{"id":3569,"date":"2013-01-13T21:26:41","date_gmt":"2013-01-13T20:26:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/?p=3569"},"modified":"2013-01-13T21:26:41","modified_gmt":"2013-01-13T20:26:41","slug":"review-science-and-pseudoscience-in-clinical-psychology-lilienfeld-et-al","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/2013\/01\/review-science-and-pseudoscience-in-clinical-psychology-lilienfeld-et-al\/","title":{"rendered":"Review: Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology (Lilienfeld et al)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology – edited by Scott O. Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, Jeffrey M. Lohr.<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Has a good discussion of the nature of science. som interesting discussions of varius dodgy and otherwise untested ideas in clinical psychology.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

about the book:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As Bob Dylan wrote, \u201cThe times they are a-changin\u2019 .\u201d Over the past sev\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

eral decades, clinical psychology and allied disciplines (e.g., psychiatry, <\/span><\/p>\n

social work, counseling) have borne witness to a virtual sea-change in the <\/span><\/p>\n

relation between science and practice. A growing minority of clinicians <\/span><\/p>\n

appear to be basing their therapeutic and assessment practices primarily on <\/span><\/p>\n

clinical experience and intuition rather than on research evidence. As a <\/span><\/p>\n

consequence, the term \u201c scientist-practitioner gap\u201d is being invoked with <\/span><\/p>\n

heightened frequency (see foreword to this volume by Carol Tavris; Fox,<\/span><\/p>\n

1996), and concerns that the scientific foundations of clinical psychology <\/span><\/p>\n

are steadily eroding are being voiced increasingly in many quarters <\/span><\/p>\n

(Dawes, 1994; Kalal, 1999; McFall, 1991). It is largely these concerns that <\/span><\/p>\n

have prompted us to compile this edited volume, which features chapters <\/span><\/p>\n

by distinguished experts across a broad spectrum of areas within clinical <\/span><\/p>\n

psychology. Given the markedly changing landscape of clinical psychology, <\/span><\/p>\n

we believe this book to be both timely and important.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Similarly questionable practices can be found in the domains of psy\u00ad<\/p>\n

chological assessment and diagnosis. Despite well-replicated evidence that<\/p>\n

statistical (actuarial) formulas are superior to clinical judgment for a broad<\/p>\n

range of judgmental and predictive tasks (Grove, Zald, Lebow, Snitz, &<\/p>\n

Nelson, 2000), most clinicians continue to rely on clinical judgment even<\/p>\n

in cases in which it has been shown to be ill advised. There is also evidence<\/p>\n

that many practitioners tend to be overconfident in their judgments and<\/p>\n

predictions, and to fall prey to basic errors in reasoning (e.g., confirmatory<\/p>\n

bias, illusory correlation) in the process of case formulation (Chapter 2).<\/p>\n

Moreover, many practitioners base their interpretations on assessment in\u00ad<\/p>\n

struments (e.g., human figure drawing tests, Rorschach Inkblot Test,<\/p>\n

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, anatomically detailed dolls) that are either<\/p>\n

highly controversial or questionable from a scientific standpoint (see Chap\u00ad<\/p>\n

ter 3).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

the cite is: Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snitz, B. E., &c Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical<\/p>\n

versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12,<\/p>\n

19-30.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

abstract:<\/p>\n

The process of making judgments and decisions requires a method for combining data. To compare the accuracy of clinical and mechanical (formal, statistical) data-combination techniques, we performed a meta-analysis on studies of human health and behavior. On average, mechanical-prediction techniques were about 10% more accurate than clinical predictions. Depending on the specific analysis, mechanical prediction substantially outperformed clinical prediction in 33%-47% of studies examined. Although clinical predictions were often as accurate as mechanical predictions, in only a few studies (6%-16%) were they substantially more accurate. Superiority for mechanical-prediction techniques was consistent, regardless of the judgment task, type of judges, judges’ amounts of experience, or the types of data being combined. Clinical predictions performed relatively less well when predictors included clinical interview data. These data indicate that mechanical predictions of human behaviors are equal or superior to clinical prediction methods for a wide range of circumstances.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

seems interesting.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

What are the primary sources of the growing scientist-practitioner gap? As <\/span><\/p>\n

many authors have noted (see Lilienfeld, 1998, 2001, for a discussion), <\/span><\/p>\n

some practitioners in clinical psychology and related mental health disci\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

plines appear to making increased use of unsubstantiated, untested, and <\/span><\/p>\n

otherwise questionable treatment and assessment methods. Moreover, psy\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

chotherapeutic methods of unknown or doubtful validity are proliferating <\/span><\/p>\n

on an almost weekly basis. For example, a recent and highly selective sam\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

pling of fringe psychotherapeutic practices (Eisner, 2000; see also Singer & <\/span><\/p>\n

Lalich, 1996) included neurolinguistic programming, eye movement desen\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

sitization and reprocessing, Thought Field Therapy, Emotional Freedom <\/span><\/p>\n

Technique, rage reduction therapy, primal scream therapy, feeling therapy, <\/span><\/p>\n

Buddha psychotherapy, past lives therapy, future lives therapy, alien abduc\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tion therapy, angel therapy, rebirthing, Sedona method, Silva method, en\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tity depossession therapy, vegetotherapy, palm therapy, and a plethora of <\/span><\/p>\n

other methods (see also Chapter 7).<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

….<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The major criticism of the Smith and colleagues (1980) meta-analytic <\/span><\/p>\n

study is that it is too inclusive; using all studies necessarily requires that <\/span><\/p>\n

good and bad pieces of research are taken into account (e.g., Howard, <\/span><\/p>\n

Krause, Sanders, & Kopta, 1997). Nevertheless, Smith et al. compared ef\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

fect sizes on the basis of research quality. The rigor of the research had lit\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tle or no impact on effect size (Smith &c Glass, 1977; Smith et al., 1980). <\/span><\/p>\n

The results, thus, were not artifacts of including methodologically weak in\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

vestigations in the meta-analysis.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As efficacy research has burgeoned, so have the number of meta\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

analyses. The primary findings of Smith and colleagues (1980) have been <\/span><\/p>\n

repeatedly affirmed (Wampold, 2001). Not only does psychotherapy <\/span><\/p>\n

appear to be effective, but there is little evidence that one therapy is signifi\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

cantly better than another. The most comprehensive meta-analysis (Wam\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

pold et al., 1997) and a meta-analysis of 32 meta-analyses (Grissom, 1996) <\/span><\/p>\n

have corroborated the conclusion reached 65 years ago by Rosenzweig <\/span><\/p>\n

(1936). He characterized the apparent uniform efficacy of psychotherapies <\/span><\/p>\n

at the time as the Dodo bird verdict, after the Dodo\u2019s observation at the <\/span><\/p>\n

end of a race in Alice in Wonderland that \u201cEverybody has won and all <\/span><\/p>\n

must have prizes\u201d (p. 412). This conclusion bears profound implications <\/span><\/p>\n

for the field of psychotherapy, which for the past five decades has been pre\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

occupied with unearthing the essential, specific findings of behavior <\/span><\/p>\n

change in the form of the best therapy. The verdict so far is that psycho\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

therapies appear to share common, not specific, therapeutic features.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Recovered memory therapy (RMT): Therapists operate on the as\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

sumption that their client\u2019s psychological distress, lack of success, failed re\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

lationships, and so forth are due to traumatic experiences, typically under <\/span><\/p>\n

the control of their parents. RMT often involves the belief that the inten\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

sity of the childhood trauma was so great as to cause dissociative \u201c split\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ting\u201d into multiple personalities, now known as dissociative identity disor\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

der (see Chapter 5). In RMT, the process of therapy often consists of <\/span><\/p>\n

diverse methods of recovering the \u201c lost memories,\u201d including hypnotic in\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

duction, administration of \u201c truth serum\u201d (sodium pentathol), group ther\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

apy, guided fantasies, religious-based prayer, and assertions by therapists <\/span><\/p>\n

that the client\u2019s symptoms could only have been caused by a traumatic <\/span><\/p>\n

event (see Chapter 8, for a critique of these and related methods). Given a <\/span><\/p>\n

New Age therapist\u2019s belief in RMT, therapy becomes unending as the client <\/span><\/p>\n

is taken back into earlier past lives, additional alien abductions, and addi\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tional split-off personalities (known as \u201c alters\u201d ; see Chapter 5). Alien ab\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

duction therapy, one variation of RMT, holds that extraterrestrials landed <\/span><\/p>\n

on earth and abducted and then molested the individual, thereby causing <\/span><\/p>\n

the past trauma. Past lives therapy, another variation of RMT, holds that <\/span><\/p>\n

all of life\u2019s travails are due having lived a series of past lives and having <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c unfinished business\u201d from past lives invading one\u2019s current life.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

such ideas seem to dovetail beautifully with blank slate ideas. if it isnt genes or the persons own fault, it has to be somthing els. past traume fits the role nicely, yes?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Satanic Ritual Abuse: The Case of Patricia Burgus, the <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cSatanic Princess\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The most widely publicized case of SRA is that of Patricia Burgus, who <\/span><\/p>\n

won a $10.6 million settlement (Acocella, 1999; Ofshe & Waters, 1993b; <\/span><\/p>\n

Pendergrast, 1996). In 1995, Frontline, a national TV documentary, aired <\/span><\/p>\n

a program titled \u201cThe Search for Satan.\u201d The program chronicled Ms. <\/span><\/p>\n

Burgus\u2019s treatment with Dr. Bennett Braun. She originally sought treatment <\/span><\/p>\n

for postpartum depression, but was hospitalized for 3 years by Dr. Braun <\/span><\/p>\n

in the Dissociative Disorders unit of Rush-Presbyterian Hospital in Chi\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

cago. Ms. Burgus was labeled as a \u201c satanic princess.\u201d At Braun\u2019s sugges\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tion, her two sons, ages 4 and 5, were also hospitalized for over 3 years. <\/span><\/p>\n

Each son was told that he was a multiple personality (see Chapter 5), that <\/span><\/p>\n

he had been in his mother\u2019s satanic cult, that he had eaten babies, and that <\/span><\/p>\n

he had felt what it was like to bite into a baby while it was still alive. As <\/span><\/p>\n

part of therapy, both sons \u201c learned\u201d that they were practiced killers. Ms. <\/span><\/p>\n

Burgus was led to believe that she had molested them. While in treatment <\/span><\/p>\n

with Dr. Braun, she was led to believe that she (1) had 300 personalities, <\/span><\/p>\n

(2) had been raised in a satanic cult, and (3) was a \u201c satanic princess\u201d in <\/span><\/p>\n

charge of a nine-state region, and (4) had eaten more than 2,000 dead bod\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ies per year in whole or part. Dr. Braun instructed her to have her husband <\/span><\/p>\n

bring a hamburger from a family picnic to the hospital so that it could be <\/span><\/p>\n

tested for human tissue. After 3 years, when her insurance was almost ex\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

hausted, she was released from the hospital. The insurance carrier paid <\/span><\/p>\n

over $3 million in hospitalization costs for Ms. Burgus and her two sons. <\/span><\/p>\n

Acocella (1999) indicates that other patients of Dr. Braun initiated similar <\/span><\/p>\n

lawsuits based on similar grounds.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

wtf<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Space Aliens: Myra<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Myra was referred to a psychologist for relaxation training by her treat\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ing physician. The referral was to a psychologist who specialized in pain <\/span><\/p>\n

relief. During Myra\u2019s initial visits, the psychologist took virtually no his\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tory. Nevertheless, after hypnosis, the psychologist informed Myra that <\/span><\/p>\n

her back problems were a result of her having been molested by her fa\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ther. The psychologist further informed Myra that she mentioned visiting <\/span><\/p>\n

her favorite uncle while she was hypnotized. The psychologist shifted to <\/span><\/p>\n

saying that her uncle had molested her. While in a normal waking state, <\/span><\/p>\n

Myra had no memories of abuse, either by her father or her uncle and <\/span><\/p>\n

took issue with the therapist\u2019s claims of such abuse. At her next session, <\/span><\/p>\n

the therapist indicated that, during another hypnotically induced state, <\/span><\/p>\n

Myra had remembered being abducted by a UFO while at her uncle\u2019s <\/span><\/p>\n

home. The UFO descended into her uncle\u2019s backyard and had taken her <\/span><\/p>\n

onboard a spacecraft that looked like the white \u201c inside of an eggshell.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

There, she was reported to have been sexually examined by aliens. This <\/span><\/p>\n

examination and subsequent examinations, performed while she was ly\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ing on an table, were the cause of her back problems. The psychologist <\/span><\/p>\n

hypnotized Myra in each of her sessions, maintaining that hypnosis was <\/span><\/p>\n

necessary with clients abducted by space aliens because the aliens hypno\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tized humans to force them to forget their alien encounters. Over the<\/span><\/p>\n

next 3 years, the psychotherapist focused on uncovering all of Myra\u2019s al\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

leged encounters with aliens. Myra felt that the therapist only seemed in\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

terested when she cooperated by producing information concerning these <\/span><\/p>\n

purported encounters. She reported that she began \u201c to feel foggy, tired <\/span><\/p>\n

all the time, and out of touch with my feelings about anything.\u201d The <\/span><\/p>\n

psychologist significantly enlarged the boundaries of the therapy, eventu\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ally seeing her in 3-4 hour sessions held 3 days a week. The psychologist <\/span><\/p>\n

also forbade her from taking medications prescribed by her physician be\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

cause the medications would interfere with her \u201c recalling all the experi\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ences on the UFOs which were central to the therapy.\u201d When Myra\u2019s <\/span><\/p>\n

savings were depleted, she was forced to terminate therapy. After she re\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

flected on what had occurred in her therapy, she sought out legal coun\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

sel. After a lawsuit was filed, the therapist settled out of court.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

ther ar mor cases than the abov, equally disturbing and insane.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Hypnosis<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Like many guided imagery procedures used in clinical situations, hypnosis <\/span><\/p>\n

often involves eye closure and relaxation and, when used to recover memo\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ries, guided imagery or mental review of past events. Accordingly, many of <\/span><\/p>\n

the concerns that have been raised with respect to guided imagery apply to<\/span><\/p>\n

hypnosis. However, an added problem associated with hypnosis is the pop\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ular (Loftus & Loftus, 1980; Whitehouse, Dinges, Orne, & Orne, 1988) <\/span><\/p>\n

yet mistaken belief that hypnosis can improve recall. This belief can result <\/span><\/p>\n

in the tendency to overvalue the use of hypnosis for purposes of memory <\/span><\/p>\n

recovery. Survey research (Poole et al., 1995) reveals that approximately <\/span><\/p>\n

one third (29% and 34%) of psychologists in the United States who were <\/span><\/p>\n

sampled reported that they used hypnosis to help clients recall memories of <\/span><\/p>\n

sexual abuse. In contrast, this figure was only 5% among British thera\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

pists.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

USA -.- even their sycologists ar wors<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Although the popularity of dream interpretation has, along with psy\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

choanalysis, waned in recent years, survey research indicates that upwards <\/span><\/p>\n

of a third of psychotherapists (37-44%) in the United States still use this <\/span><\/p>\n

technique (see also Brenneis, 1997; Polusny & Follette, 1996). These statis\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tics are of particular interest given Lindsay and Read\u2019s (1994) observation <\/span><\/p>\n

that no data exist to support the idea that dreams accurately reveal auto\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

biographical memories that fall outside the purview of consciousness. <\/span><\/p>\n

When dreams are interpreted as indicative of a history of child sexual <\/span><\/p>\n

abuse (Bass & Davis, 1988; Fredrickson, 1992), the fact that the informa\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tion is provided by an authority figure can constitute a strong suggestion <\/span><\/p>\n

that abuse, in fact, occurred in \u201c real life.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

-.- dream interpretation.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

\n

The \u201c thought field\u201d is posited to be both the locus of psychopatholo\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

gy and the vehicle for therapeutic change. It has been described thus (I. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Callahan, 1998):<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

A \u201c field,\u201d in scientific terms, is defined as \u201c an invisible sphere of influ\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ence\u201d ; magnetic fields and gravitational fields being familiar examples. In <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

this case, when we think about a situation a Thought Field (a manifestation <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

of the body\u2019s energy system) becomes active. Effectively, the Thought Field <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

has been \u201c tuned in\u201d to that specific thought. The body responds to its in\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

fluence by reproducing, to a greater or lesser extent, the nervous, hor\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

monal, and cognitive activity that occurs when we are in the real situation.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

If that Thought Field contains perturbations then the body response is in\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

appropriate.\u201d (p. 2)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

derp, fucking technobabble.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The discrepancy between the meager research support and the exten\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

sive promotion of EMDR, TFT, and CISD may be due in part to improper <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

allocation of the burden of proof. McFall (1991) argued that the burden of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

proof of positive effects should rest squarely on those who implement and <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

promote novel therapies (see also Chapter 1). Thus, it is reasonable to ex\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

pect proponents of new treatments to answer clearly and convincingly such <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

questions as:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\u2022 \u201cDoes your treatment work better than no treatment?\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cDoes your treatment work better than a placebo?\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cDoes your treatment work better than standard treatments?\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cDoes your treatment work through the processes you claim it <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

does?\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

decent overview of the perhaps four most important questions to ask and answer about any proposed treatment.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

For both antidepressants and herbal remedies, the relatively small dif\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ferences between placebo and active substances do not necessarily mean <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

that these treatments are of little value. If we define the usefulness of a <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

treatment only in terms of (1) the difference between this treatment and <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

placebo and (2) the direct and indirect costs of the treatment versus the <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

costs of the untreated disease, as is implied by the conventional definitions <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

of efficacy and utility, then some could conclude that both antidepressants <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

and phytotherapeutic substances are only of relatively modest value. How\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ever, what matters is not only the relative size of the effect, but also the ab\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

solute size compared with baseline, or, in other words, the magnitude of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

specific and nonspecific effects combined. The provision of a good explan\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

atory myth and a convincing therapeutic ritual are among the common fac\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

tors of all efficacious therapies (Frank, 1987). Hence we can hypothesize <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

that for certain people, the potential for nonspecific effects is greater in <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

herbal treatments than in standard treatments. This is particularly true of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

people who have a worldview compatible with the application of \u201c natu\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ral\u201d products and who have a belief system favoring complementary and <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

alternative treatments. For others, who subscribe to a more rational and <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

mechanistic approach to diseases, conventional medical treatments are <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

likely to be more effective. For still others, psychotherapy might elicit the <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

greatest expectancy effects, and thereby the greatest therapeutic benefit.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

It would be intriguing to determine whether patients requesting an <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

herbal treatment experience greater benefits than do those who are either <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

opposed or indifferent to this treatment. Our prediction is that the differ\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ence would be statistically and clinically significant, precisely because the <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

nonspecific effects can be better harnessed in believers. Indeed, this effect <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

has been demonstrated in a comparison of the use of hypnosis versus <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

nonhypnotic treatment with clients who either did or did not request hyp\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

notic treatment (Lazarus, 1973).<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

this is an interesting idea. surely one shud check for correlations between g, five factor factors, and varius stated beliefs, and these outcomes. perhaps beliefs do play a mor activ role in placebo effects. perhaps it is just personality. who knows. lets find out! :)<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Whereas the Feingold Diet implicates an entire class of food sub\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

stances in the occurrence of ADHD, refined sugar is a specific substance <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

presumed to cause hyperactivity and other child behavior problems (Smith, <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

1975). Despite the popular support for this proposition among parents, <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

teachers, and some mental health professionals, well-controlled studies <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

have not demonstrated an effect of sugar on children\u2019s behavior.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Milich, Wolraich, and Lindgren (1986) reviewed studies and found no <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

consistent, significant effects of sugar on a variety of behavioral measures <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

across studies, even among subjects who were thought to be \u201c sugar sensi\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

tive.\u201d Similar conclusions have been reported in controlled studies of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

aspartame on behavior. As one example, Wolraich and colleagues (Wol\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

raich, 1988; Wolraich et al., 1994) compared three controlled diets (high <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

sucrose-low sweetener, low sucrose-high sweetener, and placebo) in two <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

groups of children presumed to be especially vulnerable to the effects of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

sugar ingestion (i.e., preschool and school-age children nominated by par\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ents as highly adverse to sugar). The diets were presented in 3-week blocks <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

using a counterbalanced, double-blind, crossover design. Results showed <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

no differences among the three diets on any of almost 40 behavioral and <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

cognitive measures. Shaywitz and colleagues (1994) also found no effect <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

on cognitive or behavioral measures with children with ADHD who con\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

sumed unusually high amounts of aspartame over a 4-week period. There <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

is little evidence, then, that either sugar or aspartame ingestion have appre\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ciable effects on children\u2019s behavior.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

see also: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Hyperactivity#Sugar_consumption<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Proponents of FC claim that the experimental studies conducted are <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

inappropriately designed and do not accurately measure performance. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Silliman (1995) asserted that the studies were conducted out of the sub\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

jects\u2019 normal social context, creating an unfamiliar environment that hin\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ders performance. Duchan (1995) states that, \u201cThe context of interaction <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

is not a naturally occurring one, but one that is tampered with in a variety <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

of ways\u201d (p. 208).<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

yes… thats what an experiment IS.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Dolphin-Assisted Therapy<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Dolphin-assisted therapy (DAT) has attracted many parents of children <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

with autism. DAT received significant attention after it was presented on <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Cable News Network (CNN, March 28, 1998; http:\/\/www.cnn.com\/ <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

HEALTH\/9803\/28\/dolphin.therapy\/index.html#op). The basic procedure <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

of DAT was depicted, with the child completing a one-to-one teaching ses\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

sion with a therapist and then being given the opportunity to swim with a <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

dolphin. The child\u2019s interaction with the dolphins was described as moti <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

vating the child to participate in therapy sessions (http:\/\/www.nextstep.com). <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Dolphins are currently the only nondomesticated animals used regularly as <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

treatment partners with children with autism.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The website of the Human Dolphin Therapy Center in Miami reports <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

a success rate of 97%, which is not defined with respect to the assessment <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

instruments and measurements utilized (http:\/\/www.cnn.com\/HEALTH\/ <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

9803\/28\/dolphin.therapy\/index.html#op). The average cost for dolphin <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

therapy is $2,600 per week (http:\/\/www.nextstep.com\/stepback\/cycle9\/ <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

109\/dolphin_therapy.btml). Families have reported raising over $10,000 <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

for the small number of sessions. This cost excludes airfare and lodging <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

(http:\/\/www.cnn.eom\/HEALTH\/9803\/28\/dolphin.therapy\/index.html#op). <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The time and cost of this treatment may foster an expectation of positive <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

results.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

According to Christopher Peknic, founder and executive director of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

the Dolphin Institute, the use of dolphins as treatment partners for autism <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

and other childhood disorders is a natural and positive therapeutic tech\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

nique (http:\/\/www.dolpbininstitute.org\/text\/cp.htm). He believes that \u201c dol\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

phins have a very special bond,\u201d and are \u201c attracted to young children\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

(.http:\/\/www.dolphininstititute.org\/text.cp.htm). In addition, supporters of <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

DAT suggest that dolphins possess an uncanny ability to \u201c understand and <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

respond to the needs of special people\u201d (http:\/\/www.dolphininstitute.org\/ <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

iscltextle_smith.htm).<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

what the fuck<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

If the 1970s represented a decade during which psychologists tried to \u201c give <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

psychology away,\u201d unencumbered by concerns over the therapeutic value <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

of their gifts, then the following two decades represented a time when mar\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

keting strategies were refined, programs proliferated, and data remained <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

sparse (Rosen, 1987, 1993). We found support for this appraisal by log\u00ad<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

ging on to the Web, at www.amazon.com, where 137 self-help books were <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

listed for just the letter \u201cA.\u201d Among the titles listed by www.amazon.com <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

were A.D.D. and Success, Access Your Brain\u2019s Joy Center: The Free Soul <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Method, Amazing Results o f Positive Thinking, and The Anxiety Cure: An <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Eight-Step Program for Getting Well. There also were many titles with the <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

word \u201cArt,\u201d as in The Art o f Letting Go, The Art o f Making Sex Sacred, <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

and The Art o f Midlife. Findings were similar for the letters B through Z.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

i really hate this use of punctuation INSIDE quotes! it makes no sense.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

There also were many titles with the word \u201cArt,\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

shud be:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

There also were many titles with the word \u201cArt\u201d,<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Unlike the self-help advisors who came on the market in the early and <\/span><\/p>\n

mid-1990s, Gray is less scolding, more \u201c supportive,\u201d and he found his <\/span><\/p>\n

niche by smoothing out gender conflicts. His bromide is that conflicts be\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tween men and women arise from their inherent differences, which should <\/span><\/p>\n

be honored. This more acceptance-based doctrine links him to earlier, <\/span><\/p>\n

more \u201c therapeutic\u201d incarnations of the self-help movement. This therapeu\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

tic slant (along with its remarkable simplicity and spiffed-up sexism) is the <\/span><\/p>\n

source of much of the controversy surrounding his popularity. In Mars and <\/span><\/p>\n

Venus in the Bedroom (1995), for example, Gray gave advice about what <\/span><\/p>\n

he believes to be effective communication skills: To \u201c give feedback in sex, <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

it is best for women to make little noises and not use complete sentences\u201d <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

because \u201cwhen a woman uses complete sentences, it can be a turn off\u201d <\/strong>(p. <\/span><\/p>\n

57). Additionally, he instructed readers about the meaning of women\u2019s un\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

derwear. He explained that when \u201c she wears silky pink or lace, she is ready <\/span><\/p>\n

to surrender to sex as a romantic expression of loving vulnerability\u201d (p. <\/span><\/p>\n

106) and that a \u201c cotton T-shirt with matching panties . . . may mean she <\/span><\/p>\n

doesn\u2019t need a lot of foreplay\u201d (p. 107). Moreover, according to Gray such <\/span><\/p>\n

clothing indicates that the woman wearing it \u201cmay not be in the mood for <\/span><\/p>\n

an orgasm\u201d but rather might be \u201chappy and satisfied\u201d by feeling her part\u00ad<\/span><\/p>\n

ner\u2019s \u201c orgasm inside her\u201d (p. 107). Offering such opinions is part of what <\/span><\/p>\n

Gray states he does \u201c best,\u201d which he believes is to \u201c save marriages, create <\/span><\/p>\n

romance and passions and relationships\u201d (Adler, 1995, p. 96).<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

seems legit lol<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

–<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology – edited by Scott O. Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, Jeffrey M. Lohr.   Has a good discussion of the nature of science. som interesting discussions of varius dodgy and otherwise untested ideas in clinical psychology.   —   about the book:   As Bob Dylan wrote, \u201cThe times they […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":17,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1653,1673,1935],"tags":[1772],"class_list":["post-3569","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-psychology","category-science-philosophy","category-science-politik","tag-psychiatry","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3569","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3569"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3569\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3571,"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3569\/revisions\/3571"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3569"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3569"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emilkirkegaard.dk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3569"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}