Genders issues in mainstream psychology are of interest to a great many people, us included. So we’re happy to welcome Yale University student, Johannah Cousins, as our newest blogger to be blogging about the intersection of gender issues and pop psychology in her new blog, Pop Psychology.

Johannah Cousins is a senior English major at Yale University with a focus on gender studies and contemporary popular culture. She recently completed her senior thesis, an analysis of the cultural and feminist context of the Twilight series. She is a film and music critic and staff writer for the Yale Herald Arts & Entertainment Section.

Please head on over to Pop Psychology and check it out today!

Today sees the launch of Contraception Awareness Week where we’re invited to think about contraception choices to suit our reproductive health needs.

This year the theme of the week is focusing on unplanned pregnancies in the over 35 age group, something that’s common but often underreported – and unexpected when it happens to women.

More information about the campaign and evidence underpinning it can be found via the Family Planning Association where you can also find out information about contraception options – whatever your age.

ABC Radio National's Late Night Live has a fascinating discussion with the author of a new book on nine famous hypochondriacs: James Boswell, Charlotte Bronte, Charles Darwin, Florence Nightingale, Alice James, Daniel Paul Schreber, Marcel Proust, Glenn Gould and Andy Warhol.

I'm not sure Daniel Paul Schreber is necessarily the best example of someone with hypochondria is he is famous for writing a personal account of being genuinely mentally ill and floridly psychotic. However, I've not read the book and the programme focuses on better known figures so I am open to being convinced (certainly his delusions included lots of beliefs about his body changing in curious ways).

Link to Late Night Live on hypochondria.

How do people become leaders? Leadership is a topic of interest in social psychology and there are a number of theories that attempt to explain different aspects of leadership. Do certain qualities make people great leaders, or do situational factors play a role? Are leaders born, or is leadership a skill that can be learned?

Early leadership theories focused on what qualities distinguished between leaders and followers, while subsequent theories looked at other variables such as situational factors and skill level. Despite the wide variety of leadership theories, most can be categorized under one of eight broad outlooks. Learn more about these major theories of leadership.

• Leadership Styles
• Quiz- What's Your Leadership Style?

Eight Major Theories of Leadership originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Monday, February 8th, 2010 at 05:00:15.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Over the past few weeks I’ve been hearing about GMTV’s LK Today show’s forthcoming ‘sex week’, a series of morning programmes aimed at a mainly female audience to be run in the week before Valentines day.

It’s been an invaluable opportunity to observe how ‘sex’ is understood and constructed by programme makers, and how television journalists interact with sex educators, researchers and health practitioners. And ultimately what is chosen to count as content or ‘evidence’ for a programme.

It begins with a survey …
During the introduction to hearing about the forthcoming series I was told the programmes were going to be pinned around a ‘sex survey’. This is a predictable approach used by TV companies to create content and drive publicity. Fine if said surveys were well designed, reliable or valid, but usually they aren’t. Unsurprisingly the planned version of the GMTV sex survey wasn’t very good, but interestingly the programme makers were willing to accept feedback even if the final version wasn’t all that accurate.

The problem with using surveys to underpin programmes is they’re usually thrown together without much reflection by staff with no knowledge of survey design or much of an awareness of sex. Meaning results are either misleading or reinforce stereotypes. There is no real sense that researchers/practitioners like myself and others already know about such materials and can easily translate it into television-ready formats which we’re happy to offer if we’re approached during the planning phase of programme making.

TV sex programmes are led by two things – a ‘news’ agenda and the opinions of the producer – and it’s hard to argue with either
We all know that the media, less like education or research, is closely directed by a news agenda. The creation of GMTV’s ‘sex week’ was no exception, so during preparations for the programme it seemed production staff were keen to find sex addicts and those who’d been cheated on, presumably to fit stories tagged around celebrity sex addicts and cheaters currently in the headlines.

This does two things. It fits sex into a fairly narrow framework, but also restricts discussions towards gossip rather than actual evidence. Now undoubtedly with celebrity sex scandals there will be public interest and opinion. But this won’t help inform relationships unless we can move away from the celebrity angle and focus on the issues at hand. Even then we’d need the ability to do so accurately. So in the case of ‘sex addiction’ we’d need to take a completely different stance than that offered by a standard production angle – that sex addiction is real, here’s a celebrity example, and here’s a ‘real life’ case study to further illustrate the problem. Instead we’d need to look at how sex addiction isn’t really the problem made out by the media, who is promoting the ‘sex addiction’ agenda, and what people really need to worry about in relation to relationships – and how to solve relationship problems without medicalising behaviour.

In phone conversations I had with staff working on ‘sex week’ I was asked if I could help them find a sex addict, someone who was celibate, someone who had an STI, and recommend other experts who could join in panel discussions about sex and relationships. While I was happy to recommend a number of colleagues who I rate (and know would do a great job in talking confidently about sex and relationships to the viewers) obviously I couldn’t recommend case studies (it’s unethical to refer someone you meet in education/research to journalists).

It is unclear exactly what will feature within ‘sex week’ but if it follows the format being worked on over the past few weeks ‘sex’ will be problematised. This can be seen in the way GMTV framed sex in their introduction to their sex survey: “Valentine’s Day is upon us, but are you fed up with your sex life? Is your partner inattentive and unadventurous? Or was the last sexual compulsion you experienced many, many moons ago? Maybe you’re lucky enough to enjoy a passionate relationship with your partner. Whatever you’re getting up to between the sheets, share your sex stories and thoughts with us in our sex survey”. Through to focusing on people who do it too much (addicts) or with the wrong people (cheaters) or those who aren’t doing it enough (celibates).

Sex programmes on television will consistently fail to reach their potential if…
- The focus of any programming is defined and limited by top down approaches where producers set agendas and instruct junior staff to find experts, ‘statistics’ and case studies to support the beliefs and values of the producer. In the case of GMTVs sex week the staff I talked to were charming but were seeking answers to questions set by their producer (who of course didn’t bother speaking directly to any experts). As a result you’ve a constant interrupted dialogue where a producer sets an agenda, a junior has to find someone who’ll support this, and anyone who has a different view will be ignored. No programme will work if you’ve got junior staff negotiating with numerous key players but no authority to green light their inclusion and pressure from an editor to find tame contributors.

- Where ‘news’ (aka ‘gossip’) underpins all stories. Particularly when directly pinned on celebrity cases (with the emphasis on speculating about the celeb not wider issues). Ethically it is inappropriate for practitioners to judge celebrities or any case study and pinning stories so closely to celebrity cases will make it difficult for any ethical practitioner to contribute.

- Where poorly designed surveys are conducted as part of a programme but don’t inform it due to quality issues (or because the survey is conducted to generate publicity not content).

- Where searches for scientific evidence to inform a programme are only carried out on google and ‘evidence’ is understood in terms of some statistics to help stack up a story. A particular problem when staff are pressed for time, don’t understand evidence, and probably aren’t aware that there is a wider body of extensive information about sex they could be drawing on.

- When experts are used to inform content but where staff struggle to identify who is adequately qualified to contribute.

- Journalists (and particularly senior production staff) lack basic sex education so are unable to understand core critical issues about sex. Meaning the ‘sex week’ staff were unaware of any critical discussions of ‘sex addiction’ – they assumed it was real and accepted as a medical condition until told otherwise, and even then continued to work with it as a key contemporary sex issue. There was also the problem of staff accepting ideas that should seem nonsensical – for example one researcher called me asking if I could confirm whether celibacy was harmful to your health since one expert they’d talked to told them if you don’t have sex it could cause physical harm. As with many media encounters a large part of my discussions with staff for ‘sex week’ was about basic sex education (ie how sex won’t get rid of wrinkles or how not having sex won’t harm your body, and that celibacy and asexuality are not the same thing). No reputable sex educator will object to providing this service, but it demonstrates how programmes can’t be made accurately if staff are working from a position of ignorance and misinformation to begin with.

All of which raises serious ethical and practical dilemmas for anyone thinking about being involved in TV sex programmes
Reputable sex educators are always happy to give time to create accurate sex coverage for television. Sadly the approach taken by many production teams often creates barriers for those wanting to be involved. There is the general assumption that you will be willing to provide background information for free, very often to also contribute your time to the show/series for nothing, and the appearance on television is a privilege so you must unquestioningly fit in with the show’s agenda.

Given that many ‘sexperts’ working within the media do so as a means to advertise their products and services they’ll obviously say whatever’s asked for to get their time on television. However, genuine experts won’t be motivated in the same way. We will want to share accurate, sex positive information in an engaging way, not repeat what the producer wants to hear. For many of us schedules need reorganising if we’re going to be on TV (for ‘sex week’ we were asked to set aside two days for filming). That means patients, clients, colleagues and students timetables will also need restructuring. This is only worth it if you’re actually going to be able to share sex positive information.

Once you become aware there’s a show in development you want it to be as accurate as possible – regardless of whether you appear on the final edit. However, that in turn raises issues of how much you should be involved given you can provide lots of time and effort for nothing, have no record of your contribution, and ultimately not see any of your efforts inform the programming. (Which is sadly the case with ‘sex week’ where contributors including myself who’d been booked to appear were told at the last minute we weren’t needed as they’d be sticking with their resident TV doc and sexpert).

Because of these issues the end result of most TV sex shows currently means sex is always constructed in particular ways – usually limited, negative, problem-based with judgemental case studies pinned on celebrities. Expertise may well have been consulted, but may well not be understood or applied. And contributors may not end up on any programming leading to time being wasted and a lot of lost opportunities and bad feeling created.

Very often journalists complain they can’t put together decent programmes because they are up against limits of time or resources. Yet this case study and countless others like it indicate that’s just not true. There’s stacks of evidence, loads of qualified people who can talk about it in engaging ways, and a lot to be said that’s currently not talked about. The key problem is producers make specific decisions to frame sex and ‘sexpertise’ in particular ways. Meaning you get poor to average sex coverage when you could have had GREAT sex.

The tracking of GMTV’s sex week from programme outline to broadcast allows us to think about how sex programmes are constructed for mainstream prime time audiences. You’ve had the background from me, but you can explore this further by watching the programmes (run on ITV1 every morning this week from 9am GMT)

What will they discuss? Consider what they may have talked about and reflect on how much of the programme is linked to their sex survey (the results of which can be found here). You can also question what other evidence is used to underpin programme (and where might that have come from) and what other evidence could have been used. How much of ‘sex week’ will frame sex in a language of hormones, evolution, body language, and gender stereotypes (and how much of that coverage seems accurate or understood). You may want to reflect on who is and isn’t included in discussions (for example in terms of ability, age, ethnicity or sexuality) and how much of the series will be pinned around product placement (lingerie, sex toys etc). Finally you may want to consider how much of the series provides actionable information people can put into practice (rather than instructions on what we should be doing sexually).

As a sex educator my wish is always that quality sex information is provided to the public, so if GMTV manage to do this during ‘sex week’ then this is good news. My anxiety is the programmes won’t be as good as they could be (for reasons set out above) and this is common to most television shows about sex/relationships.

The questions remain about how we address this problem? Practitioners are keen to get involved and share good information but are restricted by many practical and financial barriers set up by television companies. Television companies are keen to continue to include sex content but are unwilling to improve content, particularly because they need to talk about sex but fear losing advertising revenue or viewing figures.

Perhaps the key to the puzzle is not to be found with journalists or practitioners, but lies with the public who can demand better programming (presuming they’re aware what’s currently on offer is inadequate). After all, no matter how eager or well meaning us practitioners can be, or how much evidence we can share, this is never going to be possible unless producers have a reason to provide it. If viewers want this – or if viewers will switch off if it’s not provided – then maybe our sex programming will get better.

What would you say if I told you that simply observing people thanking others induced more altruism? The simple act of watching someone else do something uplifting or a good deed motivates us to also do good. At least that’s what researchers found in a recent demonstration of this effect at the University of Plymouth.

In two experiments, researchers (Schnall et al., 2010) tested the level of altruistic behaviors amongst female students by asking them to view TV clips of three kinds — a neutral clip showing scenes from a nature documentary, an uplifting segment from “The Oprah Winfrey Show” showing musicians thanking their mentors, or a clip from a British comedy, intended to induce mirth.

When asked if they wanted to participate in another study (in the first experiment), or if they would be willing to complete a boring questionnaire (in the second study), the subjects who watched the uplifting clip from the Oprah Winfrey Show were nearly twice as likely to agree than people who watched the neutral or funny clip.

Simply watching others do something good and uplifting encouraged more altruistic behavior.

Another study (Liljenquist et al., 2010) looked at the impact of scent on our altruistic behavior. Ninety-nine undergraduate students were individually assigned to either a clean-scented room (sprayed with Windex) or a baseline, no-scent room and were asked to work on a packet of unrelated tasks.

“Included in the packet was a flyer requesting volunteers for Habitat for Humanity, a charitable nonprofit organization. Participants reported their interest in volunteering for future Habitat efforts, specified the activities they would like to assist with, and indicated whether they wanted to donate funds to the cause,” noted the researchers. The researchers also controlled for subjects’ current mood, to rule that out as a possible explanation for their findings.

Participants in the clean-scented rooms expressed greater interest in volunteering and donating money to the charity than control participants did. Room scent had no impact on either positive or negative affect, and in analyses controlling for the participants’ current mood, room scent continued to have a significant effect on volunteerism and donation rate.

Isn’t human behavior amazing?

Limitations of the studies were that subjects were all college students, who may be different than older adults who may view the world differently (or more cynically). And since all of the subjects of the first study were female, we also can’t be sure if the first study’s findings would hold true for men.

Motivating individuals to “do good” imay be surprisingly simple and uncomplicated. Show them an uplifting TV clip in a clean-scented room, and you’ll have a group of individuals primed and ready to be altruistic.

Read the full story: Observe a Good Deed, Perform a Good Deed

References:

Liljenquist, K., Zhong, C-B., & Galinsky, A.D. (2010). The Smell of Virtue: Clean Scents Promote Reciprocity and Charity. Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/0956797610361426

Schnall, S., Roper, J., & Fessler, D. (2010). Elevation Leads to Altruistic Behavior Psychological Science DOI: 10.1177/0956797609359882

The engaging behavioural economist Dan Ariely has just become a columnist for Wired UK and in his first article he describes how the promise of performance-related pay often backfires leading people to do more but perform worse.

To see the effect of bonuses on performance, Nina Mazar (assistant professor of marketing, Toronto University), Uri Gneezy (professor of economics and strategy, University of California, San Diego), George Loewenstein (professor of economics, Carnegie Mellon, Pennsylvania) and I conducted three experiments. In one we gave subjects tasks that demanded attention, memory, concentration and creativity. We asked them, for example, to assemble puzzles and to play memory games while throwing tennis balls at a target. We promised about a third of them one day's pay if they performed well. Another third were promised two weeks' pay. The last third could earn a full five months' pay. (Before you ask where you can participate in our experiments, I should tell you that we ran this study in India, where the cost of living is relatively low.)

What happened? The low-and medium-bonus groups performed the same. The big-bonus group performed worst of all.

Link to 'Bonuses boost activity, not quality' in Wired UK.

Full disclosure: I'm a contributing editor to Wired UK. I have never received a bonus in my life, but if I do, I hope to spend it beautiful on women and fast cars, although, in reality, I will probably buy a laptop.

Research says that witnessing simple acts of everyday kindness, such as one person giving up a seat on the bus, holding a door open for another, or helping someone pick something that dropped to the floor can promote altruism. This pychological phenomenon that makes us feel great, lifts our emotions and motivates us to do good is called elevation. Witnessing an uplifiting act inspires us to do the same for others. In essence, kindness is contagious.

One Million Acts of Kindness Week is February 8th to the 14th. So, go start a ripple effect and be kind. For inspiration go here and to the Pay It Forward Foundation



Landis, S., Sherman, M., Piedmont, R., Kirkhart, M., Rapp, E., & Bike, D. (2009). The relation between elevation and self-reported prosocial behavior: Incremental validity over the Five-Factor Model of Personality The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4 (1), 71-84 DOI: 10.1080/17439760802399208

Definition: In Piaget's stages of cognitive development, a period between birth and age two during which an infant's knowledge of the world is limited to his or her sensory perceptions and motor activities. Behaviors are limited to simple motor responses caused by sensory stimuli. Read more...

Related Reading:

• Biography of Jean Piaget
• The Stages of Cognitive Development

_{Image courtesy Piotr Bizior}

Sensorimotor Stage - Psychology Definition of the Week originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at 06:00:44.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

If you are planning to apply to a psychology graduate program after earning your undergrad degree, now is the time to start preparing for the application process. In addition to basic steps such as taking the GRE and obtaining letters of recommendation, it is also important to select your undergraduate courses wisely. In order to be fully prepared for the rigors of the program you eventually choose, it's important to take courses that provide a strong background in key psychology topics.

How do you decide which courses to take? Start by considering your own interests and goals. Look for courses that match your research interests, or that relate to the specialty area you plan to pursue in the future.

In addition your own interests, it's also important to consider what graduate admissions committees will be looking for. Most psychology graduate programs have specific requirements that need to be filled in order to be admitted. While all graduate schools differ, a 1994 survey analyzed the course requirements of more than 2,000 graduate programs to find which courses were most often required for admission. Learn more in this article about the courses you should take before applying to graduate school.

Looking for more information about psychology education?

• 5 Questions to Ask Before Choosing a Psychology Graduate School
• Graduate Program Alternatives for Psychology Majors
• Which Psychology Graduate Program Is Best?

Courses You Should Take Before Applying to Graduate School originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010 at 06:00:05.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

A doctorate-level degree in psychology is required in order to work in a number of fields, including as a licensed clinical psychologist or counseling psychologist. A doctorate degree is also often required in fields such as school psychology or health psychology.

Just how long would it take you to earn your doctorate degree in psychology? The exact answer to that question depends on a number of different variables including your educational background and the specific graduate program you choose. Learn more: How Long Does it Take to Get a Ph.D. in Psychology?

_{Image courtesy Mary Gober}

How Long Does it Take to Get a Ph.D. in Psychology? originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010 at 06:00:08.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

We all know how important sleep is, so why is it that so many people don't get enough. The National Sleep Foundation reports than approximately 50 million American adults suffer from chronic sleep problems. while there are many great reasons to get a good night's sleep, many people simply don't place a high priority on sleep. The National Sleep Foundation report also found that nearly 63% of respondents simply accept sleep deprivation as a part of their life, while 32% turn to caffeinated drinks to combat daytime sleepiness.

A new survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention asked more than 12,000 U.S. high school students how much sleep they were getting each night. Past research suggests that teenagers need to get at least nine hours of sleep each night. Of the 12,000 students surveyed, only 900 reported getting the recommended amount and another 2,8000 indicated that they got an average of eight hours of sleep each night.

The CDC suggests that sleeplessness can have a number of negative consequences on teen health and well-being, ranging from lowered judgment to decreased immunity.

According to the report:

• Thirty percent of the students slept for approximately seven hours each night
• Nearly twenty-three percent of students slept for six hours each night
• Ten percent slept less than five hours
• Almost six percent of students reported getting four or less hours of sleep each night.

So why do so many U.S. students not get the sleep they need? Unfortunately, the CDC study does not identify the underlying causes of this sleeplessness. Science News for Kids reports that some research suggests that computer screens might be linked with sleep problems. Researchers have found that the blue light emitted by computer screens can actually interfere with the body's natural cirdadian rhythms.

If you are struggling to get enough sleep, there are a number of different strategies you can use to help ensure a good night's rest. About.com's Guide to Sleep Disorders, Brandon Peters, offers several great tips such as going to bed at the same time every night and avoiding caffeine and alcohol at least four to six hours before you go to bed. Find more great ideas in his article on 10 ways to get a better night's sleep.

Read more: Sleep By the Numbers - Science News for Kids

Teens Are Not Getting Enough Sleep, New Survey Suggests originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Monday, February 1st, 2010 at 14:33:06.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Workshops for Deaf People: For those of you in the Maryland/DC area, here is a flyer from the Jewish Social Service Agency (JSSA). Click on the image to make the flyer bigger.

Definition: A visual cliff involves an apparent, but not actual drop from one surface to another. This tool was originally developed to determine if infants had developed depth perception. A visual cliff is created by connecting a transparent glass surface to an opaque patterned surface. The floor below has the same pattern as the opaque surface. This apparatus creates the visual illusion of a cliff, while protecting the subject from injury. Read more...

More About Perception

• Optical Illusions Gallery
• Gestalt Laws of Perceptual Organization
• What Are Monocular Cues?

_{Image courtesy Piotr Bizior}

Visual Cliff - Psychology Definition of the Week originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Friday, January 29th, 2010 at 07:00:17.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

It starts with fatigue. You feel tired and overwhelmed, and you struggle to get things done. Soon negative thoughts come into play - and your cynicism leads you to feel helpless. Before you know it, you're in a state of Burnout.

Psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud is one of the most famous figures in the history of psychology, but many students know little about his life beyond the fact that he was the founder of psychoanalysis. Despite the fact that his theories are often maligned by contemporary psychologists, he remains one of history's most fascinating characters.

Did you know that Sigmund Freud gave up his job in a science lab and became a doctor in order to marry the woman he loved? Or that he probably never actually said the famous phrase "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"? Learn more about some of the interesting aspects of his life and career in these ten facts about Freud.

Learn More About Freud

• Freud's Life, Work and Theories
• A Freud Photobiography
• Freud Quotations

Ten Facts About Freud originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Wednesday, January 27th, 2010 at 12:53:09.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

One of the most frequent requests I receive is for help planning, designing or researching a psychology study or experiment. Choosing a topic, selecting research methods and figuring out how to analyze the data you collect can be intimidating, especially if you have little or no background in experimental methods.

The results of psychology experiments are printed and broadcast everyday in newspapers, magazines, television programs and blogs. On a more informal level, we often make judgments about the intentions, motivations and actions of others on a daily basis. While the everyday judgments we make about human behavior are subjective and anecdotal, researchers use the scientific method to study psychology in an objective and systematic way. A large part of being an informed psychology consumer is to understand exactly how the research process works.

If you need help preparing for a research project, study or experiment, start by reading this article outlining the basic steps in psychology research.

Want to learn more about psychology research methods?

• Intro to Psychology Research Methods
• The Simple Experiment
• Correlational Studies

Understanding the Psychology Research Process originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Monday, January 25th, 2010 at 00:01:12.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

As you begin any new course, it is a good idea to sit down and evaluate your homework habits and study skills. At the beginning of the semester, the sheer amount of information heaped upon you can seem overwhelming. The key is to develop a focused study strategy that will help you memorize and retain information from class readings, lectures, discussions and notes.

There are a number of effective methods for improving memory, which can make your study sessions much more useful. Basic tips such as improving focus, avoiding cram sessions and structuring your study time are a good place to start, but there are even more lessons from psychology that can dramatically improve your learning efficiency. You can learn more about some of these techniques in this article on how you can become a more effective learner.

While you probably know that cramming is one of the worst ways to study for an exam, the fact is that virtually everyone finds themselves in this situation once in a while. Try to avoid this by learning great study habits, but also look for ways to make the most out of your last-minute study sessions. About.com's Guide to Homework Tips, Grace Fleming, has some great advice on how to utilize chunking to improve your learning and retention: Chunking to Remember.

The study techniques that you use can also vary from one class to another. For example, a statistics class may require more intensive rehearsal and memorization of problems and formulas, while a social psychology course might require more reading and group discussion.

Another important part of analyzing your study habits includes learning more about your unique learning style, which can provide useful information about which study strategies might be the most effective for you. For example, if you are a strong auditory learner, consider downloading and listening to psychology podcasts. If you tend to be a visual learner, review your course readings, notes and psychology study guides.

Links to Explore:

• 10 Ways to Become a More Effective Learner
• How to Improve Your Memory
• Effective Study Habits for Psychology Students

Part 5 of the "Back-to-School Tips for Psychology Students" series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

Improving Your Psychology Study Skills originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Friday, January 22nd, 2010 at 08:02:10.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Five years ago today, we made the first post that would eventually make its way onto a blog called Cognitive Daily. We thought we were keeping notes for a book, but in reality we were helping build a network that represented a new way of sharing psychology with the world. Cognitive Daily wasn't the first psychology blog, but clearly it filled an important niche, because within a year, we were receiving over 30,000 page views a month. Now we often get over 100,000 page views a month, and we've totaled over four million. We reach many more people than would ever have bought our book, and we've made many people aware that psychology is much more than Sigmund Freud.

Now, it's time to say goodbye to that. We are permanently closing Cognitive Daily, and this will be our last post.

While we won't be here, we've seen a number of exceptional psychology blogs join us in sharing the science of psychology with the world, and we encourage you to visit them. Rather than single any of these blogs out, we ask that you visit Dave's ongoing project, ResearchBlogging.org. There, by clicking on the "Psychology" and "Neuroscience" channels, you can find nearly 100 blogs that regularly discuss peer-reviewed research in the same fields we've been covering here. You can also follow dedicated psychology and neuroscience RSS feeds, or the @researchblogs twitter feed, to get an even broader view of what's going on in the world of science.

We're grateful to many, many people who have helped make Cognitive Daily great. There are too many to mention by name, but without the many scientists who provided the raw materials, the bloggers who've helped share ideas, and the administrators and techies who've made it all work, this blog simply couldn't exist. And, of course, without our readers and commenters, Cognitive Daily probably wouldn't have been around for more than a few months. You've inspired us, motivated us, corrected us, disputed us, informed us, and responded to more polls and surveys than we ever imagined possible. We hope you'll continue to find Cognitive Daily useful; the archives will remain here for all to see.

What will we do with all that time we've freed up? Greta plans to continue her work as Professor of Psychology at Davidson College, teaching and mentoring students, conducting research, and sharing her love of music, literature, and art. Dave will continue as editor of ResearchBlogging.org and weekly columnist for SEEDMAGAZINE.COM, and he'll maintain his personal blog, Word Munger and his obsessively-updated Twitter account. In addition, Dave's planning a new project, to be unveiled within the next few weeks. Look for more information about it on Twitter and Word Munger. In addition, Dave's now launched a new blog, The Daily Monthly. Check there for a new post every day, a new topic each month.

Thanks again for being a part of Cognitive Daily. It's been an amazing ride.

Read the rest of this post... | Read the comments on this post...

Take a listen to this brief audio clip of "Unforgettable."

Aside from the fact that it's a computer-generated MIDI performance, do you hear anything unusual?

If you're a non-musician like me, you might not have noticed anything. It sounds basically like the familiar song, even though the synthesized sax isn't nearly as pleasing as the familiar Nat King Cole version of the song. But most trained musicians can't listen to a song like this without cringing. Why? Because the music has been made "bitonal" by moving the accompanying piano part up two semitones (a semitone is the difference between a "natural" note and a sharp or flat). Here's the original, unaltered piece:

Can you tell the difference? A 2000 study led by R.S. Wolpert found that non-musicians couldn't distinguish between monotonal and bitonal music played side-by-side. Meanwhile musicians found artificially-created bitonal music to be almost unlistenable. For most non-musicians, if they heard anything wrong with the clips, they typically said they were being played too fast, or mentioned some other unrelated concept.

But Mayumi Hamamoto, Mauro Bothelo, and Margaret Munger (AKA Greta) wondered if years of musical training were really necessary for non-musicians to hear bitonal music. Bitonality is actually a bit controversial in the world of music, and it can be a little hard to define. In principle, there's a difference between bitonality and just playing or singing off-key, but in practice, the difference may not even exist. Advocates of bitonality like to point to the works of composers like Milhaud, Bartók, Prokofiev, and Strauss. These composers deliberately wrote in two different musical keys. But how is that different from occasionally or regularly writing dissonant chords? After all, all the same notes can be written using any musical key. To be truly bitonal, advocates say the two separate parts must unfold independently in different keys. This results in a distinctive "crunch" when the music is played. The separate question is, is this noticeable? Wolpert's work shows that it is, at least for trained musicians.

Read the rest of this post... | Read the comments on this post...

Hofmann, S., Heering, S., Sawyer, A., & Asnaani, A. (2009). How to handle anxiety: The effects of reappraisal, acceptance, and suppression strategies on anxious arousal Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47 (5), 389-394 DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2009.02.010

If you are interested in learning more about psychology but are unable to enroll at a college or university, there are still plenty of great ways to expand your knowledge. In addition to self-study using textbooks and Internet resources, you can also explore free online psychology courses that cover numerous subjects within psychology.

One option is to enroll in our free 9-week Psychology 101 e-course. All lesson materials arrive via e-mail each week, allowing you to explore the resources whenever you choose. The course serves as a great introduction to the basics of psychology and covers a range of topics, including history, memory, intelligence, development and personality.

MIT OpenCourseware offers a wide selection of courses in the brain and cognitive sciences, all of which can be completed online via self-study and do not require registration. If you enjoy learning at your own pace, then don't miss out on this excellent opportunity.

Some courses you might be interested in include:

• Foundations of Cognition
• Animal Behavior
• Social Psychology

Free Online Psychology Courses originally appeared on About.com Psychology on Wednesday, January 20th, 2010 at 12:35:32.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

In the few last years, the gaming industry has introduced games that require physical movement. No more sitting with a controller in your hand couch-potatoting it up all day long. Now, when it comes to gaming, you gotta move it or lose it.

For example, Nintendo Wii requires each player to swing golf clubs, tennis racquet's and throw bowling balls. Playmotion has volleyball, shufflepuck and soccer. Gamercize has wrestling and racing. There's yoga, snowboarding and a host of other activities that keep the fun going and keep your body moving.

Research says that "Exergaming" has more than entertainment value. It offers great physical and mental benefits. I totally agree.

Technology rocks.

Klein, M., & Simmers, C. (2009). Exergaming: Virtual inspiration, real perspiration Young Consumers: Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers, 10 (1), 35-45 DOI: 10.1108/17473610910940774

You Are Mystery

You are a natural problem solver. You like figuring out the best way to do something. You are very intuitive. You are good at picking up on people's moods and predicting the future. You can't help but being a bit of a detective and a snoop. You always want to know what's going on. And while you may have the scoop on everyone you know, you're not a gossip. You're a pro at keeping secrets.

Emergency Health Registry is an innovative web service that allows you to register personal health information and vital details should a medical emergency arise. The iB Card, Invisible Bracelet Card, works like a Medical ID Bracelet - alerting EMS medics of your specific needs, allergies, medications, illnesses, etc. The service also automatically notifies friends and family via text or email messages of your transport and condition.
A patent is also in the works for a Universal Personal Emergency Medical Information Retrieval System that will be accessible on the back of a driver's license, passport or school identification card.

There are few relationships in life that are more influential than those between a mentor and a young person. I know this from both sides of the coin. You see, I have had many a mentor in my life growing up. A person who took a unique interest in me, fostered my growth and guided me onward. January is National Mentoring Month. Be mentor. Change a life. And transform your own. Link here for more information.


Pedersen, P., Woolum, S., Gagne, B., & Coleman, M. (2009). Beyond the norm: Extraordinary relationships in youth mentoring Children and Youth Services Review, 31 (12), 1307-1313 DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.06.001

To mark the occasion of our 200th episode, we invited three former  guests,  Brian Leiter, Jenann Ismael, and Martha Nussbaum, and also  our listeners to help us come up with a list of the 10 most pressing  philosophical issues of the 21st Century. We talked about all sorts  of ideas and it was hard to distill out just 10, but John and Ken  summarized the suggestions and compiled them on the fly at the end  of the show. But with a little more time to reflect, we decided to  clean the list up a bit. So what follows is an improved version of the  makeshift list that was generated during the broadcast.  10.  Finding a new basis for common sensibilities and common values. The world is more economically interconnected than it has ever been. But it still seethes with divisions and social fragmentation. Can we find a new basis for shared values that will bring us together rather than tear us apart?   9. Finding a new basis for social identification. Distant and powerful forces, not answerable to local communities, shape so much of our lives. Howcan we sustain local communities, communities with which we can identify?  Or is the very idea of a local community an outmoded parochial idea suited only to centuries gone by?  8. The Mind-Body problem.  Neuroscience is revealing so much about the brain. Does this new knowledge solve age-old mysteries of the mind?  Or does it reduce the mind to mere dumb matter and rob us of what we once thought was so special about us?  7. Can freedom survive the onslaught of science? Science, especially neuroscience, is revealing more and more about the true workings of the mind,  threatening to explode our ancient beliefs about things like the freedom of the will.  Can traditional practices that presuppose human freedom survive this scientific onslaught?  If we are not really free is it really permissible to punish people, and even put them to death, for their wrongful acts?  6. Information and misinformation in the information age. The 21st century threatens to wreak havoc on the social organization of information and knowledge. We are awash in a glut of information coming at us from all sources -- some reliable, some unreliable.  But the old top-down authorities that once functioned to certify some information as true and other information as false, are quickly being dismantled.  How can we distinguish the good from the bad, the wheat from the chaff?  We philosophers for a new century thus face epistemological problems hardly imagined by our predecessors.  5. Intellectual property, in the age of re-mix culture. Ideas now spread like wildfire -- mixing and re-mixing in the blink of an eye.  Can the very idea of intellectual property survive in the age of re-mix?  Are outmoded ideas of property stifling the growth of a new culture? 4. New models of  collective decision making and collective rationality. Solving the problems of the 21st Century will require coordinated rational action on a massive scale. But we really have no models of collective rationality, no idea of the institutional, social, political and economic structures that will allow us to meet these challenges.  Can philosophers help build them in time to guide us in meeting the challenges of this century?   3. What is a person? WIth the rise of cloning,designer babies, and drugs that can alter one's personality, enhance one's memory, or make one smarter, we may be forced to rethink the very idea of human person.   What exactly is a human person, when every aspect of our biological and genetic and psychological make-up can be manipulated at will?  What, if any,  part of a person is fixed and unchanging?  2.  Humans and the  environment.  What relationship should humans have to the environment?  Are we called to be stewards of the environment? Or is the environment just there for our exploitation and use?  Never in the history of humankind have such questions been so pressing.  But we have barely begun to think about them in a systematic philosophical way.   And the number one philosophical problem for the 21st Century:

1. Global Justice.  What new principles of justice will help us manage distinctively 21st Century problems like preserving the environment while  allowing the poorer nations of the world to improve their standards of living?   The philosophy of the past has given no real models for answering such questions. It is urgent that philosopher of the 21st century do so.

Listen to to the 200th episode.

If you live in the United States, has this ever happened to you?

You call a psychologist, social worker of psychiatrist who is on your plan only to find out that they are not on your plan?

Have you found yourself feeling disgusted from this experience?


Have you thrown the towel in, forgoing the therapy route?


If so, you need to consider that you are being haunted...by a Ghost Network.

A Ghost Network, also called a Phantom Network, is a collective list of doctors and specialists that your insurer insists are contracted providers for your medical or mental health needs. However, many of these identified individuals are not members of the network.

I have been part of a Ghost Network, haunting the managed care company of Group Health Insurance, for over a decade. I do not participate with them, haven't signed a contract - yet, year after year, they have my name in their panel of specialists. Many potential patients call my office thinking that I am in their plan, only to learn the ghostly, uh, I mean ghastly truth, that I am not.

If you find yourself bedeviled by a Ghost Network, try these tips:


1) Tell your employer and colleagues about the situation so that the next time a choice for a different insurance coverage comes up, a change can occur.


2) Managed Care companies and Health Insurance Carriers sell their services by "showing off" the list of specialists they have in their network. Ask your employer or Human Resources Department to cold-call doctors to see if their provider list is accurate.


3) The Managed Care organizations that use Ghost Networks are engaging in fraudulent behavior and bad faith, making promises they cannot deliver. Call your state Attorney General and Insurance Department and lodge a complaint. Never underestimate the power of your voice.


4) The legal issue here is that you are entitled to a specialist for your medical needs. If there are no specialists because of the Ghost Network practice, your are entitled to have one at no additional cost to you. Many people don't know this!


Resources:


McCain-Edwards-Kennedy Patient Bill of Rights


13 Things Your Health Insurer Doesn't Want You To Know

The holiday season can be a time of great joy, connection and celebration. And if you find yourself feeling the warmth of the season, you are lucky.

Many, though, do not find the holidays a time for celebration. Family strife, financial woes, traumatic memories and even loneliness can make the season dark, not bright.

If you are having a rough time as the holidays approach, here are some tips to keep YOU in this Yuletide Season.

1. Put yourself first.

2. Don't over-schedule your time.

3. Keep a limit on spending.

4. Avoid triggers that set old traumas into motion.

5. Focus on what you can control.

6. Choose to do things you want to do, not have to do.

7. Keep expectations realistic.

8. Don't be afraid to delegate or ask for what you need.

9. Stay in the present and look toward the future.

10. Use your senses to find beauty and peace in small moments around you.

Today our topic is Darwin's Philosophical Legacy and our guest is the one man in best suited to help think this through. That would be Dan Dennett, author of many books inspired by Darwinian ideas. Dennett thinks that Darwin's idea of evolution through natural selection is both the single best idea that anyone has every had about life and how it works and also a deeply unsettling even "dangerous" idea. You can join the conversation by posting to this open blog entry.

Every year on the Saturday before Thanksgiving, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention sponsors National Survivors of Suicide Day - reaching out to thousands of people who have lost a loved one to suicide. This Saturday, November 21, 2009, is their 11th year of raising awareness and providing support.

Over 230 simultaneous conferences for survivors of suicide loss will take place throughout the U.S. and across the world. An amazing network of healing conferences is available for those who have survived the tragedy of suicide loss. Connecting on this day allows survivors to know that they are not alone in this experience. And perhaps more important than anything else, research has shown that survivors of suicide contribute significantly in better understanding suicide and its prevention. There is great power in the personal narrative.

To find a city worldwide where a conference is being held link here and here

Read more on suicide outreach and about the 10 common myths about suicide here



Andriessen, K. (2009). Can Postvention Be Prevention? Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention, 30 (1), 43-47 DOI: 10.1027/0227-5910.30.1.43

Tindle, H., Chang, Y., Kuller, L., Manson, J., Robinson, J., Rosal, M., Siegle, G., & Matthews, K. (2009). Optimism, Cynical Hostility, and Incident Coronary Heart Disease and Mortality in the Women's Health Initiative Circulation, 120 (8), 656-662 DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.827642

	Help Us Celebrate 200 Episodes of Philosophy Talk!
Our 200th episode is coming up, and to mark the occassion we're compiling a Philosophical Top 10 List. What burning issue do you think philosophers and Philosophy Talk  should tackle in the years ahead? Send your suggestions for our Philosophical Top 10 list to comments@philosophytalk.org or post them here on our blog.   We will be monitoring the blog during the show.

Over 1.9 million troops have been deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Persian Gulf since September 11, 2001. Many who return home are finding a shortage of mental health therapists.

Give an Hour is a pro bono program that recruits mental health professionals to aid in this treatment gap. Give an Hour is endorsed by six major mental health associations in the United States--the American Association of Pastoral Counselors, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Association of Social Workers, the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, and the Anxiety Disorders Association of America. Only licensed mental health professionals are included in the network. Link here for registration.

Give an Hour is also looking for non-licensed volunteers who can use their skill‐sets to help veterans and their families. If interested, link here

Volunteering has long been known to have significant mental and physical health benefits for the volunteer. But did you know that recent research indicates how volunteering in your community produces "neighborhood well-being"?



Mellor, D., Hayashi, Y., Stokes, M., Firth, L., Lake, L., Staples, M., Chambers, S., & Cummins, R. (2007). Volunteering and Its Relationship With Personal and Neighborhood Well-Being Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38 (1), 144-159 DOI: 10.1177/0899764008317971

ASL = English: ASC is pleased to see the trend of more Deaf professionals taking advantage of the internet and technology to formally present their ideas and research in ASL. Traditionally, even in environments proclaiming bilingualism, there has been a longstanding, often unspoken, message that English still reigns superior to ASL. Compare how readily academic articles published in English receive credibility and status, while lectures and videos delivered in ASL are frequently viewed as less serious or scholarly. Bilingualism may refer to two languages, but in many so-called bilingual Deaf educational institutions it has not always been the case that both are accorded equal respect.

Double Standard: What is one to make of the fact that at Gallaudet University last Friday, a hearing doctoral candidate presented a dissertation defense in spoken English rather than ASL? The student spoke to an audience that included Deaf students and professors, as well as hearing students who are planning on careers working with Deaf people. This reflects a lack of an institutional commitment to honoring ASL, something that should be a minimal expectation at the premier higher education institution for Deaf people. This concession to a hearing, English-speaking graduate student, whose choice to forgo presenting in ASL did little to convey a sense of respect and courtesy, is a sad commentary on the university’s double standard. What such concessions are ever made to Deaf students, who have no choice but to write their dissertations in English, a second language for many? Imagine the reaction if a Deaf student made a request to do a dissertation entirely in ASL! Hearing students can cite insufficient fluency or discomfort in using their second-language ASL in front of an audience, but Deaf students can never opt out of having to use their second-language English to meet their program requirements.

Academic ASL: Without a doubt, Deaf people have been proving that academic ideas, once erroneously believed to be “too complicated” or “too abstract” to be explained in ASL, can be presented perfectly well in ASL. Check out the late and widely-respected Dr. Larry Fleischer’s elegant ASL lecture for a shining example of one of the earliest academic ASL presentations. Take a look at the promising new online Deaf Studies Digital Journal for another example of ASL in academia. There are many more examples online. Please feel free to share your favorites here.

ASC would like to thank Raychelle Harris, who was one of the first people to reference and cite an ASC vlog in a published paper. We also appreciate the many people who have requested permission to show our vlogs for different workshops, classes, and conferences. This is the type of respect and acknowledgement that all ASL vlogs and videos deserve.

To cite: Duchesneau, S. (2009). ASL in Academia? ASC on the Couch. Retrieved (date retrieved), from http://www.ascdeaf.com/blog/?p=498.

Thirteen people were killed and several more wounded in a shooting in Fort Hood, Texas, on Thursday.

The alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a psychiatrist at Darnall Army Medical Center in Fort Hood, has been taken into custody.

Hasan is a licensed psychiatrist and has treated soldiers for post-traumatic stress disorder. Military officials say Hasan had recently received orders to deploy to Afghanistan.

For updates, see CNN.com.

Shootings at Fort Hood; alleged gunman is mental health worker originally appeared on About.com Mental Health Resources on Friday, November 6th, 2009 at 11:53:33.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Question: What is seasonal affective disorder?
Answer: Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) is a pattern of significant depressive symptoms that occur and then disappear with the changing of the seasons. SAD has also been called "Winter Depression" or "Winter Blues". The reason for these names is that SAD occurs when days get shorter around November and lasting until Spring.

Question: What's the difference between seasonal affective disorder and other forms of depression?
Answer: SAD is similar to other major depressions in its severity and symptoms; however, it occurs seasonally usually starting in the fall and lasting until early spring. This disorder is cyclical. SAD patients also tend to sleep and eat more compared to patients with other types of clinical depression — usually, depression patients have insomnia and loss of appetite. For some individuals, seasonal changes cause a "Reverse Seasonal Affective Disorder" where symptoms of mania, elevated mood, racing of thoughts and pressured speech can occur. In this case, Reverse Seasonal Affective Disorder stems from Bipolar Disorder. SAD can also occur in summer months.

Question: How many people are affected by this disorder each year?
Answer: SAD affects millions of individuals worldwide. The illness is more common in higher latitudes, that is locations farther north or south of the equator, because the timeline of darkness is longer.

Question: What are the symptoms of SAD?
Answer: Symptoms include many of the same symptoms of depression: sadness, anxiety, lost interest in usual activities, withdrawal from social activities and an inability to concentrate. The difference though, is that these symptoms resolve each Spring and tend to occur again in late Fall.

Question: What is the cause of Seasonal Affective Disorder?
Answer: Melatonin, a sleep-related hormone secreted by the pineal gland in the brain, has been linked to SAD. This hormone, which may cause symptoms of depression, is produced at increased levels in the dark. Therefore, when the days are shorter and darker the production of this hormone increases. A dip in Serotonin has also been associated with SAD.

Question: What kind of treatments are available?
Answer: Phototherapy or bright light therapy has been shown to suppress the brain’s secretion of melatonin. Although, there have been no research findings to definitely link this therapy with an antidepressant effect, many people respond to this treatment. The device most often used today is a bank of white fluorescent lights on a metal reflector and shield with a plastic screen.

For mild symptoms, spending time outdoors during the day or arranging homes and workplaces to receive more sunlight may be helpful. One study found that an hour’s walk in winter sunlight was as effective as two and a half hours under bright artificial light.

If phototherapy doesn't work, an antidepressant drug may prove effective in reducing or eliminating SAD symptoms.

Daily exercise has been shown to be helpful, particularly when done outdoors. For those who tend to crave sweets during the winter, eating a balanced diet may help stave off SAD.

Question: How Do I Seek Treatment for SAD?
Answer: If you have noticed a pattern to your depressive symptoms, make an appointment with your physician and bring this to his or her attention. Medical tests and exams should be up to date to rule out any other reason for depressive symptoms. Thereafter, a consult with a psychologist, social worker, psychiatrist or psychopharmacologist so that together you can formulate a treatment plan with light therapy, medication, talk therapy or a combination of them.

Resources
Seasonal Affective Disorder Association: http://www.sada.org.uk/

Society for Light Treatment :www.websciences.org/sltbr

The Circadian Lighting Association: www.claorg.org

October 20 is National Call-In Day for Health Reform.

If you'd like to contact your local Senator and Representative, you can follow these simple instructions. And you don't need to call on the 20th.

I left my message already!

Call: 877-264-4226

Once connected:
Press 1 to be connected to your Senators
Press 2 to be connected to your Representative.

Then you will be asked for your 5 digit zip code.

In the case of the Senators, you will pick which one you want to be connected to.

Leave your message: "Health Care Can't Wait. We need action on the health care reform NOW."

I love Ralph Lauren's designs. They are classic, urban and pure Americana. But I think the Ralph Lauren company went overboard with reshaping model Fillipa Hamilton’s figure via photoshop for their recent marketing campaign.

World Mental Health Day was first observed on October 10, 1992. It was started as an annual activity of the World Federation for Mental Health by the then US Deputy Secretary General Richard Hunter - and is officially commemorated worldwide every year on October 10th.

This year's theme is Mental Health in Primary Care: Enhancing Treatment and Promoting Mental Health

I happen to have a wonderful Primary Care Physician. She endorses psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, and often calls me to help her refer patients to therapists. And I often consult with her to find specialists in the medical field for my patients. It's so great that the fields of mental health and medicine have been working better over the years - understanding the art and science of each respective field. Mind and Body are *so* inter-connected. Now, if only we can get everyone health care.

"Seeing" begins with the presence of darkness and light. An image forms on our retinas which sends an impulse of information to our brain.

"Perception", however, is a more involved process than seeing. Perceptions are influenced by the interplay of the mechanics of seeing and our imagination and experiences.

The illusion above moves even though it is a static figure. Research says that the reason for this perceptual experience has to do with the neural processes which take in contrast and luminance. Of interest, are the research findings that says some of us will see it move more fluidly than others. This has to do with our individual hard-wiring.

There's more to the magic and mystery behind optical illusions, but I won't go further into how perception and the mind work. I still feel sad knowing the secret of the bunny in the hat magic trick.

Let's just enjoy for now.


Backus, B. (2005). Illusory motion from change over time in the response to contrast and luminance Journal of Vision, 5 (11), 1055-1069 DOI: 10.1167/5.11.10

You Are Calm and Comforting

You're the type of person who can sit all day in order to keep someone in need company. You are kind and giving. Helping other people is your one, true person in life. You give a first impression of blending in. And it's somewhat true - you need to be drawn out. You are an armchair spiritual leader. You can bring peace to those who can't usually be comforted.

Patterson, C., & Mischel, W. (1976). Effects of temptation-inhibiting and task-facilitating plans on self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33 (2), 209-217 DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.33.2.209

For those not in the KALW Broadcast area, we will be re-airing our episode on Post-Modernism during this coming week. So we're moving an old blog post by our guest Gary Aylesworth, written when this episode originally aired, to the top of the blog.

">">">posted by Gary Aylesworth

Toward the end of last Sunday’s broadcast of Philosophy Talk, a caller asked whether the “moral relativism” supposedly rampant in our time was part of postmodernism. While I would certainly agree that the current hysteria over moral relativism is a postmodern phenomenon, I don’t agree that postmodern thought takes an “anything goes” view of politics or ethics, or that it prevents us from saying that the terrorists of 9/11 committed mass murder. Instead, I see postmodern thought as a kind of moral humility, a humility that prevents us from assuming that the world divides neatly into “us” and “them” or that “others” are simply evil while “we,” by mere opposition, are assured to be in the right. Such absolutism, after all, has the same structure as the ideology of the terrorists. Several figures associated with philosophical postmodernism emphasize our obligation to the other as an other, that is, not as “one of us” but as one who marks the limit of our own identity or community. It is an obligation to receive the other as such and not to silence or eliminate her. We can agree that the 9/11 terrorists violated this obligation and that they are responsible for their actions, but it also forces us to examine our own sense of victimization. Nietzsche warned us against the moral righteousness of the victim; it is dangerous because it seeks to annihilate the other and tolerates no dissent.

The alarms against moral relativism we hear around us are, I think, the latest bellowings of the morality of ressentiment, a morality that looks for someone or something to blame for the insecurities and uncertainties of our age. Postmodern thought did not create this situation, but tries to explore its structures and its limits. It also upholds certain Enlightenment values, such as the freedom to dissent, social and political emancipation, the rights of individuals and minorities, etc., but it does so without claiming to know, once and for all, who individuals are or what ultimately constitutes a right. That these identities must remain open is itself a moral imperative, and one that obliges us to be humble in our judgments. Moral humility, not moral relativism, is the lesson of postmodern thinking.

For those not in the KALW Broadcast area, we will be re-airing our episode on Post-Modernism during this coming week. So we're moving an old blog post by our own John Perry -- written when this episode originally aired, to the top of the blog.

Am I a Postmodernist?
John Perry

The term ``postmodern’’ came into use as a description of certain trends in architecture, art, and literature in the 1970’s, although the trends it describes reach back earlier in the twentieth century, to Joyce and Finnegan’s Wake in the case of literature, and to the 1950’s at least in the case of architecture.  But what counts as postmodern philosophy?

    One theme of postmodernism, according to Jean-François Lytard at any rate, is the opposition to theory and “meta-narrative”.  If I had just this much to go on, I might think that a good candidate for postmodern philosophy would be the views I was taught in graduate school at Cornell, a mixture of the philosophy of Wittgenstein and the Oxford Philosophy of J.O. Urmson, John Austin, and the like. 

    Urmson is an interesting figure.  He came back to Oxford after spending five or six years in a German prison camp; he was one of the British soldiers who didn’t make it onto one of the boats at Dunkirk.  Upon resuming to his career in philosophy at a very early stage, he once told me, he looked on things differently than he might have in more normal times, when he would have been five years younger.  He was more adventurous, more confident of his ability to do philosophy on his own than merely build on the last generation, and deeply suspicious of all “-isms” and overarching themes; he and the group of “ordinary language philosophers” at Oxford wanted to start philosophy over with few preconceptions about it.

Now this sounds very postmodernist.  And when you add to that the focus on language, and add in a Wittgenstein’s anti-theoretical position, the concept of language games from Wittgenstein and speech acts and performative language from Austin --- two ways of extending the philosophy of language beyond the merely descriptive uses of language --- it sounds very much like what postmodernism is supposed to be about. 

This may explain why I often enjoy the sentences and some of the paragraphs in postmodern philosophy, especially Lyotard, sometimes Rorty, not so often Derrida.  Lots of the sentences, some of the paragraphs ---- but I seldom make it through a whole essay.  The reason for the latter, apart from my adult onset attention deficient disorder, is that as you read on in postmodern essays one of two things happen.  Most often they turn into discussions of how this or that theme of postmodernism is related to what various dead people said, Hegel, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Freud, Dewey, etc. etc.  I am not very well-read in most of the relevant literature, and find these discussions hard to follow and boring and somehow not what you would expect from philosophy without meta-narrative.  At any rate, I get the impression that postmodern philosophers love to read philosophy --- either that or they are incredibly disciplined to read so much of it.

Some of the philosophers actually turn to examples at times and do some philosophy.  Derrida, for example.  He really has some interesting examples.  But what he has to say about them usually seems to me to head off in the wrong direction.  Postcards, for example.  When I came across Derrida’s discussion of postcards (I don’t remember where) I already had a theory of postcard’s, based on asking the question, “what do you know when you read “I am having a good time here” on a postcard but you don’t know who sent it, from where, and when?”  I found what I and my friends had to say on such topics much more interesting and somewhat more sophisticated than what Derrida had to say (as far as I could make it out), so I never got through a whole essay, much less a whole book, by him either.

I actually don’t like reading philosophy all that much; I like doing philosophy and reading it is the price you have to pay.  Not that it’s a terrible experience, but I can’t a less appealing way to spend the day than reading through the tomes that postmodernists all seem to know by heart.  Well actually I can think of a lot less appealing ways to spend a day, but you get my drift.

So, although I don’t like meta-narratives, and agree with many of Lyotard’s opinions --- or at least many of his sentences --- about states, capitalism, Freud, Marx, and the like, I guess I am not a postmodernist. 

posted by Ken Taylor

It's pledge week on KALW, our host station.  And we're doing a live pledge show that will only be heard on that station and not on our affiliates  around the country.  But if you'd like to tune it, you can do so at 10am PST time, on KALW's Website  where the show is streamed live.   Join the conversation.   Of course, even if you can't hear a broadcast version of the show,  we will eventually put the streaming version up on our own  website, from which you can also purchase an downloadable version.

A couple of weeks ago, I started an open blog entry on pornography, so I thought I'd do the same for the Post-Modern Family.  Our guest today will be sociologist, Michael Rosenfeld, author of a The Age of Independence: Interracial Unions, Same-Sex Unions and the Changing American Family.   I've only read a bit of it,  but what I have read is fascinating.   He argues that increase in  same sex and interracial unions in America is due largely to the occurrence of a relatively new "life-stage"  -- the age of independence, he calls it -- during which young adults are single, co-mingled with one another in colleges, universities, and the work-force,  and, most importantly,  mostly free of their parents.   That's because more and more people go off to college in young adulthood, and go into the workforce at an age when earlier generations of their age cohort were living with or near their parents.  That gave earlier generations of parents more influence over their offsprings mate choices.   But that's been lost with the gradual rise of the age of independence as a distinctive life stage.    

As a sociological, demographic thesis this strikes me as extremely plausible and I doubt either John or I will challenge  Michael on that score.  But my question is what does this mean about the role of the family in society.   One used to think of a family as one of the primary means of transmitting values from generation to generation.   One might have thought, in fact, that that is one of the primary things that family is for.  Of course, it has other functions -- providing for its members daily material and psychological needs prime among them.   It also inculcates a system of binding ties between the old and the young such that the old care for the young in their age of dependency in such a way that the young feel permanently bound to the old and out of love and affection, more than mere "duty"  return the favor when the old are very old.    Families also traditionally provided central ingredients of our self-narratives -- the narratives in the telling of which we constitute ourselves thick identities, as particular people, with particular life stories. 

But can a family structure  which so radically weakens the normative ties between generations really do that identity constituting, value transmitting,  generation binding work? 

That's one of the questions I'd like to discuss with MIchael on the air.  

We'd love to have your input.    Leave a comment on this blog or call in or send us an e-mail.  

gotta run.

This post was originally published back in January of 2008, when the episode on work -- which was actually recorded in October of 2007 -- first aired. I thought it would be interesting to republish it at the top of the blog as we re-air that episode.

posted by Ken Taylor

Today's episode was on Work. Our guest was Al Gini from Loyola University of Chicago. He's a philosopher by trade, the author of a number of books about work and the self, and the resident philosopher at WBEZ public radio in Chicago.

The episode was recorded a couple of months ago, back in late October, in front of a live, large and lively audience of students and faculty at Centenary College in Shreveport Louisiana. We were at Centenary for the better part of a week. We not only recorded today's episode there, but we also broadcast an episode on Philosophy and Literature live from Centenary's college radio station, KSCL, which has the singular distinction of airing our show twice per week. We also did a couple of other public events in connection with Centenary's First Year experience. Meeting with the students was especially fun. But we were also wined and dined, in very fine style, by many of Centenary's energetic and engaged faculty members. It was a delight getting to know you all.

We thank all the good folks at Centenary, the nation's smallest Division 1 school, for making this all possible. And I hope you enjoyed having us around as much as we enjoyed being around.

We'd like to do more of this sort of thing in the future -- as I think I've mentioned before. So if you'd like to bring us to a college campus near you, including your own, get in touch and let us know.

Since it's been a couple of months since we recorded the show, I have to admit that it's been about that long since I thought hard about the topic of the show. I listened to it as it was broadcast this morning and was reminded of many things that I thought at the time. I think I still think most of them. But in the rest of this post, I'll try out briefly a few follow-up thoughts.

I count myself very lucky in my own work. I mostly love being a professor of philosophy. I love doing philosophy for its own sake. I love teaching philosophy. And I love this public intellectual radio thing that I've stumbled into in the last few years. I enjoy almost everything about working at a top-flight university like Stanford, where I am surrounded by world class colleagues in just about every department and where I get to teach extremely well-prepared, disciplined and often highly creative students. I even admire the intellects and dedication of the people who do the necessary but less intrinsically rewarding task of administering this very fine place. I can sometimes hardly believe my good fortune in finding work to which I am so well suited, in a place where a love living, in a community whose values I mostly share and respect. To be sure, I do work very long hours -- especially in the years since I have been simultaneously chairing my department, trying to make a go of a certain radio show, and trying to keep my teaching and research more or less on track. The long hours aren't always happiness making -- both because some of what I have to do as department chair, for example, I could easily do without. But, more importantly, it's at times hard to keep work confined to its proper proportions. I am deeply committed to being an available and engaged father to my son and a supportive and present husband to my wife. Sometimes the demands of work and the demands of family come into deep conflict. So as much as I love my work, it's not as though I find it "cost free" or that I've found the magical formula for adjudicating the delicate balance between costs and benefits of work vs. non-work.

I said something during the episode that certainly could have been said more clearly about getting the proportions right. On the one hand, there's how much of the time available to one, one's work will take. There are only so many hours in a day, week, or life. How many of the hours of one's day will one allow one's work to consume? Work also consumes the self. And there's only so much of the self to go around too. What occurred to me as the conversation developed during the show was sort of a half-baked formula. Try to let one's work consumes no greater portion of one's available hours -- one's total temporal allotment, as we might call it -- than the proportion of one's self that one is willing to give over to one's work -- one's degree of self investment, as it were. The rough thought was just that, all things being equal, the more of one's self one "invests" in one's work, the more of one's total temporal allotment it will be worth investing in one's work. Correlatively, the less of one's self one invests in one's work, the less of one's total temporal allotment, one should invest in one's work.

Or so the thought went.

Two plus month's later, I'm not sure that I had a fully coherent thought or that the thought provides very much positive guidance as to how to adjust the balance between work and the rest of one's life. Even if the rough thought is right, it's surely only roughly right. Not every minute of one's life counts the same, for one thing. Hours spent doing sheer drudgery or delaying gratification can cost relatively less in terms of "self-investment" than is gained back in the moments in which one finally, if only briefly, reaps the reward.

One could spend one's entire life doing back-breaking, intrinsically unrewarding work, in service of a cause larger than oneself. Imagine a factory worker, with children to feed, clothe and educate, doing work that he finds mind-numbing. But he does it nonetheless, does it with pride and does it in a sense willingly, because he invest himself not so much in his work per se, but in what that work is instrumental to -- providing for his children and his wife. I think generations have taken deep and deserved pride in doing work like that.

Would their lives have been "better" had they been able to provide for their families by means of work they found more intrinsically rewarding, more intrinsically self-defining? In some sense, that certainly seems true. Certainly, all things being equal one would prefer intrinsically rewarding to intrinsically unrewarding work. But a life willingly given over to back-breaking, intrinsically unrewarding, work out of devotion to things larger than oneself seems to have a certain dignity and nobility to it that is not easily matched by a life spent doing only work that naturally "fits" the self, as it were.

Of course, I don't mean to romanticize back-breaking, intrinsically degrading work. Probably, nobody should have to do such things -- at least not without decent compensation. But to acknowledge this is not to deny the quiet dignity that is often displayed by those who find themselves stuck doing such work.

We invited Rae to guest blog, and she graciously agreed.  And unlike many who agree to guest blog for us, she actually followed through on her intention.  But somehow the technology didn't work for her.   So we're posting this on her behalf --Philosophy Talk.  

John says, first, it's only fantasy, and second, outlawing is always 'a losing strategy'. 

Well yes, it might be fantasy or pretend: someone is being paid to pretend to be bound, and paid to pretend to enjoy it. The viewer is joining in with the pretence. 

But (i) note that even fictions are told and experienced against a backdrop of presupposed claims about the real world. For example, the Sherlock Holmes stories make claims about a fictional detective, against the backdrop of real world London. What does porn say or presuppose about the real world? That many real life women enjoy being bound and gagged, and that women who say no don't mean it. That's why, on the social science evidence, many consumers actually get their beliefs changed (see e.g. Donnerstein et al, the Question of Pornography). 

And (ii) as 'one of many' points out, even if consent is there, the woman's pleasure may not be; and rehearsing even pretend violence can 'stay in that man's mind' to shape how he looks at other women later. There is a lot of psychological literature now about how our 'off-line' imaginings and pretendings can influence our 'on-line' behaviour. This can be a good thing when it means that rehearsing your tennis strokes, just in imagination, can actually help you play better! But bad when it's shaping your responses to real people. 

Furthermore (iii) it's naive to assume that there is always consent, on the part of the actors, in the first place. Sara raises some excellent points about the real life conditions of many in the industry, for example in South East Asia, effectively the conditions of appalling sexual slavery. Consumers using pornography made in this way are effectively sex tourists, using virtual brothels in South East Asia. Possibly they are even the same consumers who would think twice about buying sneakers made with sweat shop labor.

Strategies: Why so pessimistic about the law? Most people think the law can and should be used to restrict or make actionable some sorts of pornography, for example, in the US, child porn; and in the UK now (legislation pending) 'extreme pornography',  that eroticizes life threatening attitudes and behaviours such as necrophilia and asphyxiation. (This follows the porn-inspired murder of a school teacher by Graham Coutts, who was addicted to this sort of porn.) 

 I also agree with Michael that other strategies should be pursued—I would say, 'as well', not 'instead'. Yes, more and better sex education please! Otherwise porn will be the default sex educator of the next generation. But also: education for us all about porn itself: the conditions under which it's made (thanks again Sara!), and what it can do to people—to women, and to men too. It's naive, though, to think it will go away because it will just fail in the marketplace of ideas. People don't have their truth filtering brains switched on when they consume porn: they aim for pleasure, not knowledge. But it changes their minds all the same, just like effective advertising does. 

And then in addition to education, a consumer boycott too. For the same reasons you might boycott sneakers made with sweat shop labour. Or for the same reason you might choose not to own a gun, even if you think you have a 'right to bear arms'. Why exercise that right, if it's more likely to damage you yourself—or those who are, or could be, closest to you?

posted by Ken Taylor

Blogging has been light around here as of late -- what with our gang's various and sundry  summer travels and the fact that we were often not in the studio this summer.  But it's time to kick this blog back into at least moderate gear.   For the upcoming season,  I plan to blog more regularly -- at least weekly, I hope.   (Daily is way more than I can manage.)

Not going to make an elaborate entry this morning, before the show.  But I thought I'd give you a taste of what we're going to talk about today,   Here's a little dialogue, between Joe and Blow,  that sets up some of the issues we'll talk about today. 

JOE:     I was thinking about the nature of pornography and I got stuck on the problem of definition. The late Supreme Court Justice, Potter Stewart, is famous for having said that pornography he couldn’t define pornography, but that he knew it when he saw it.  Seems like he's right.   Or do you think you can do better?

BLOW:   Well,  try this definition on for size.    Pornography is the graphic depiction or description intimate sexual acts,  with an intense focus on sexual organs,  for the express purpose of causing sexual arousal in the viewer, listener, or reader.

JOE:       My first reaction is that seems too broad.  That definition would make things that are romantic, artistic and erotic count as something base and pornographic.

BLOW:  You’re making the  pretty common, but mistaken assumption that pornography is, by definition, a bad thing.   Do yo really think it's an analytic truth, as philosophers like to say,  that pornography is a bad thing? 

JOE:      Definitely,   pornography is a bad thing.  It debases and objectifies  woman; it  promotes the sexual exploitation of children; it glorifies sexual violence.

 BLOW:   Are you deliberately being obtuse, Joe?   I don't doubt that  some pornography is bad.  And probably some of it is bad in just the ways you say.   But that's not what I was denying.  I was denying that  pornography is bad by definition.  

JOE:  I'm not being obstuse.  I get that you're suggesting that we shouldn’t define pornography in value-laden terms.    I just disagree -- that's all. 

BLOW:   You want to try and settle the moral issues about pornography by appeal to definitions?  But that's a mistake.    We have to look at how pornography actually works – at its  real world social, and psychological and economic effects.  

JOE:     I hate to appeal to the authority of dictionaries in philosophical arguments.  But if  you go looking in the dictionaries you get conflicting data. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines pornography as  “the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.  That’s a value-neutral definition.   But at dictionary.com you find a more value-laden definition,   “obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, esp. those having little or no artistic merit.” 

BLOW:   I’m with Merriam Webster, obviously.   But however we want to define pornography, we’ve got the same problem.   The real question is which, if any depictions of sex organs and sex acts, are morally problematic and which are not?  And what distinguishes the morally problematic ones from the ones that are not morally problematic?

JOE:      The morally problematic ones are the ones that debase woman, that exploit children,  that promote sexual violence.  

BLOW:   Can we agree to set aside child pornography?    That has no defenders.   But are you suggesting that certain representations of sexual acts are intrinsically or constitutively morally problematic?

JOE:       I am indeed, suggesting that.   I more than suggesting it,  I'm outright claiming it.       There’s just something plain distasteful about pictures of naked women in bondage.   Such representations treat woman as if they were mere things,  mere tools.   Woman are not and should not be represented as tools.  Don’t you agree?  Don't you find that sort of thing just disgusting.  I know I do. 

BLOW:   You sound like you're trying to legislate tastes,  Joe.    But tastes vary and should be allowed to vary.   Some people like that sort of thing, obviously.  And some people don’t. 

JOE:     I don't think we're talking about matters of taste.  I think we're talking about matters of morality.   There  is something intrinsically morally wrong with pornographic representations of woman in sexual bondage. Anybody ought to find such representations distasteful.    It's a perversion of taste that some men find the objectification of woman aesthetically pleasing.  So I might not want to  call someone who likes that sort of thing evil.  But I would call them perverted.   And I take perversion to be a term of moral condemnation. 

BLOW:   Perversion is in the eye of the beholder.   What you call a perversion may for another person be a supreme and sublime erotic experience.   Look,  I'll grant you this.   Some people can’t handle explicit sexual representations.   It might lead them to sexual violence or other untoward behavior toward woman.  But some people can’t handle explicit violence in the movies either.    Perhaps we should keep pornography out the hands who people who can’t handle it.  But otherwise leave it alone.  That's about as far as I'm inclined to go in morally condemnation of pornography. 

JOE: Look,  I gotta run, Blow.  I wish I could stay and talk you out of your silly views.  But my favorite radio show,  Philosophy Talk,  is about to air and it just so happens they are doing an episode on  Pornography,  with Rae Langton --who has written a wonderful book about the subject.   I wouldn't miss it for anything, 

BLOW: That sounds cool.  Mind if I come along and listen too?

JOE: Not at all.  I'd like that.  Maybe you'll learn something. 

note - This post was written by our guest Malcolm Parks at the time that we initially recorded the episode which is airing this week. 

Greetings.  My name is Malcolm Parks and I'll be joining John and Ken to discuss this topic at an event at Pacific University on April 17th.  I'm a communication researcher at the University of Washington, where I've been looking into online and offline social networks and relationships for some time.

Facebook, now the world's largest online social networking site, enrolled its 200 millionth member earlier this month.  Sites like Facebook, MySpace, Hi5, Orkut, Twitter, and many others have become so successful that we forget they are all less than 5-6 years old.  It's far too soon to have definitive answers, but we do know social networking sites (SNS) raise some intriguing questions about the nature of social relationships and how it might be changing.  Here are a few ideas to get us thinking...

Does Facebook Change the Way People Relate to Each Other?   When researchers like me think about the social impact of communication technologies like Facebook, we try to look beyond simple things like saving time or money.  Instead we ask four questions about SNS like Facebook and MySpace: 

Too soon to know for sure, but here are some of the things we might consider.  Right off the top, let's ask what it means to be a "friend" in an online setting like Facebook.  Research shows that most people list 2-20 friends in offline settings.  But the average number of "Facebook friends" is typically 300-500.  So who are all these people?  Acquaintances?  Friends of friends?  Lapsed friends? 

Thanks to everything from personal profiles to google searches, it is possible to learn more about people before first meeting them.  Some have suggested that this might make us more critical-- more quickly sorting down to those few people who match some preset criterion.  Perhaps we harshly winnow out people who might be turn out to be more interesting if they had more of a chance.  Also, SNS make others' social connections more clearly visible to us than ever before.  What is the impact of that?  Does the old adage about judging people by the company they keep take on extra weight?  We think it might.  We also think that discovering that your friends have friends who belong to groups you don't like might have an impact on how prejudiced your are.  If nothing else, SNS and the internet generally have greatly increased contact among members of extended families (yes, that's right-- the net is pro-family!).  It also greatly increases access to social support for people dealing with diseases or difficult life changes. 

Does Facebook Change What it Means to "Know" Someone?  This is one of the more engaging questions for me-- and one that confronts us with basic philosophical questions about what we mean when we say we know another person.  Is "knowing" just having information about others?  If so, what kinds of information have the greatest knowledge value?  Or does true "knowing" unfold in a process of mutual revelation?  If so, does having all that additional information from someone's Facebook profile disrupt the process or does it just mean that we start farther along?  And what about the information itself?  Deception is a universal human behavior, but the internet makes it easier than ever to craft the image one wishes others to have.  So do we have more "information" but less real knowledge of others?  Are we beginning to assume that all online presentations are somewhat deceptive or, putting a less judgmental spin on it, playful or ironic?  These are important questions, but there are two more subtle questions that also interest me.  When so much information about us is public, what remains of the private or personal?  I'm always surprised that people don't worry more about all the personal information they put up online.  Finally, shouldn't we be worrying at least a little about the fact that Facebook and MySpace and many other SNS encourage us to describe ourselves in terms of standardized categories?  Are we commodifying ourselves?  Maybe we always have, but I'm particularly concerned when I see MySpace users present themselves in terms of product logos and symbols.  Do I really "know" you if I know what products and services you consume?  If so, what does that say about the nature of what we have become?

Good stuff to think about.  I'm looking forward to hearing what others think about these questions. 

Hot off the press in Journal of Forensic Sciences (hat tip Mind Hacks), a study in which a Layered Voice Analysis system was tested independently and found to be effective at the chance level. In other words, you might as well flip a coin.

Here’s the abstract:

This study was designed to evaluate commonly used voice stress analyzers—in this case the layered voice analysis (LVA) system. The research protocol involved the use of a speech database containing materials recorded while highly controlled deception and stress levels were systematically varied. Subjects were 24 each males/females (age range 18–63 years) drawn from a diverse population. All held strong views about some issue; they were required to make intense contradictory statements while believing that they would be heard/seen by peers. The LVA system was then evaluated by means of a double blind study using two types of examiners: a pair of scientists trained and certified by the manufacturer in the proper use of the system and two highly experienced LVA instructors provided by this same firm. The results showed that the “true positive” (or hit) rates for all examiners averaged near chance (42–56%) for all conditions, types of materials (e.g., stress vs. unstressed, truth vs. deception), and examiners (scientists vs. manufacturers). Most importantly, the false positive rate was very high, ranging from 40% to 65%. Sensitivity statistics confirmed that the LVA system operated at about chance levels in the detection of truth, deception, and the presence of high and low vocal stress states.

Reference:

• James D. Harnsberger, Harry Hollien, Camilo A. Martin, and Kevin A. Hollien (in press) Stress and Deception in Speech: Evaluating Layered Voice Analysis. Journal of Forensic Sciences

You’ll find more on Layered Voice Analysis in the voice analysis category on this blog.

UPDATE!  Request to admit No Lie MRI report in California case is withdrawn Stanford Center for Law & the Biosciences Blog, 25 March 09

So depressing. Here’s the coverage so far:

• Stanford Center for Law & the Biosciences Blog, it appears, broke the story (14 Mar)
• Brief comments from the Neuroethics and Law Blog (15 Mar)
• Detailed report from Wired Science in MRI Lie Detection to Get First Day in Court (16 Mar)
• Karen Franklin’s In the News Blog offers further thoughts and links to previous posts on the limitations of fMRI for lie detection (16 Mar)

Related links:

• The company offering this service is No Lie MRI.
• More from the Deception Blog on fMRI and lie detection including links to relevant academic research
• Is the MRI lie detector test reliable? ScienceLine reports (3 November 2008)

As you know, the Crimepsych blog is on something of a hiatus until later this year. To keep you going, I’m delighted to bring you a guest post from John Olsson of the Forensic Linguistics Institute. John is one of the UK’s most experienced forensic linguists, with over 300 criminal cases in his portfolio. He kindly agreed to answer a few questions about how forensic linguistics contributes to solving crimes. You can find out more about John and his work over at his comprehensive website.

Tell us about some of your cases

I mostly get asked to give an opinion on the authorship of a text, which can be a book, a set of mobile phone texts, letters, emails and so on. I also do plagiarism analysis. For example, about four years ago I was approached by Lew Perdue, the novelist, who claimed that his book had been plagiarised by Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code. This was a very big case and it went all the way to the US Supreme Court. Most of my work is criminal work. I did the authorship analysis in the case of Garry Weddell, the police inspector accused of murdering his wife. He was released on bail and later shot his mother in law and then himself. I also did the linguistics in the case of Julie Turner, the woman whose body was found in an oil barrel in Yorkshire.

What other kinds of cases do you get involved in?

I often get asked by coroners to look at suicide notes, or other texts surrounding incidents of suspicious death. I also do a lot of hate mail work and I’ve done quite a number of product contamination cases. I also do a lot of insurance and other security work in fraud and forgery cases. Mobile phone text authorship is also a key area in forensic linguistics.

How would you describe ‘Forensic Linguistics’?

There are two parts to forensic linguistics: language as evidence and the language of the law. Language as evidence involves the linguist being asked to give an expert opinion on the authorship, or possibly meaning, of a text. This involves making an analysis, writing a report and going to court to give evidence.

How do you find the experience of giving evidence in court?

I enjoy it and I also believe it’s right that we should be made to defend our views. Lawyers should not hesitate to be as probing as possible when it comes to experts.

When was forensic linguistics first used?

Forensic linguistics was first used in an analysis of a suspect statement in 1968 by a Swedish linguist by the name of Jan Svartvik. However, it did not make its first appearance in court in any serious way until the 1990’s.

How long have you been practising as a forensic linguist?

I have been practising since about 1995, working with police forces all over the UK and the US, and with lawyers in the UK and abroad. I have prepared over 300 reports for court and have given evidence many times, mostly for prosecution.

Do you think forensic linguistics has been beneficial for the justice system?

I believe forensic linguistics has had a major impact on the justice system in that it has helped courts to clarify the linguistic evidence either in favour of or against suspects.

How should police officers and lawyers brief forensic linguists?

It’s important that lawyers and police officers brief experts carefully. In a few cases people have ‘overbriefed’ experts, giving them information which is not only unnecessary, but which the expert should not know. Another important factor is when to approach the expert. I suggest the earlier the better - even if it is just to get an opinion on the viability of a particular piece of evidence.

How can Forensic Linguistics be used in a criminal investigation?

To identify the author of a text, such as a ransom demand or suicide note, or series of hate mail letters, mobile phone texts or emails. To clarify the meaning of a word or phrase. For example, in one case I was asked the meaning of a slang word in a murder trial and to evaluate the word in context and assess its meaning within the scope of the crime that had been committed.

What should investigators, solicitors or private clients consider when requesting help from Forensic Linguists?

The primary issue is whether the expert is appropriate for the task. Even forensic linguistics is becoming more and more specialised. Most linguists will be happy to tell the client if there is someone else who is better qualified or more current in the particular area under examination.

How long does a Forensic Linguist need to analyse a piece of evidence?

It very much depends on the evidence. In cases where there are many texts (whether emails, letters, mobile phone texts, etc) it can take several months. However, where there are only a few texts to analyse, the work can be completed within a week or ten days. Most linguists will give a preliminary opinion at little or no cost.

Is the science behind it robust enough to use in a trial as evidence?

Forensic Linguistics has been used successfully in courts many times, both in the UK and abroad. I believe linguistic evidence stands up as well as any other kind of forensic evidence in court. Behind every case is a considerable body of research: we base our conclusions on linguistic principles, on evidence from language databases, on previous experience and findings. In fact, just like any other forensic scientist, we use all the tools available to us.

What difficulties have you come across when analysing a piece of evidence?

All evidence is difficult to analyse: you can never underestimate the task. Perhaps the most difficult task is estimating the contribution of a particular piece of evidence to the overall case. Does it tend to support an identification of a suspect? Does it tend to support the identification of someone other than the suspect? It is important not to overstate an opinion or cause problems for courts by being over-confident. All forensic scientists have these issues.

Where do you see the future of Forensic Linguistics?

The only future that matters is that the justice system is well served and that investigators and lawyers are given useful, honest, impartial advice and evidence. I believe forensic linguistics can do this, and so will remain a good servant of the justice system. It is the integrity of the justice system that counts - nothing else matters.

Find out more:

• Crimepsych posts on forensic linguistics
• The Forensic Linguistics Institute (John’s website)
• Centre for Forensic Linguistics at Aston University
• Forensic Linguistics Discussion Group

Two books by John Olsson:

• Wordcrime: Solving Crime Through Forensic Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics: Second Edition

Controversy and debate is the driver of scientific progress.  It forces us to re-examine our assumptions, scrutinise our methods and think hard about the meaning of data.  Of course, there is another way of dealing with controversy…

Voodoo science in fMRI

If you’re involved or simply interested in fMRI research you’ll already be well aware of the ongoing debate about Voodoo Correlations in Social Neuroscience [pdf]. If not, you’ll find the detail in coverage all over the psych and neuroblogs by googling the title or simply “voodoo correlations”.

Here’s how it went:

1. Edward Vul, Christine Harris, Piotr Winkielman, and Harold Pashler wrote a critique of a series of recent research studies exploring the neural correlates of various social psychological issues. Their paper was accepted by a peer-reviewed journal and will be published later this year.

2. Authors of those criticised research papers wrote careful defences of their work and pointed out problems in Vul et al’s arguments (here and here).

3. Vul et al. responded to the criticisms here.

And the debate continues - watching from the sidelines you get a sense of the passion and the intellect on both sides, with the process of open debate resulting in further clarification and some concessions (on both sides). Ultimately, this debate will result in better understanding of some important issues and better scrutiny of new research. Scientific progress, in other words.

Voodoo science in deception detection

Compare this to another recent controversy that started in the research literature (hat tip to Mind Hacks).

1. In 2007, the International Journal of Speech Language and the Law (a peer reviewed journal) published a critique by Anders Eriksson and Francisco Lacerda of mechanical methods of deception detection that claim to use ‘voice stress analysis’ or ‘layered voice analysis’ to detect deception. It is more pointed and more personal than the Vul et al. critique (commenting on the companies and the individuals involved in developing and marketing such machines), but the authors nevertheless examine the scientific literature carefully and raise some significant problems with the technology as it is marketed.

2. One of the companies named, Nemesysco, threatened to sue.

3. The publishers of IJSLL withdrew the paper (though, this being the age of the internet, you can access it here).

Rather than publish the potentially ground-breaking scientific evidence underpinning their technique, respond to the criticisms or engage in debate, a company uses legal threats to silence criticism. The result is that we have no chance to hear both sides of the story, little chance of increasing our understanding of the techniques or their theoretical basis, further polarisation of the pro- and anti- camps, and bugger all scientific progress. Shame.

Of course, Nemesysco’s actions do mean that a lot more of us know and are talking about the criticism of their technology than had they let the journal article lie (no pun intended).