Wading in.... I guess there are a couple reasons for wanting clinicians to be at least knowledgeable about and respectful of science.
I've taught grad students the "sciency" stuff (cognition and perception, mostly), and been met with hostility and a lack of curiosity more than once. I asked one class, "What is going to make you an effective therapist?" The answer was "good people skills." (Literally, it was "people like to talk to me about their problems.") I asked them, "Upon what are you going to base treatment decisions?" and they had no answer (they were first-year grad students). This alarmed me. This, I think, is why we have people doing crap like EFT and other bits of psychological snake-oil: gullible therapists with a greater reliance on their own intuitions than on empirical results. This is why we have "recovered memories" and people's lives and relationships being wrecked on the basis of phenomena for which there is no evidence. What we want, by attempting to inculcate a respect for science, is a healthy skepticism. Science makes one skeptical. I love the idea that science is "an error-correcting device." I want people who are in positions of power and authority to have a respect for finding out -- really finding out -- what works, what's real. So I guess we don't care that they be scientists, but I care a *lot* that they have the attitude of a scientist. That will make them better therapists than the fact that their friends like to talk to them, and will make fewer charlatans. But then, IANAC. :) m -- Marc Carter, PhD Associate Professor and Chair Department of Psychology College of Arts & Sciences Baker University -- ________________________________ From: Gerald Peterson [mailto:peter...@svsu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 2:01 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: RE: [tips] Relevance of science to psych work? I agree, but might the clinical or practice-oriented student obtain this information in a professional program like social work or human services rather than having to major in psych and go on to (at least some) science/research grad programs? Perhaps this is what already takes place in professional practitioner programs--where conducting psych science is not stressed? Isn't this what the psy.d. is about? Perhaps we need a social or human service track connected to social work programs rather than psych for undergrads? I am cringing as I write this, but just wanted to explore ideas and views. Those going in to a field like Biology may have a goal of pre-med, but they may also have a more realistic appreciation of the math and science they would be expected to learn. Psych students apparently don't. Gary >>> <tay...@sandiego.edu> 4/22/2009 2:24 PM >>> I completely agree with Rick. Anyone who is a clinician has all the MORE reason to be extremely cognizant of the science of psychology; to wit all the crap therapy approaches that do more harm than good, in which I define more harm than good to include those therapies that do no harm but while they are being pursued keep a person from pursuing evidence-based therapies. Finally, we should all be thinking like scientists in our daily lives; this morning on the news a recent survey of US citizens shows that global warming is last on their list of priorities relative to preservation of the planet. Sigh. People in general do not know how to interpret scientific findings or to know simple things like: one million testimonials are less evidence than one single good, clean experiment. Double Sigh. And as Rick said, the empiricists don't need good people skills but it helps a lot when it comes to disseminating information and as we can see by the sad state of dissemination of good findings, perhaps this is an area we need to develop. Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 tay...@sandiego.edu ---- Original message ---- >Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:42:42 -0500 >From: Rick Froman <rfro...@jbu.edu> >Subject: RE: [tips] Relevance of science to psych work? >To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@acsun.frostburg.edu> > > There is no accounting for interest and I am sure > those interested in clinical and counseling work > will not be as excited about research as those who > are interested in learning about people and why they > act the way they do. However, interested or not, > understanding of the science of psychology is an > important prerequisite to being a psychological > clinician. As to Mike's equivalency: Research > psychologists do not need training in human empathy > and social interaction to do their jobs. Clinical > and counseling psychologists need to use empirical > research to inform their practice or they are no > more than entrepreneurs selling snake oil. If your > practice is not based on empirically-based methods, > I think you shouldn't call yourself a psychologist. > There are a number of names you can use for yourself > that would not imply that there is an empirical > basis to favor your techniques over anyone else's. > > > > Rick > > > > Dr. Rick Froman, Chair > > Division of Humanities and Social Sciences Box 3055 > > x7295 > > rfro...@jbu.edu > > http://tinyurl.com/DrFroman > > > > Proverbs 14:15 "A simple man believes anything, but > a prudent man gives thought to his steps." > > > > From: Michael Smith [mailto:tipsl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 11:31 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > Subject: Re: [tips] Relevance of science to psych > work? > > > > I personally have no problem with psych students who > want to be clinicians not being interested in the > "science of psychology". > > > > I always find it funny that the science types are > sooo concerned that everyone should take science > very seriously. > > Are the authors EQUALLY concerned about the state > and training of the empirical psychologists' human > empathy and social interaction skills? I bet not. > > > > And if what the authors are saying is true, how > come there arnt oodles of positions available for > empirical psychologists? :) > > > > --Mike > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
