Happiness is Right Outside
[Photo by Drawings of Light]
Just having a break from work is not enough suggests new research, it is activities in the open air which have the strongest restorative effects on our mental states.Everyone gets down sometimes - it's only natural. It would be more unusual never to be depressed. The idea that depression is an on-off condition with a purely chemical foundation is a myth no psychologist would endorse. The causes of depression can be many and widespread. But one cause many of us have to cope with is work.
One of the main weapons against stress building up from work is going on vacation. Holidays are a firmly established way of allowing the mind and body to recuperate. In new research, however, published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology, Hartig, Catalano and Ong (2007) find that all holidays are not created equal.
Getting out in the open
The lead author of this paper, Terry Hartig, lives and works in Sweden, a country well known for its long, dark winters. As such, the Swedes know the importance of getting out in the sunshine, when it finally arrives. There is even a law requiring employers to provide four consecutive weeks of holiday in the summer. And it's actually this law that is crucial to Hartig et al's findings.Hartig and colleagues suggest that being stuck indoors on vacation can limit mental recuperation. On the other hand, when able to roam outdoors, we can exert ourselves at a favourite sport or simply linger in the park. Psychologically, beautiful scenery can distract us from our troubles, help us forget our normal stressful environments and reconnect us to nature.
This is a nice theory that is intuitively attractive and plausible. The problem is how to test it scientifically.
Anti-depressant prescriptions and the weather
Hartig et al. decided to use the number of SSRI anti-depressants prescribed between 1991 and 1998 as a proxy for the general level of depression in the population of Sweden. They then looked for correlations between the weather and the amount of anti-depressants prescribed, which they duly found.Wait, though, there's a problem with this. Perhaps people are simply happier when the weather is warmer? It would then follow there would be an association between anti-depressant prescriptions and temperature.
Hartig et al. anticipated this problem. They remove the variation in anti-depressant prescriptions associated with the general change in monthly mean temperature from the equation. Then they get a really interesting finding. Now there's only a correlation between temperature and anti-depressant medications in one month: July. There's no similar effect even for the adjacent months of June or August.
How can that be explained? Why would the relationship only occur in July?
Why July is unusual
Here is the authors' reasoning. In Sweden people take most of their holiday in July at the centre of the period stipulated by law (from 1 June to 31 August). A survey found it is over 90%. This means that during July they have the highest likelihood of being free to enjoy outdoor pursuits. On average, the rest of the year they will be working, so even if the weather is unseasonably warm in May, for example, they won't be able to take advantage of it.The reasoning goes, then, that if the weather is bad in July people are stuck indoors. This means they are unable to fully recuperate mentally before returning to work. Alternately, if the weather is good in July people are, on average, mentally rested and have less need for medication.
Remember that this explanation relies on averaging out many people's behaviour across nine years. Obviously not everyone requires anti-depressants to get through a spell of bad weather. Similarly some people require them whatever the weather. But think about it in terms of the people who are slipping across the boundary of requiring/asking for medication. Then the authors' explanation makes sense.
Happiness is...
I know this study falls into the category of telling us something we already know. But it does so in rather an ingenious way that takes advantage of Swedish vacation patterns. Also, we can't be reminded often enough that we should take every opportunity to get out in the open air.Truly, happiness is looking out across fresh fields, gazing at a distant tree, feeling the sun on your back and the wind brushing your skin.
» Discover more on positive psychology.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Depression, Environment, Happiness
Dodgy Juries, (Un)Ethical Professors, MySpace vs. Facebook
Here are some pointers to what I've been reading this week on other blogs and elsewhere.
As a former law student I was very interested to see this report on the accuracy, or rather inaccuracy of juries, on Psychology and Crime News. This US study compared the official jury decision with the unofficial opinion of the judge. There were some worrying findings. In 25% of cases the jury convicted the defendant, despite the judge thinking they were innocent. In 14% of cases where the jury acquitted the defendant, the judge thought they were guilty.
Scary stuff. It's amazing really that with these sort of stats many societies still consider trial by jury the gold standard of justice. Of course the judge could be wrong - but I'd guess he is more accurate than a jury given that groups are often terrible at decision-making.
MindHacks asks why ethics Professors don't appear to behave ethically. Good question - surely they should be even more ethical than the rest of us? Turns out they're going around stealing chocolates and library books. So, not exactly Adolf-Hitler-unethical.
I'd like to know if they're more likely to sleep with their students, plagiarise or bump off a colleague. Now those are real tests of unethical behaviour.
New ethnographic research has revealed that MySpace users tend to come from lower socioeconomic groups than those on Facebook. More interestingly, MySpace seems to have more 'geeks, freaks, or queers' than Facebook which is full of conventional high-achievers. As the study's author points out this obviously doesn't describe everyone, but it's certainly an interesting trend (via Neurocritic).
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
As a former law student I was very interested to see this report on the accuracy, or rather inaccuracy of juries, on Psychology and Crime News. This US study compared the official jury decision with the unofficial opinion of the judge. There were some worrying findings. In 25% of cases the jury convicted the defendant, despite the judge thinking they were innocent. In 14% of cases where the jury acquitted the defendant, the judge thought they were guilty.
Scary stuff. It's amazing really that with these sort of stats many societies still consider trial by jury the gold standard of justice. Of course the judge could be wrong - but I'd guess he is more accurate than a jury given that groups are often terrible at decision-making.
MindHacks asks why ethics Professors don't appear to behave ethically. Good question - surely they should be even more ethical than the rest of us? Turns out they're going around stealing chocolates and library books. So, not exactly Adolf-Hitler-unethical.
I'd like to know if they're more likely to sleep with their students, plagiarise or bump off a colleague. Now those are real tests of unethical behaviour.
New ethnographic research has revealed that MySpace users tend to come from lower socioeconomic groups than those on Facebook. More interestingly, MySpace seems to have more 'geeks, freaks, or queers' than Facebook which is full of conventional high-achievers. As the study's author points out this obviously doesn't describe everyone, but it's certainly an interesting trend (via Neurocritic).
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: This Week
Sex Doesn't Sell (Neither Does Violence)
[Photo by Kevin Steele]
People think sex sells. Advertisers know it, TV and film producers believe it and the internet was built on it. But does sex really help sell products, or is it just one of those expressions ad execs use so they can wile away an afternoon choosing models?Parker and Furnham (in press) decided to test whether sex really does sell using an experiment with a total of four conditions. In the first two conditions participants watched an episode of 'Sex in the City' specially chosen for its even higher than normal sexual content. Apparently it's the one where:
"Charlotte panics about her 'bed-manner' when her lover Dr. Bram Walker dozes off in bed once after a gruelling day of surgery, so she takes a tantric class - signing up all four girls; it's given by hands-on demonstration by a couple of psychologists."
In one of these two conditions participants were shown ads with high sexual content (e.g. an ad for Budweiser). In the other the ads had low sexual content (e.g. one for Fosters lager).
Then in the second two conditions the TV programme chosen was Malcolm in the Middle, also a comedy drama, but one that is suitable for the whole family. The ads embedded in this again either had high or low sexual content.
After watching the programmes participants were tested for their recall of the ads. The results are a blow for our budding ad execs.
There was no significant difference in 'brand recall' between the adverts that used sexual content and those that didn't. Worse (for our beloved ad execs) the sexual content of 'Sex in the City' actually reduced the recall of the embedded adverts.
Actually, surprising and counter-intuitive as this finding may seem, the researchers had been expecting it. Previous work by Bushman (2005), using a similar experimental design also suggested sex doesn't sell.
Not only that but Bushman (2005) also tested how violence in the television programme affected ad recall. Again, they found it had no beneficial effect on selling products.
There was, however, one finding from Parker and Furnham's study that was absolutely in line with expectations. They found men were more likely to remember ads with sexual content than women.
Well, at least there are some intuitions we can rely on.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Advertising, Media
A Tale of Two Conversations (and Mrs Thatcher)
I was catching up with a friend I hadn't seen for a while the other day when I noticed something unusual about our conversation. Something I couldn't quite put my finger on.
We were sat outside a pub by the Thames gazing out across the river with one eye on the famously changeable British summer. Each black cloud charging in from the west looked as though it would be the one to send us scurrying inside. But none of them did.
Then it hit me.
It was the uncanny precision with which our utterances meshed. We hadn't seen each other for a long time and yet we seemed magically to know when to start and stop talking. In three hours of turn-taking we hadn't interrupted each other - our conversation was perfectly choreographed.
Admittedly this wasn't that unusual in itself, but it was to me because of a conversation I had earlier in the day. This one, although with someone I know quite well, couldn't have been more different. There were awkward gaps, we talked over each other, we accidentally interrupted. It was as though our conversational choreographer had gone on holiday.
It all put me in mind of the former British Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher, whose interactions often mirrored my own awkward stop-start conversation. Indeed, a study published in Nature by Beattie, Cutler and Pearson (1982) asked: "Why is Mrs Thatcher Interrupted So Often?"
Their in-depth analysis revealed the reason might not be just because she wanted to dominate conversations. It was, they argue, a particular facet of her speech that caused her to be interrupted so often.
They found she often displayed turn-yielding signals in the wrong places. She would lower the pitch of her voice and slow the rhythm of her speech - both classic signs you're about to hand over the conversational reigns - and then she would carry on talking. Hence, all the accidental interruptions.
Perhaps, I wondered, the difference between my two conversations partly came down to tiny turn-yielding signals of which we are normally completely unconscious. In one these signals were being picked up loud and clear, in the other they were lost - and so was the smoothness of our conversation.
Further proof of how an ordinary conversation is actually a highly skilled performance. Even tiny imperfections in nonverbal signals can throw the whole thing off. It's a wonder any of us can manage it at all.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibility
We were sat outside a pub by the Thames gazing out across the river with one eye on the famously changeable British summer. Each black cloud charging in from the west looked as though it would be the one to send us scurrying inside. But none of them did.
Then it hit me.
It was the uncanny precision with which our utterances meshed. We hadn't seen each other for a long time and yet we seemed magically to know when to start and stop talking. In three hours of turn-taking we hadn't interrupted each other - our conversation was perfectly choreographed.
Admittedly this wasn't that unusual in itself, but it was to me because of a conversation I had earlier in the day. This one, although with someone I know quite well, couldn't have been more different. There were awkward gaps, we talked over each other, we accidentally interrupted. It was as though our conversational choreographer had gone on holiday.
It all put me in mind of the former British Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher, whose interactions often mirrored my own awkward stop-start conversation. Indeed, a study published in Nature by Beattie, Cutler and Pearson (1982) asked: "Why is Mrs Thatcher Interrupted So Often?"
Their in-depth analysis revealed the reason might not be just because she wanted to dominate conversations. It was, they argue, a particular facet of her speech that caused her to be interrupted so often.
They found she often displayed turn-yielding signals in the wrong places. She would lower the pitch of her voice and slow the rhythm of her speech - both classic signs you're about to hand over the conversational reigns - and then she would carry on talking. Hence, all the accidental interruptions.
Perhaps, I wondered, the difference between my two conversations partly came down to tiny turn-yielding signals of which we are normally completely unconscious. In one these signals were being picked up loud and clear, in the other they were lost - and so was the smoothness of our conversation.
Further proof of how an ordinary conversation is actually a highly skilled performance. Even tiny imperfections in nonverbal signals can throw the whole thing off. It's a wonder any of us can manage it at all.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Nonverbal
Which Type of Emailer Are You?
Does your email inbox stress you out? Does "You've got mail" mean "You've got stress"? Or are you more laid back about email? Do you see it simply as a way to make your life easier?
Hair, Renaud and Ramsay (2007) investigated the different ways that people react to email. After administering some questionnaires, they came up with three types of emailers:
Seems about right, although I'd be interested to know how many people fit into each of these categories. So, let's do a straw poll, please vote below:
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibility
Hair, Renaud and Ramsay (2007) investigated the different ways that people react to email. After administering some questionnaires, they came up with three types of emailers:
- The relaxed emailer. If you fall into this category then chances are you see email as something you will deal with as and when you have time. You don't try to respond to emails almost instantaneously. You expect others to be relaxed about email as well.
- The driven emailer. For you email must be replied to immediately. You see it as more like an ongoing conversation. Responding quickly is important for you.
- The stressed emailer. For you email is just a source of stress and you don't see it as that useful. You feel the pressure to respond.
Seems about right, although I'd be interested to know how many people fit into each of these categories. So, let's do a straw poll, please vote below:
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Email
Are British Youth a Template for the US?
I've been a big fan of Adbusters ever since I first saw their clever spoof ads. In their magazine's latest issue they've got a new article which is well worth a read called Generation F*cked: How Britain is Eating Its Young. It's a powerful polemic which ends with this paragraph warning Americans that the British youth experience may be coming their way:
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
"As a small, densely populated island that spawned both the industrial revolution and colonialism, Britain has a lot to tell the rest of the developed world in general, and America in particular, about our common future. If the crisscrossing faultlines of greed, geopolitics and social inequality do reach a tipping point, we may well see a conflict between youthful brutality and the power of old age that will only accelerate the decline. Maybe we should hope that our young people never wake. Because, if they do, Britain may soon be no place to grow old."People often respond to this type of writing by saying it is too extreme. But I think forceful reporting of important issues is all too scarce in the media, and we need more of it.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: Media
The 'Monster Study' on Stuttering
[Photo by Yogi]
The so-called 'Monster Study' on children's stuttering qualifies for this series on weird psychology on three grounds. First it had extremely shaky (practically non-existent) ethical standards. Second its results were never published for fear it would be likened to experiments carried out by the Nazis (Rothwell, 2003). Finally, in historical context, its findings were dramatic.Challenging theories of stuttering
Dr. Wendell Johnson, a speech pathologist, wanted to show that the prevailing theories about the causes of stuttering were wrong. During the 1930s it was thought that stuttering had an organic or genetic cause. This meant you were born a stutterer (or not) and little could be done.Dr Johnson had different ideas. Instead he thought the labelling of children as stutterers could actually make them worse, and in some cases cause 'normal' children to start stuttering. To prove his point, he suggested an experiment which has since become known as the 'Monster Study'.
Power of labelling
Twenty-two young orphans were recruited to participate in the experiment. They were then divided into two groups. The first were labelled 'normal speakers' and the second 'stutterers'. Crucially only half of the group labelled stutterers did actually show signs of stuttering.During the course of the experiment, the normal speakers were given positive encouragement but it was the treatment of the other group that has made the experiment notorious. The group labelled stutterers were made more self-conscious about stuttering. They were lectured about stuttering and told to take extra care not to repeat words. Other teachers and staff at the orphanage were even unknowingly recruited to reinforce the label as the researchers told them the whole group were stutterers.
Dramatic results
Of the six 'normal' children in the stuttering group, five began stuttering after the negative therapy. Of the five children who had stuttered before their 'therapy', three became worse. In comparison, only one of the children in the group labelled 'normal' had greater speech problems after the study.Realising the power of their experiment, the researchers tried to undo the damage they had done, but to no avail. It seemed the effects of labelling the children stutterers was permanent. This is something the orphans labelled stutterers have had to cope with for the rest of their lives.
Clearly this research raises a number of major ethical concerns.
Case for the defence
- The researchers had the best of intentions - they were motivated to help stutterers of all ages. Indeed Dr. Wendell Johnson was himself a severe stutterer.
- The findings supported Dr Johnson's theory and contributed to new and successful ways of treating people with stutters.
Case for the prosecution
Despite the researcher's good intentions, the study fails on any number of ethical dimensions.- The children were never told they had been involved in a study, until it was revealed by a newspaper over 60 years later (read the emotionally charged report from the San Jose Mercury News).
- The teachers and administrators of the orphanage were also misled about the purpose of the study. This deception was never explained to them.
- The study was never published. Because of this some argue the damage inflicted on the children was even more unethical. All studies must balance the potential risks against the potential benefits. Without publication and dissemination through the academic community, this study's benefits are reduced.
The final word
This is left to the University of Iowa, where Dr Johnson was working at the time of the experiment. In 2001, 36 years after his death, they issued a formal apology, calling the experiment both regrettable and indefensible (Rothwell, 2003).This judgement is impossible to argue with.
UPDATE: Six participants in this study have just won a £500,000 settlement against the University of Iowa.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Development, Weird Psychology
Stop Staring at Me!
[Photo by simpologist]
Continuing the weird psychology series, here's a couple of studies you can replicate yourself - if you've got the nerve. In the first you could be risking bodily harm from enraged motorists, while the second has a twist in the tail. They both show the power of staring at other people and they're both fantastically simple social psychology experiments.Loitering with intent
Here's the experimental procedure for the first. You loiter by a set of traffic lights where people are idling in their cars, waiting for the lights to change. Then, in the full view of the driver at the head of the queue, you stare at them mercilessly. When the lights change you hit your trusty stopwatch and time how long it takes them to get to some predetermined point at the other side of the junction.You then repeat this procedure the next time the lights change back to red and a queue reforms. This time, however, you only glance at the person in the first car - don't stare. Then time how long it takes them to get across the junction. Stay there for the rest of the day repeating this procedure, sometimes staring, sometimes glancing, then noting down how quickly drivers pull away.
If you replicate the original experiment successfully you should find that people you stared at pull away significantly faster than those you only glanced at.
A stare becomes appealing
While I like that study, it doesn't have the pleasing twist in the tail of the second study. For this one you'll need to position yourself on the other side of the road from, and facing, a group of pedestrians about to cross the street. Then you do the same staring at some people and only glancing at some people as before. The recipients of your piercing gaze should, again, cross the road faster.Now for the twist.
In your hand during the experiment, you need to be holding some shopping bags. While staring at someone crossing the road, you need to drop one of these bags as if by accident. If the original experiment holds up, you should find that those you stared at are much more likely to help you pick it up. It seems the simple act of dropping something transforms the meaning of your gaze.
Either that or they just think you are crazy and in need of help.
By the way, in the second study, it may make a difference if you are male or female. The original study was carried out with a female researcher.
Both of these studies (reported by Ellsworth, 1975) show how important eye contact is to humans, but it's the second that shows how sensitive it is to context. With one subtle variation, what was unattractive staring can suddenly become an appeal for help.
Good luck with your field research!
» Read more weird psychology studies.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Nonverbal, Weird Psychology
Encephalon #25 - The Neuroscience and Psychology Blog Carnival
Right. Into the fray.
The neurobiologist Dr. Robert Sapolsky is well-known for the theory that, as we have no natural predators, stress in humans results from our social environment. Channel N points to two of Dr Sapolsky's talks, one has video, the other audio. In these he discusses the effects of stress in the brain and in evolutionary psychology.
My favourite quote: "Physiologically, it doesn't come cheap being a bastard 24 hours a day".
Neurofuture raises the frightening possibility that neurosurgeons will be able to operate using their mobile phones.
"Can you put that brain tumour on hold, I've got a hemispherectomy on line two."
Dr Deb speculates that John Travolta and Kelly Preston's son, Jett Travolta, may have autism. As a result of their alleged denial of his alleged condition, he could be missing out on useful treatments (shout out to Encephalon's lawyers for that sentence).
Talking of Scientologists, I happened to be standing outside a Scientology 'shop' the other day with a group of fellow psychology postgrads when one of the suited salesmen thought he'd have a go at converting us. When he opened up with "Perhaps you'd like to take a personality test?" we all chorused back, "We're psychologists, we've got enough personality tests!"
After that the debate was all downhill as some members of our party had been drinking...
Ouroboros brings us two papers from Nature which cover the neuronal (and pharyngeal) mediation of calorie restriction signalling in the worm. I want to do a weak joke about eating disorders, but I fear it is in bad taste.
Developing Intelligence reports a study looking at whether children can tell fantasy from reality. What we really need is a study on whether children can understand the difference between 'yes' and 'no', or whether they're just messing with us.
Pure Pedantry looks into a study showing how monkey brains encode numbers. Personally, my brain pilot relies on a tiny abacus. With a couple of beads missing.
With the detail and clarity we've come to expect, the Neurophilosopher describes the history of trepanation. One cheeky commenter wonders if trepanation might explain the Bush administration. But we need anti-American sentiment here about as much as we need a hole in the head.
Yes! Managed to crowbar it in!
Aaaah, in the sea of serious scientific endeavour, the mighty OmniBrain is an island of iconoclasm. See here, they're on about pigeons playing ping-pong, laughing rats and the top ten annoyances to people with bipolar disorder.
From GrrlScientist comes the simple question (with complicated answer): Why don't all smart people make smart choices? I especially like the scare-quoting of 'decision scientist' in the first paragraph. It seems to beg the question: if 'decision scientists' are so chock-full of knowledge about decision-making, how come they ended up in academia? Bloody good point really.
Here's a few interesting posts for which (mercifully) my flippancy deserted me. The Mouse Trap dreams of the biological basis of imagination. Memoirs of a Postgrad asks: what is embodiment? SharpBrains muses on Richard Dawkins, Alfred Nobel and the nature/nurture debate.
And we wrap up this Encephalon with a tussle over foreskin. No, an intellectual tussle. The Neurocritic reports on the penile homunculus. Sometimes, flippant remarks are not required.
That's your lot. Next time Encephalon is coming home to Neurophilosophy.
PsyBlog out.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: Encephalon
Objects in the Home Reflect Your Relationship
When I walk into someone's home, almost without thinking I look around at the whole decor, but I'm particularly interested in prominently displayed objects. It gives me a sense of the person. Indeed studies have shown it is possible to draw some limited conclusions about personality from personal spaces like homes or offices (Gosling et al., 2002). What about couples though? Is it possible to tell anything about relationships from objects that are prominently displayed? Research by Lohmann, Arriaga and Goodfriend (2003) suggests it is.
In this research participants were asked to sit in the room in which they most often entertained guests and list their five favourite objects. They were then asked a subtly different question: which objects did they most want visitors to notice?
Then later on in the questionnaire they were asked how these objects had been acquired. Were they acquired on their own, by their partner or together? Joint acquisition covered the situation where the object had been given as a gift to both of them, or was bought when they were together.
Two measures were calculated from this data:
Second, the results also showed that closer couples were more likely to have a higher percentage of 'couple markers' - favourite objects that were jointly acquired.
This study is a really good illustration of the way in which a person's environment can reflect not only their own personality but their relationship with their significant other. Why not look around your own living room - perhaps it contains some home truths?
Thanks to Dr Grumpus for suggesting this study.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibility
In this research participants were asked to sit in the room in which they most often entertained guests and list their five favourite objects. They were then asked a subtly different question: which objects did they most want visitors to notice?
Then later on in the questionnaire they were asked how these objects had been acquired. Were they acquired on their own, by their partner or together? Joint acquisition covered the situation where the object had been given as a gift to both of them, or was bought when they were together.
Two measures were calculated from this data:
- Couple markers - percentage of favourite objects jointly acquired.
- Couple displays - percentage of objects jointly acquired that they wanted visitors to notice
Results
These percentages were then compared with a series of measures assessing the health of participant's relationships. First, the results showed that couples who were closer, better adjusted and perceived their relationship as long-term were more likely to want visitors to notice jointly acquired objects.Second, the results also showed that closer couples were more likely to have a higher percentage of 'couple markers' - favourite objects that were jointly acquired.
This study is a really good illustration of the way in which a person's environment can reflect not only their own personality but their relationship with their significant other. Why not look around your own living room - perhaps it contains some home truths?
Thanks to Dr Grumpus for suggesting this study.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Relationships
Guide to Psychology Blogs - Part 4
Best mental health blog
World of Psychology, run by the clinical psychologist Dr John Grohol, is a great blog for mental health generally. But the blog only forms part of the site, that also includes discussion forums, a guide to medications, psychological tests and more. Loads of useful resources on mental health books and research.Best social psychology blog
The Situationist explores the importance of the situation in human behaviour and thought. It covers social psychology, social cognition, and related fields, but it is associated with Harvard Law School and therefore has a broad subject-area. It has both original writing and interesting excerpts from relevant pieces in the media.Best 'big pharma watch' blog
Philip Dawdy is a journalist with bipolar disorder whose blog, Furious Seasons, rattles the cages of Big Pharma. Want to find out more about the atypical anti-psychotic Zyprexa, made by Eli Lilly? Worried about the marketing of drugs and whether they are really for the benefit of patients? Check out his blog.best psychotherapy blog
i feel calmer just browsing around the 'change therapy' blog written by isabella, a psychotherapist in vancouver, canada. it's partly the absence of capital letters - which gives the impression of a soft-voice - and it's partly the gentle way this blog is written. recommended.Best autism blog
Dr Kristina Chew explains that she began to blog about her son's autism in 2005 somewhat out of desperation. Charlie was not doing well despite a number of different treatments like intensive ABA, some biomedical treatments, speech therapy and OT. Read more of her story here on Kristina Chew.com and continue on to her blog, AutismVox which is a fantastic autism resource.Best human psyche blog
Dr Deborah Serani's blog covers all sorts of areas of psychology, but focuses on depression, treatment, stigma and self-esteem. She herself is a trauma psychologist and Adjunct Professor at Adelphi University.Best urban monk (personal development)
This blog has a great name, the Urban Monk, and it also has some great content. If you're the sort of person wondering: what your ego is and how to stop it from obscuring your inner peace and unconditional love, or the most effective way to express words of gratitude, then this is the blog for you.Thanks to...
Gareth of PsychSplash kindly pointed me to his publicly available list of RSS feeds which was really useful in discovering more lovely blogs.» Now read part 1, part 2, part 3 and part 5.
[Photo by DogFromSPACE]
Labels: Psychology Guides
Dreaming of Evidence for Telepathy
[Photo by assbach]
Continuing the series on unusual research in psychology we search for proof of dream telepathy, a search which has thrown up some controversial findings and an experiment during a Grateful Dead concert.For a few minutes after waking, my mind is filled with the alien imagery of dreams. Perhaps these dreams contain the roots of my neuroses? Or perhaps they are just the random flotsam of a brain unhooked from its body. Or perhaps they are something more intriguing -- could they be a window through time and space itself?
Dream Telepathy
Research has shown the occurrence of extrasensory perception (ESP) is most often reported during dreaming. ESP is gaining access to information other than through recognised human senses like sight sound, smell and touch. ESP can include precognition, clairvoyance and telepathy.
Some of the most influential work on dream telepathy was carried out by the psychiatrist Montague Ullman at a medical centre in Brooklyn. Over a period of more than a decade during the 1960s and 70s, Ullman and colleagues conducted thirteen scientifically controlled studies into both precognition and telepathy.
Transmission in progress
The procedures for these experiments were variations on one central theme. The receiver of the telepathic message is hooked up to an EEG machine to monitor their brain waves. They then fall asleep in the lab. When the sender of the telepathic message, located in a separate sound-proofed room, sees that the EEG waves indicate the receiver is dreaming, they begin to send the message.
In these experiments the 'message' usually consists of art prints selected for their simplicity and emotional intensity from around 8 to 12 options. The particular print used is not selected until after the receiver is asleep. Then, once the receiver is dreaming, the sender opens the sealed print and begins to transmit the image.
After the image has been transmitted, the receiver is woken and asked by the experimenter to describe their dreams. These are tape-recorded and transcribed. This process is repeated a number of times during the night using the same image.
Rating and ranking
In the morning the receiver looks at all the art prints and gives each a rating based on their confidence that each is the target. Finally judges who are blind to the experiment rate the transcripts and try to decide which of the pictures most closely fits their dreams.
Positive instances of dream telepathy, or 'hits' are deemed to have occurred when the target image is in the top half of the rankings. So, if there were 8 images, a ranking of 5 or above would count as a hit. Anything lower is a 'miss'.
Above chance
The results across 450 trials of these types of experiments have been pooled and the overall success rate is 63%. Bearing in mind that a 50% hit rate represents guessing at chance, 63% is a strong finding. So, does this mean that we're capable of telepathy during our sleep?
Unsurprisingly these results have been treated with considerable apprehension by many other researchers. And, like telepathy itself, the findings and data from these experiments are shrouded in mystery.
Some have suggested the findings are fraudulent, although no one has been able to explain how it could have been done. Later researchers have tried to get their hands on the original data to carry out a re-analysis , but it has become 'unavailable' and so the mystery remains.
Grateful Dead audience boost signal
The most dramatic example of this type of telepathic experiment was carried out during a Grateful Dead concert (Krippner, Honorton & Ullman, 1973). Onstage in 1970 Jerry Garcia, the lead guitarist of the Grateful Dead, asked all 2,000 audience members to focus on an image projected onto a screen and send it to Malcolm Bessent, a particularly sensitive receiver sleeping in the dream research laboratory.
For 15 minutes, while the music played on, they focussed, as best they could in their altered states of consciousness, on the image.
That night Bessent had a dream. He saw the image of a man suspended in the air, he talked of 'a spinal column' and of 'using natural energies'. Sure enough, the image being telepathically projected at him was of a man apparently floating in the air entitled 'The Seven Spinal Chakras'.
Replication attempts
Of course, the classic way of proving the worth of these studies is to replicate them. Sherwood and Roe (2003) report that six replications by independent researchers were carried out in the 1960s and 70s. Of these, only one provided support for dream telepathy.
Studies using varying methodologies have continued through the last three decades. While many remain unconvinced, saying the results are inconclusive, there is still enough encouragement to keep parapsychologists interested. Indeed, many maintain that if this research was considered mainstream, acceptance of what are often highly rigorous studies would be much more widespread (Bem & Honorton, 1994).
Like it or not, though, we're a society of sceptics now.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Dreams, Weird Psychology
Psychological Testing for New Drivers is Flawed
[Photo by Ed from Ohio]
BBC News reports on government plans to introduce a psychometric component to the UK driving test. Under these plans, before passing the driving test in the UK, it will be compulsory to show the right psychological attitudes to road safety. It's a nice idea that we might be able to eliminate at least some of the dangerous drivers from our roads with one simple paper and pencil test. Unfortunately from a psychological viewpoint it's a fundamentally flawed plan.Attitude-behaviour gap
One of the biggest problems is the well-known gap between people's attitudes and their behaviour. Even the most honest and well-meaning among us will consciously give the 'correct' answers to questions that assess our levels of racism or prejudice in general. But when our unconscious selves are tested, our behaviour reveals our true prejudices. Research on implicit attitudes dramatically shows this divergence between what we think we believe and what our behaviour reveals about our beliefs.
The practical upshot of this research is simply that even someone who thinks they are a safe driver may not be.
Even more obvious than this, though, is the fact that people lie. If you ask people: "How fast should you drive down this winding, slippery road on a foggy night?" most people with more than two brain cells to rub together can work out the answer isn't: "As fast as I bloody well can!"
In support of the scheme, the article refers to a bus company which introduced these psychological tests for bus drivers four years ago. Since then they claim to have seen fatalities involving buses reduce by 31%.
It's a juicy but very loose association being used here. What proof is there that this reduction in fatalities wasn't due to the introduction of new buses, changes in road layouts, numbers of people travelling on buses, or any number of other factors?
How to change driving behaviour
A further point used to support the scheme is the idea we'll be able to identify dangerous or risky drivers and then somehow change their attitudes. Now, if you're buying what the psychological research says about the problematic relationship between attitudes and behaviour, what does it matter if you change someone's attitudes? Even supposing that you could?
What if - shock! horror! - the driving test is actually a really good way of testing if someone is good at, well, driving. After all if you want to see how good someone is at golf, you don't sit them down and ask them about their attitudes to bunker shots, you take them out on the course.
Managing risks
Introducing psychological testing for drivers is just the latest manifestation of modern Westernised societies' obsession with trying to manage risks, but without spending any money. If the government really wants to make the roads safer they'll use the same technique employed by all reputable professions: continuing professional development. Make drivers top-up their training every few years with refresher courses and perhaps even give them complete retests every few decades.
Now just try and get that past the driving lobby.
And, before there's an outcry about the driving baby picture, at least his hands are at ten-to-two.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: Transport
Don't Stand So Close to Me
[Photo by Phil Dokas]
Here's a weird study that sometimes gets a mention in ethical discussions about psychology, and it's not hard to see why. Middlemist, Knowles & Matter (1976) designed an experiment to test how the speed and flow of men's urination in a public lavatory was affected by invasions of personal space.Piss pilot
To gather some preliminary data on men's toilet habits, a pilot study stationed an observer in a public toilet at a US university. He was instructed to look like he was grooming himself in the mirror, but was actually keeping a record of which urinals men stood at and their patterns of urination.
Timing them on his wristwatch, our intrepid toilet researcher measured the onset delay in micturation along with persistence of flow. If you're wondering how our correspondent measured these, it was by sound - which must have been no mean feat when there was multiple micturation in progress.
Sure enough the pilot study revealed men prefer not to stand next to each other in the urinals, and the closer other men are to each other, the longer it takes for them to begin urinating, and the shorter the persistence of their stream.
And now for the periscope...
Middlemist et al. were not satisfied with this observational data, however, and decided to carry out a proper experiment. For this they required a more complicated setup, and a little covert action.
They forced unknowing urinators to spend their pennies in one (out of three) urinals that was closest to a single stall. A confederate (who was in on the experiment) then either stood directly next to the various experimental subjects, one urinal away, or was not present at all.
Hidden in the stall was our urine measurement officer (grad students get all the best jobs). Chief amongst his weapons was a specially designed periscope hidden in a stack of books so that the stream of urine could be directly observed.
The experimental version of the pilot study confirmed earlier findings. With no one present, unselfconscious urinators' average onset was 4.8 seconds, with a confederate present one urinal away, mildly self-conscious urinators' average micturation onset was pushed up to 6.2 seconds. Finally with the confederate in the next urinal, it was 8.4 seconds before our bashful toilet-goer's blessed relief began.
Urination and personality?
Rather than being left with the feeling, as you may be, that this was not only distasteful but also a bit of a waste of time, the psychologist in me comes out. I'm wondering about personality correlates and personal space. For example, is neuroticism positively correlated with increasing micturation onset, while extroversion is negatively correlated?
The problem is then you've got to get urinators to fill in a personality measure on the way out, which will expose all the periscope business, which in turn may lead on to a variety of uncomfortable conversations. Perhaps we'll just leave this one as it is.
» Read more weird psychology studies.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Weird Psychology
Superstitious Pigeon-Guided Missiles
[Photo by libraryman]
During WWII, in the days before cheap computing, guiding a bomb to its target was a more miss than hit affair. While the military were working on their first crude electronic guidance systems, one famous psychologist, B.F. Skinner, had an unusual idea. Skinner, who had been developing ways of training animals, thought that an expendable animal with excellent eyesight and high manoeuvrability could be trained to guide anti-aircraft missiles to their targets. And so we continue this series on weird psychology with the imaginatively titled: 'Project Pigeon' (Skinner, 1960).
Pigeon-guided missiles
First what was needed was proof of concept so Skinner set up a pigeon training area which consisted of a pigeon in a man's sock looking at a picture of a 'target'. The pigeon could then peck on one of four levers that moved the 'target' up, down, left and right.
This prototype seemed to work with the pigeons keeping the target in the centre. Skinner thought this was proof that a pigeon-guided missile was a real possibility. In fact, he planned on having three pigeons in the nose cone of each missile, thinking this would provide a more failsafe system.
The military got as far as adapting some missiles to accommodate the pigeons before eventually deciding electronics was a better bet for the future and killed Project Pigeon. They were also understandably nervous about a load of heavily-armed pigeons flying around the skies.
Superstitious pigeons
While the pigeon-guided missile died, the idea of using a box with levers for experimenting with animals lived on in the form of a 'Skinner box'. It was using this that Skinner then made the surprising claim that pigeons could be superstitious (Skinner, 1948).
A hungry pigeon was placed in a Skinner box and fed once every 15 seconds. But soon it began to exhibit unusual behaviours. In one case it began stretching its neck just before the food was delivered. In another the pigeon started walking in circles. Yet another stuck its head in the corner.
Skinner argued the pigeon had come to associate the movement of its neck, or walking in circles around the box, or sticking its head in the corner with the reward of food. So it now believed it had to move its head to get fed. It had become a superstitious pigeon.
Skinner would give lectures in which an apparently passive pigeon was placed into the Skinner box at the start. After an hour or so the box's cover would be removed to reveal a pigeon now engaged in some bizarre behaviour.
Personally I think the pigeons got wise. After all, would you rather dance for your supper or be strapped to a missile?
» Read more weird psychology studies.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Weird Psychology
I'm a Dead Dog: First Case of Cotard's and Lycanthropy
[Photo by Jayel Aheram]
The series on weird psychology opens up with a suggestion kindly provided by Dr Vitelli of the first reported case of a man suffering from both Cotard's syndrome and lycanthropy. The Iranian authors describe a 32-year-old man admitted to a psychiatric hospital with some unusual delusional beliefs (Nejad & Toofani, 2005). First he believed he was dead, yet immortal (Cotard's syndrome) and second he thought he was a dog (lycanthropy).
The man explained to doctors the symptoms had begun two years ago but had recently become much worse. While people had been ignoring him for some time, it wasn't until he felt a strange sensation in his body, like electricity, that he became convinced he was dead. He told doctors he was sure he was dead because his relatives had fed him cyanide yet he wasn't hurt.
Not only did the man think he was dead, but also that his wife and his three daughters were dead as well. When he noticed that his mouth moved, apparently for no reason, he concluded that both he and his wife were not only dead but had been turned into dogs.
The man also suffered from an olfactory hallucination: he thought his daughter's urine smelled of sheep's urine. He thought this indicated his three daughters had been turned into sheep.
The man's family history is described by the authors as unremarkable, although he was suffering from guilt over a sexual relationship with a sheep in adolescence. He also reports having incestuous feelings towards his daughters.
Attempting to explain this extremely unusual set of delusions, the authors wonder if the transformations can be explained as a way of coping with sexual attraction towards his daughters. He has transformed himself into a dog, the traditional guardian of sheep.
Nejad and Toofani (2005) describe the paradoxical representation of the dog in Persian culture: as both a symbol of loyalty and of impurity. This mirrors the strange coexistence of beliefs in Cotard's that one is both dead and yet immortal.
Finally, the authors report that two months after treatment with electroshock therapy and antipsychotics, the main signs of illness had been relieved and no antidepressants were required.
» Read more weird psychology studies
Your suggestions
Thanks once again to Dr Vitelli (check out his blog) for the suggestion. If you've got any other studies to suggest for this series of posts on weird psychology, then leave a comment below or send me an email. Much appreciated.
Encephalon #24
» Encephalon #24 now online at The Phineas Gage Fan Club.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Weird Psychology
Weird Psychology: Call for Inspiration
Inspired by the ever-compelling Freakonomics I thought what we need here in the psychology blogosphere is some coverage of weird psychology studies. I know, a lot of psychology studies are pretty weird, but I'm talking about the really weird ones. Two minor problems.
The main one is finding the studies. And this is where I need to harness the much-vaunted power of networked communities, or Web 2.0, or whatever fancy name we're giving this interweb thingey nowadays. To get you started I came across one entitled: 'Personal space invasions in the lavatory: suggestive evidence for arousal' (via The Psych Files). While this study will be particularly attractive to a British audience who love a bit of micturation-related chat, don't let it constrain your imaginations.
So, fire up your brain departments for a couple of minutes and see what they spit out. I don't necessarily need full references, any old fragments will do. On the other hand I will need a bit more than: "Well, there was this study, right, with people in it, where, like, things were done, and it was, like, really weird and everything."
OK, I know none of you will do that, you're all far too intelligent (flatter the audience they tell me, flatter them). Anyway, you can comment below or feel free to email me direct if you prefer. There's no reason economists should have all the fun with the freaky studies. Psychologists should be able to out-weird those guys any day of the week.
Second, in the tradition of all goodrip-off artists I want to have a funky title for these types of 'weird' or unusual studies. Weirdology? No - doesn't contain the 'psych' part. My current favourite is psycho-ology. Geddit? No, doesn't really trip of the tongue does it?
Any other ideas? Come on my networked friends, let's work that grey stuff. Come on FEEEEL THE NEURONS BUUUUURN!
(It's all this inane motivation chat or I'll be reduced to threatening you - it won't be pretty.)
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
The main one is finding the studies. And this is where I need to harness the much-vaunted power of networked communities, or Web 2.0, or whatever fancy name we're giving this interweb thingey nowadays. To get you started I came across one entitled: 'Personal space invasions in the lavatory: suggestive evidence for arousal' (via The Psych Files). While this study will be particularly attractive to a British audience who love a bit of micturation-related chat, don't let it constrain your imaginations.
So, fire up your brain departments for a couple of minutes and see what they spit out. I don't necessarily need full references, any old fragments will do. On the other hand I will need a bit more than: "Well, there was this study, right, with people in it, where, like, things were done, and it was, like, really weird and everything."
OK, I know none of you will do that, you're all far too intelligent (flatter the audience they tell me, flatter them). Anyway, you can comment below or feel free to email me direct if you prefer. There's no reason economists should have all the fun with the freaky studies. Psychologists should be able to out-weird those guys any day of the week.
Second, in the tradition of all good
Any other ideas? Come on my networked friends, let's work that grey stuff. Come on FEEEEL THE NEURONS BUUUUURN!
(It's all this inane motivation chat or I'll be reduced to threatening you - it won't be pretty.)
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: Weird Psychology
Diners Spend More In Lavender-Scented Restaurant
[Photo by Thomas Hawk]
The effects of smell are rarely researched in psychological studies. That's why it's great to come across this study by Gueguen and Petr (2006) on the effect of different smells on how much time and money people spend in a restaurant. But not, as you might imagine, the smell of the food, but the smell of lavender. A very small (22 place-setting) pizzerria in Brittany, France, was the site for this fascinating experiment. On three apparently identical Saturdays in May, three different experimental conditions were tested. In the first condition no aroma was dispersed - other than that occurring in the natural course of cooking and serving pizzas. On the second Saturday, the smell of lemon was diffused into the atmosphere of the restaurant. Finally, on the third Saturday, it was the turn of lavender.
The authors tell us there were no significant differences in the weather conditions or in the patrons of the restaurant on the three evenings.
Lemon, generally found to be an activating smell, did increase the amount of money spent but not by a statistically significant amount. It was actually the relaxing scent of lavender that increased spending per person from 17.5 Euros to 21.1 Euros on average. That's a statistically significant 20% increase. Not a bad return on the investment of three electric fragrance diffusers.
But unfortunately for all Gordon Ramsay wannabes, I have discovered a potentially fatal flaw in the plan. Not only did spending go up in the lavender condition, but so did the average amount of time spent in the restaurant, from 91.3 minutes to 105.7 minutes - about 15%.
In busy restaurants, owners often want a high throughput of diners. More covers equals more cash-o-la. People hanging around drinking coffee and soaking up lavender aren't necessarily racking up the profits. On the other hand, on quiet nights, it's better to be selling those coffees than not and a half-full restaurant always looks better to passing trade than one that's almost empty.
(Warning: the following sentences contain puns - please look away if you're of a nervous disposition.)
So here it is for you Gordon, on a plate: only use the lavender on quiet weekdays when you want people to hang around, but can it Friday and Saturday nights.
You see it's not all pie-in-the-sky here on PsyBlog, fat cats are also catered for.
Stop groaning, I did warn you.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References - Click here to toggle visibilityLabels: Smell