Mike Scoles asks:
Does anyone know of cases, especially at the more competitive state or
national
levels, where a psychology project has earned anything other than an
"honorable
mention?" Is there an appreciation of good research in psychology, or of the
difficulties of doing good research in
reasons,
but given the popular conceptions of psychology, and perhaps the limited
opportunities for science tracks in psychology, scholarships, etc., her
father may have a point. Do any tipsters know of similar problems in the
high schools of getting students to develop projects in psychological
ed her from pursuing such a project in
favor of more traditional science work. I am sure there are many reasons,
but given the popular conceptions of psychology, and perhaps the limited
opportunities for science tracks in psychology, scholarships, etc., her
father may have a point. Do any tipsters know
On 20 Jan 00, at 10:45, Gary Peterson wrote:
Do any tipsters know of similar problems in the
high schools of getting students to develop projects in psychological
science? Are there prejudices or limitations for students interested in
pursuing science, if their interest is psychology? Is
'yes'. Is
psychology a science? Please explain IN DETAIL why you answered the way
you did."
Although I do not have enough responses yet (they are still being handed
in) to give meaningful statistics, a majority of my students so far have
answered "yes" to the question, although some qu
I had another thought about this issue. Perhaps a reason why many
students are skeptical of psychology's scientific status is that, as
scientists, we don't try directly to answer the fundamental question
most humans are interested in. This question can be put in several ways,
but it typically has
ink I want to hear. Some people
(even psychologists) answer with a 'no', others answer with a 'yes'. Is
psychology a science? Please explain IN DETAIL why you answered the way
you did."
Of particular interest to me were the responses of
those who answered "no." These latter s
Jeff Ricker wrote:
Annette Taylor posted a wonderful update describing how she
attempted to explain the scientific aspects of psychology to
the chemistry instructor who saw psychology as being unscientific.
Nevertheless, in a second post, she seemed to take it all back
by stating the
To provide another take on this issue.
I teach History of Psychology to our senior psychology majors--it is
required as a "capstone" class. At the beginning of the semester we talk
about what it means to say that psychology is a science, and we talk about
their conceptions of scien
TIPSters,
I take great pleasure in reporting that Annette Taylor has not "gone post-
modern" on us! I am sorry, but I read the addresses incorrectly on my mail.
My comments were meant for William McCown (I hope I remembered his name
correctly), not Annette.
Please forgive me Annette.
Meekly,
causes behavior" and "humans have too many choices". So what are we doing
here folks? I feel like everthing I've said has rolled off their backs ( I
also teach child development, in which I emphasize empiricism/scientific
approach).
If we can't convince psych majors that psychology i
PROTECTED]
1-517-790-4491
To provide another take on this issue.
I teach History of Psychology to our senior psychology majors--it is
required as a "capstone" class. At the beginning of the semester we talk
about what it means to say that psychology is a science, and we talk abo
Hi
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Dr. Kristina Lewis wrote:
I teach History of Psychology to our senior psychology majors--it is
required as a "capstone" class. At the beginning of the semester we talk
about what it means to say that psychology is a science, and we talk about
their c
ry of Psychology to our senior psychology majors--it is
required as a "capstone" class. At the beginning of the semester we talk
about what it means to say that psychology is a science, and we talk about
their conceptions of science and why they might or might not believe that
psyc
maybe!
Michael Sylvester
in various
settings that they might not expect or predict (an example being the US
miliary's use of classicial conditioning to increase the "kill" or "shoot"
rate from about 15% of soldiers firing in WWII to about 85% during
Vietnam). I have had much more luck getting them to se
The definitive answer:
That psychology has presented itself as a science at all,
much less a hard science, is somewhere between a joke
and a travesty.
- Dr. Laura Schlessinger
--
**
* Mike Scoles
I post the following as relevent to our ongoing discussion of
psychology as a science. I will leave it to others to comment if they
wish. (I apologize for the formating.)
Jeff Nagelbush
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ferris State University
Cybersex Survey a travesty
Laura Schlessinger
"Now psych
With full respect to the legitimate point Annette is making, my pet peeve
forces me to point out that one characteristic of science is clear
communication and careful use of language.
On Sat, 24 Apr 1999, Annette
Taylor wrote:
Needless to say, and here I sit embarassed and upset, I went
Your experience would be pitifully funny if it weren't increasingly
common.
Science used to be defined in Popperian terms, as an enterprise with
its goal as prediction and control. Chaos theory thoroughly destroyed
that notion. Complex systems are unpredictable.
Unfortunately, what the
Tom Allaway:
With full respect to the legitimate point Annette is making, my pet
peeve
forces me to point out that one characteristic of science is clear
communication and careful use of language.
I would like to add that some branches of psych are more scientific
than others, in their
Annette Taylor posted a wonderful update describing how she attempted to
explain the scientific aspects of psychology to the chemistry instructor who
saw psychology as being unscientific. Nevertheless, in a second post, she
seemed to take it all back by stating the following:
Science used to be
the hard, hard, hard work we all do to convince our students that
psychology is a science here is a faculty member, a relatively young
faculty member, who should have been schooled relatively recently,
telling me that psychology can't be categorized in the 'science'
category.
Deep breath. Maybe
ERALLY. I couldn't contain myself--after all
the hard, hard, hard work we all do to convince our students that
psychology is a science here is a faculty member, a relatively young
faculty member, who should have been schooled relatively recently,
telling me that psychology can't be categorized in
** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
---
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 08:59:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Annette Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IS psychology a science?
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apparently not according to the "science" people at our university,
particularly the chemistry dept.
Our
At 1:13 PM -0400 4/24/99, Charles M. Huffman wrote:
In the past 3 years, I have taken 3 students before the committee. On each
occassion, the Chemistry prof. basically attacked the scientific rigor of
the psych experiment in question. Without actually making a statement as
such, the implication
On 24 Apr 99, at 8:59, Annette Taylor wrote:
What would or what do the rest of you do when this comes up--and
please don't tell me you go off like a roman candle because I don't
feel like that was very effective--I think I just made an enemy instead
of a convert. Dang my fiery nature.
Dave Johnson wrote:
I ask
them if the National Academy of Science represents "science." I also
ask them if the journal *SCIENCE* publishes scientific papers.
Or, if the know anything about that journal's beginnings!
**
*
28 matches
Mail list logo
