way to send 3dimensional holographic avatars to 
class so that they can appear to be there, but they actually are still back in 
their dorm rooms sleeping.

The same sort of thing happened a few years ago when I did a classic 
demonstration of choosing the face of a one cent piece. I asked the students to 
raise their hands regarding which of the different representations of a penny 
they chose. As I went through the options, I ended up with about 50% of the 
class still not claiming one as I got to the last one, which none of them 
admitted to choosing at the end. 

Perhaps these new clicker systems that allow us to do anonymous class polls 
might help, but I really would like to know why students come to class but 
don't take part in it.

Bill Scott


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Christopher D. Green]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Guns do not kill people,people do
>
...often using guns, impulsively, in situations where they would have 
refrained if they had been forced to engage physically with their 
victim(s) or, even if they had attacked, would have much less likely to 
attain a lethal level of force.

Down with empty slogans! :-)

Chris
-- 

Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, (which has less than 1/5 of Chicago's murder rate. Is it just 
because Canadians are "nice"?)
ON M3J 1P3
Canada

 

416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/



"Part of respecting another person is taking the time to criticise his 
or her views." 

   - Melissa Lane, in a /Guardian/ obituary for philosopher Peter Lipton

=


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

RE: [tips] Boys & Girls at school

[Jim Matiya]

Okay,
why not just turn on the can opener for the cats to get in? 
 
I also tell my students that Pavlov had a sign outside his door that read, 
"PLease do not ring the bell!" That's why he  
received the No-bell award.
 
Jim
 
Jim Matiya 
Florida Gulf Coast University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2003 Moffett Memorial Teaching Excellence Award of the Society for the Teaching 
of Psychology (Division Two of the American Psychological 
Association)
Using David Myers' texts for AP Psychology? Go to  
http://bcs.worthpublishers.com/cppsych/
High School Psychology and Advanced Psychology Graphic Organizers, Pacing 
Guides, and Daily Lesson Plans archived at
 www.Teaching-Point.net


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:27:00 -0500Subject: Re: [tips] 
Boys & Girls at schoolTo: tips@acsun.frostburg.edu



Good one Robin!  Annette, I have three cats that are addicts so when you open 
the rehab, I will involuntary commit them!
 
Albert Barman
Department of Psychology/Sociology
Union County College
1033 Springfield Avenue
Branford, NJ 07014
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL 
Living.---To make changes to your subscription contact:Bill Southerly ([EMAIL 
PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Msylvester]

   
  

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:From: "Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" Subject: Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:23:50 -0600


   
  


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not sure how familiar you are with experimental
design.There is a design classified as an ABAB  where A stands  for
baseline and B the intoduction of the treatment.Behavior will be
different under those two conditions.The second A designates a return
to baseline.It is obvious that the shooter had returned to baseline due
to the absence of the treatment condition(his medication).

As so aptly pointed out by Paul Brandon, this is not a valid (or even
close to valid) ABAB design. At best, according to Michael above, this
is an ABA design -- off meds, on meds, off meds.  Of course, I don't
recall reading that the individual under question in this case,
committed a mass murder under the first condition or had been
previously arrested for planning such a murder. Therefore, this would
be at best an AB (on meds; off meds) design. 

Michael also wrote:

Not if you use the subject as his or her own
control. The interactional variables(ironically) are held constant.
  


Hm . . .  what would Shadish, Cook, and Campbell (2001) say about
this?  Michael suggests that this individual lived in a vacuum whereby
the only environmental factors impacting the individual are unique to
the individual.  However, history can act as an experimental treatment
and threatens the internal validity of any study that occurs over time
without appropriate experimental controls. It could have been the
freaky weather that the midwest was experiencing, the historical
presidential campaigns, an odd alignment of planets, etc. or a host of
factors not unique to the perpetrator that may have lead to the
shooting. As Chris Green posits, "this situation is FAR more
complicated than whether one takes drugs."

Moreover, as stressed by Steven Specht, the issue of variability is an
issue. There are vast numbers of individuals who go off meds and don't
shoot people, vast numbers of folks not on meds who don't shoot people,
and vast numbers of folks on meds who don't shoot people. 

Perhaps, a more important question is why are so many mass shootings
are going on in the United States currently? Just in the past couple of
weeks, there was a shooting a block or so from my house (one dead, one
wounded). Hypothesized rationale is that it was a drug related
shooting. In the suburb next to the university, a man shot and killed
five individuals at a city council meeting. Hypothesized rationale was
that he recently lost a court case in a long standing dispute with the
city council. The Lane Bryant shootings--hypothesized rationale is a
robbery gone bad. The NIU shooting--hypothesized rationale is the
medication theory. These are complex situations and one single variable
rarely is the sole cause of a set of behaviors. In each case, other
choices in the situation could have been made that would not have
included shooting the victims.

Guns do not kill people,people doMichael SylvesterDaytona Beach,Florida






---To make changes to your subscription contact:Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Paul Brandon]

As I said before, without experimental control this cannot be any 
sort of experimental design; single subject or otherwise.
As it is, it is best classified as a case study -- a naive observation.

At 12:23 PM -0600 2/19/08, Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D. wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>I am not sure how familiar you are with experimental design.There 
>>is a design classified as an ABAB  where A stands  for baseline and 
>>B the intoduction of the treatment.Behavior will be different under 
>>those two conditions.The second A designates a return to 
>>baseline.It is obvious that the shooter had returned to baseline 
>>due to the absence of the treatment condition(his medication).
>>
>
>As so aptly pointed out by Paul Brandon, this is not a valid (or 
>even close to valid) ABAB design. At best, according to Michael 
>above, this is an ABA design -- off meds, on meds, off meds.  Of 
>course, I don't recall reading that the individual under question in 
>this case, committed a mass murder under the first condition or had 
>been previously arrested for planning such a murder. Therefore, this 
>would be at best an AB (on meds; off meds) design.
>
>Michael also wrote:
>
>>Not if you use the subject as his or her own control. The 
>>interactional variables(ironically) are held constant.
>>
>
>Hm . . .  what would Shadish, Cook, and Campbell (2001) say about this?

My personal single case gurus are Johnston and Pennypacker (1993, 
Lawrence Erlbaum),
and I know what they would say.

>Michael suggests that this individual lived in a vacuum whereby the 
>only environmental factors impacting the individual are unique to 
>the individual.  However, history can act as an experimental 
>treatment and threatens the internal validity of any study that 
>occurs over time without appropriate experimental controls. It could 
>have been the freaky weather that the midwest was experiencing, the 
>historical presidential campaigns, an odd alignment of planets, etc. 
>or a host of factors not unique to the perpetrator that may have 
>lead to the shooting. As Chris Green posits, "this situation is FAR 
>more complicated than whether one takes drugs."
>
>Moreover, as stressed by Steven Specht, the issue of variability is 
>an issue. There are vast numbers of individuals who go off meds and 
>don't shoot people, vast numbers of folks not on meds who don't 
>shoot people, and vast numbers of folks on meds who don't shoot 
>people.
>
>Perhaps, a more important question is why are so many mass shootings 
>are going on in the United States currently?

The key term is *mass*.
Of course, the ownership of automatic and semiautomatic firearms 
couldn't have anything to do with it.
The data do show that people are more likely to kill people when they 
have guns.

>Just in the past couple of weeks, there was a shooting a block or so 
>from my house (one dead, one wounded). Hypothesized rationale is 
>that it was a drug related shooting. In the suburb next to the 
>university, a man shot and killed five individuals at a city council 
>meeting. Hypothesized rationale was that he recently lost a court 
>case in a long standing dispute with the city council. The Lane 
>Bryant shootings--hypothesized rationale is a robbery gone bad. The 
>NIU shooting--hypothesized rationale is the medication theory. These 
>are complex situations and one single variable rarely is the sole 
>cause of a set of behaviors. In each case, other choices in the 
>situation could have been made that would not have included shooting 
>the victims.
>
>The common thread for each of these situations was the easy access 
>each shooter apparently had to weapons. In the United States, we 
>seem to do a poor job of monitoring who gets weapons, poorly 
>prosecute those caught with illegal weapons, protect loopholes in 
>gun laws to make weapons freely available without background checks 
>at gun shows, etc., etc., etc.
>
>Now before someone else states the obvious, let me add that I 
>recognize that "guns don't kill people; people kill people."

To reference the above discussion, people may be the remote 
(historical) cause, but guns are the immediate (mechanistic) cause. 
Remove that and fewer people are killed.

>To which I add, "guns just make it easier."
>
>To Peace,
>
>Linda
>
>
>Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2001). Experimental 
>and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. 
>Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
>
>
>
>--
>tag Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D.
>Professor of Psychology and International Human Rights
>Past-President, Society for the Study of 
>Peace, Conflict, & Violence (Div. 48, APA)
>Steering Committee, Psychologists for Social 
>Responsibility (PsySR)
>Secretary, Raphael Lemkin Award Committee, 
>Institute for the Study of Genocide
>Coordinator - Holocaust & Genocide Studies
>Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rig

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D.]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I am not sure how familiar you are with experimental design.There is a 
> design classified as an ABAB  where A stands  for baseline and B the 
> intoduction of the treatment.Behavior will be different under those 
> two conditions.The second A designates a return to baseline.It is 
> obvious that the shooter had returned to baseline due to the absence 
> of the treatment condition(his medication).


As so aptly pointed out by Paul Brandon, this is not a valid (or even 
close to valid) ABAB design. At best, according to Michael above, this 
is an ABA design -- off meds, on meds, off meds.  Of course, I don't 
recall reading that the individual under question in this case, 
committed a mass murder under the first condition or had been previously 
arrested for planning such a murder. Therefore, this would be at best an 
AB (on meds; off meds) design.

Michael also wrote:

> Not if you use the subject as his or her own control. The 
> interactional variables(ironically) are held constant.


Hm . . .  what would Shadish, Cook, and Campbell (2001) say about 
this?  Michael suggests that this individual lived in a vacuum whereby 
the only environmental factors impacting the individual are unique to 
the individual.  However, history can act as an experimental treatment 
and threatens the internal validity of any study that occurs over time 
without appropriate experimental controls. It could have been the freaky 
weather that the midwest was experiencing, the historical presidential 
campaigns, an odd alignment of planets, etc. or a host of factors not 
unique to the perpetrator that may have lead to the shooting. As Chris 
Green posits, "this situation is FAR more complicated than whether one 
takes drugs."

Moreover, as stressed by Steven Specht, the issue of variability is an 
issue. There are vast numbers of individuals who go off meds and don't 
shoot people, vast numbers of folks not on meds who don't shoot people, 
and vast numbers of folks on meds who don't shoot people.

Perhaps, a more important question is why are so many mass shootings are 
going on in the United States currently? Just in the past couple of 
weeks, there was a shooting a block or so from my house (one dead, one 
wounded). Hypothesized rationale is that it was a drug related shooting. 
In the suburb next to the university, a man shot and killed five 
individuals at a city council meeting. Hypothesized rationale was that 
he recently lost a court case in a long standing dispute with the city 
council. The Lane Bryant shootings--hypothesized rationale is a robbery 
gone bad. The NIU shooting--hypothesized rationale is the medication 
theory. These are complex situations and one single variable rarely is 
the sole cause of a set of behaviors. In each case, other choices in the 
situation could have been made that would not have included shooting the 
victims.

The common thread for each of these situations was the easy access each 
shooter apparently had to weapons. In the United States, we seem to do a 
poor job of monitoring who gets weapons, poorly prosecute those caught 
with illegal weapons, protect loopholes in gun laws to make weapons 
freely available without background checks at gun shows, etc., etc., etc.

Now before someone else states the obvious, let me add that I recognize 
that "guns don't kill people; people kill people." To which I add, "guns 
just make it easier."

To Peace,

Linda


Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2001). Experimental and 
quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: 
Houghton Mifflin.




-- 
Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology and International Human Rights
Past-President, Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, & Violence 
(Div. 48, APA) 
Steering Committee, Psychologists for Social Responsibility (PsySR) 

Secretary, Raphael Lemkin Award Committee, Institute for the Study of 
Genocide 
Coordinator - Holocaust & Genocide Studies
Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rights
Webster University
470 East Lockwood
St. Louis, MO  63119

Main Webpage:  http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's (and woman's) best friend. . . .
Inside a dog, it's too dark to read."
  - Groucho Marx

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school

[K. H. Grobman, Ph. D.]

Hi Everyone,

Several developmental psychologists spoke on NPR's "Science Friday"  
in a panel discussion on topics including if classrooms should be  
segregated by gender.  Among the panelists were Lynn Liben (outgoing  
editor of "Child Development" who does very interesting research  
connecting Piagetian stage to gender stereotyping, as well as her  
primary research on geography and understanding of spatial  
representations) and Nora Newcomb (well known for her research on  
spatial cognition in infancy and early childhood).  Here is the link  
for the podcast:


http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5036084

There may be many consequences of segregating children and the  
particular way things change may depend on many intertwined  
circumstances.  What are the particular teachers like in their  
classrooms now?  Are teachers already conscientious about avoiding  
common patterns of calling on boys disproportionately and giving boys  
more detailed feedback (e.g., Saxon's educational psychology  
research)?  What beliefs do the teachers have about gender and how  
might that influence how they teach the same course to each group?   
For example, will teachers stop pushing as hard in girls' math  
classes, or in boys' english classes, even though the actual sex  
differences on standardized tests is very small?  Will gender become  
more salient to students and will that create a stereotype threat  
(which has a far greater effect size on standardized tests)?  Will  
assigning teachers segregated classrooms lead to more stereotyping  
(e.g., my 4th period scored 3 points higher on the exam than my 5th  
period so maybe it's because of gender)?  What is the classroom  
management situation of the school and teacher and what are the  
accepted gender norms among the students (e.g., will a quiet boy  
suffer in a classroom overwhelmed by rowdy boys who echo each other;  
will a mechanically-minded girl become less self-assured when other  
girls echo each others' attitudes toward science)?  When we measure  
success, what is our comparison?  Will we just care how gender- 
segregated classrooms differ from gender-mixed classrooms, or should  
we compare gender-segregation with segregation by other factors like  
introversion, standardized test scores, or doing homework regularly?


Overall, my personal feeling is that we should not segregate based on  
gender.  There are too many plausible reasons to expect it to cause  
harm either by negatively influencing children's self concepts,  
learning experiences, or by exacerbating gender stereotypes.  I'm  
personally happy to see a school trying to apply developmental  
psychology research to do something to change a bad status quo.  With  
so many intertwined factors, it's likely to be an incredibly big  
challenge that no one action can fix.  I hope school administrators  
will draw upon an enormous body of research by developmental and  
educational psychologists about how to enhance students' learning  
(e.g., mental models, problem solving strategies, emotion regulation,  
task analysis like buggy subtraction, phonemic awareness, informal  
learning opportunities, scaffolding, inquiry learning, jig-saw  
classrooms, teacher attitudes, parenting styles, mass media, ...).


Kevin
http://www.DevPsy.org/



On Feb 18, 2008, at 6:17 PM, Christopher D. Green wrote:
Here's a more interesting question than whether a one-time junior  
psychophysicist can produce better theories of child development  
than full-time senior developmental psychologists (or whether she  
can just make more money at it than they do).


Greene Country, Georgia is about to separate boys from girls in all  
of its schools, primary and secondary. They apparently have a  
terrible track record with their education system. The promoters  
say there is evidence that each sex learns better when not  
distracted by the other (funny, that was the justification for  
keeping girls out of college in the 19th century). The detractors  
call it a reintroduction of segregation (presumably the most  
inflammatory term they could come up with on short notice).


My questions are: (1) Do you think it will "work" (improve  
students' grades)? (2) Are there important reasons to object to it  
even if it does "work" (in this narrowly defined way)?


For my own part, I expect that it will "work," at least in the  
short run, but more due to the Hawthorne effect than anything  
pedagogically substantive. Essentially, however, it is a "stunt"  
that serves as cover for the more significant problems/ The only  
way to improve education systems in the long run is to provide  
better schools, teachers and resources, which cost more money than  
most US states are willing to pay, and then wait a generation or  
two for the adult society surrounding the school system (which was  
itself educated in the "bad" system) to begin to learn to value  
real education (rather than just the emission of gr

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Paul Brandon]

At 10:37 AM -0600 2/19/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>  >
>>  No.
>>  Environmental conditions may still vary between baseline and treatment.
>>  In this case, he might have both gone off medication and had a fight with
>  > his girlfriend: confounding variables.
>  >
>
>The issue here is whether the fight  was a consequence of the absence of the
>medication.The fight might not have been an isolated  and independent
>factor.

The only way to sort out the 'might haves' is with better experimental control.
This is still not a valid ABAB experimental design.
-- 
The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that
people believe in it.

* PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED]  *
* Psychology Dept   Minnesota State University  *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217  *
* http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/*
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

[tips] a bigger issue, perhaps

[Steven Specht]

And perhaps the bigger issue, notwithstanding academic arguments about 
experimental designs, is the notion of variability (that can be 
addressed with more-than-single-subject designs, of course).
I can only assume that over the past week or month MANY individuals 
across the country have both gone off their meds AND have had fights 
with their respective significant others. If only 1 in 1,000 (and I'm 
probably being generous here) goes off and starts shooting others, what 
really is the predictive value of knowing anything about meds and 
fights. Hindsight, hindsight, hindsight bias resulting from some 
availability heuristic.

On Feb 19, 2008, at 11:37 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
>
>>
>> No.
>> Environmental conditions may still vary between baseline and 
>> treatment.
>> In this case, he might have both gone off medication and had a fight 
>> with his girlfriend: confounding variables.
>> -- 
>> The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that
>> people believe in it.
>>
>> * PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED]  *
>> * Psychology Dept   Minnesota State University  *
>> * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217  *
>> * http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/*
>>
>
> The issue here is whether the fight  was a consequence of the absence 
> of the medication.The fight might not have been an isolated  and 
> independent factor.
>
> Michael Sylvester,PhD
> Daytona Beach,Florida
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>



Steven M. Specht, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Utica College
Utica, NY 13502
(315) 792-3171

"Mice may be called large or small, and so may elephants, and it is 
quite understandable when someone says it was a large mouse that ran up 
the trunk of a small elephant" (S. S. Stevens, 1958)

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Msylvester]

No.
Environmental conditions may still vary between baseline and treatment.
In this case, he might have both gone off medication and had a fight with 
his girlfriend: confounding variables.

--
The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that
people believe in it.

* PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED]  *
* Psychology Dept   Minnesota State University  *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217  *
* http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/*



The issue here is whether the fight  was a consequence of the absence of the 
medication.The fight might not have been an isolated  and independent 
factor.


Michael Sylvester,PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida 



---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school

[taylor]

I knew this would be a money maker in my old age!

;)

A

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: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:27:00 EST
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
>Subject: Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
>
>   Good one Robin!  Annette, I have three cats that are
>   addicts so when you open the rehab, I will
>   involuntary commit them!
>
>   Albert Barman
>   Department of Psychology/Sociology
>   Union County College
>   1033 Springfield Avenue
>   Branford, NJ 07014
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 
>
>   Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch
>   the video on AOL Living.
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Paul Brandon]

At 7:09 AM -0600 2/19/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 >

 An ABAB design is usually a single case experimental design.
 For it to be a valid experiment, conditions other than the experimental
 condition (in this case medication) must be held constant -- obviously not

 > the case here.
 >
Not if you use the subject as his or her own control. The interactional
variables(ironically) are held constant.


No.
Environmental conditions may still vary between baseline and treatment.
In this case, he might have both gone off medication and had a fight 
with his girlfriend: confounding variables.

--
The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that
people believe in it.

* PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED]  *
* Psychology Dept   Minnesota State University  *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217  *
* http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/*

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school

[AlBRAMANTE]

Good one Robin!  Annette, I have three cats that are addicts so when you open 
the rehab, I will involuntary commit them!
 
Albert Barman
Department of Psychology/Sociology
Union County College
1033 Springfield Avenue
Branford, NJ 07014
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) 



**Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.  
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598)

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school

[Robin Abrahams]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

My plan for retirement is to open a rehab facility for all the catnip addicted 
cats that would like to be detoxed again. You try to make 'em go to rehab, they 
say meow, meow, meow. 

(Sorry.)


Robin Abrahams
www.boston.com/missconduct

Notices at the bottom of this e-mail do not reflect the opinions of the sender. 
I do not "yahoo" that I am aware of.
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school

[taylor]

Hey, I went to all girls' (Catholic) schools most of my life and look where I 
ended up! LOL

I did not miss the boys in school; somehow most of us managed to find boys just 
fine outside of school. 

My plan for retirement is to open a rehab facility for all the catnip addicted 
cats that would like to be detoxed again. I have a highly addicted cat who 
immediately upon sniffing the dreaded weed immediately goes into a frenzy (must 
be a classical, anticipatory response because it can't possibly be in his 
system from one sniff) and within 15 minutes of his frenzy drops into a d-e-e-p 
sleep. So I know there are cats out there that need rehab.

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: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:44:23 -0500
>From: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
>Subject: Re: [tips] Boys & Girls at school  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
>
>   Gerald Peterson wrote:
>
> I have no references handy, but seem to recall
> some work suggesting girls might benefit, but I
> doubt it would make any differences for the boys. 
> I am not sure how long-lasting any benefits would
> be either.  Shades of G.S. Hall Chris? Gary
>
>   My understanding is that, of later, there have been
>   studies showing that boys benefit somewhat by
>   curriculua that are customized to their interests,
>   and involve more physical activities.
>
>   I'm not  specialist on Hall's educational theory,
>   but he certainly viewed mental maturation as a
>   process of gradually controlling "primitive" (as he
>   saw them) emotions and sexual urges. This is where
>   his adaptation of Haeckel's "recapitulationism" came
>   in: the "civilized" child "recapitulates" and passes
>   through the mental "stages" of all more "primitive"
>   societies as s/he matures. (Very politically
>   incorrect stuff by today's standards.) This was also
>   why Hall was so fascinated by Freud.
>
>   Regards,
>   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/
>
>   "Part of respecting another person is taking the
>   time to criticise his or her views." 
>
>  - Melissa Lane, in a Guardian obituary for
>   philosopher Peter Lipton
>
>   =
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] hindsight (20/20) vs. foresight (?/?)

[Msylvester]

An ABAB design is usually a single case experimental design.
For it to be a valid experiment, conditions other than the experimental 
condition (in this case medication) must be held constant -- obviously not 
the case here.


--
The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that
people believe in it.

* PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED]  *
* Psychology Dept   Minnesota State University  *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217  *


Not if you use the subject as his or her own control. The interactional 
variables(ironically) are held constant.


Michael Sylvester,PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])