Of course, that most scientific form of psychology, the behaviourism of BF Skinner, has given us the poker machine - a Skinner Box for making money. Self-help books may indeed be wishy-washy and pseudo-scientific but do they reduce a human being to nothing but a rat pushing a bar for a reward?

This article made a good start but petered out before anything substantial was said. An interesting link on this sort of thing is:

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7457

Psychology remains an embattled discipline because it attempts to define the undefinable, the conscious self. This self is made up not only of genes but of culture and environement and the most puzzling thing of all consciousness. How does a science deal with a conscious being? The very success of science is predicated on its subject matter being natural, that is, non conscious. As the author alludes, some neat techniques are produced that do produce some benefit but it is usally at a cost, the cost of reduction of the human.

Barbara, I thank you for your article. It has much to commend it and you won't find any argument from me about what you have written.

But gosh, how do I say this?

Well, like I normally do, as rough as guts. Please forgive me.

As a thesis, I'd mark it at about 65%. As an educator, I'd try to give you some hope and something you could hang your hat on, so to speak, to move forward and do better. Something you could work towards. Like giving practical application to the theory. Like stating some actual case examples to give weight to your argument. Some amplification of the points you made. Illustrate some ramifications. Develop a strong and significant point and drive it home.

I thought this article was good - for a first year uni student with a yet to be developed mature understanding of life and a yet to be developed writing voice.

Can you imagine my shock when I read about your credentials?

Look, please don't take this the wrong way, but I was amazed! Simply amazed.

Your credentials say, "Barbara Gillam is Scientia Professor of Psychology ay the University of New South Wales. She is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences of Australia and of the Australian Psychological Society. Barbara is the President of The Psychology Foundation of Australia (member Society of FASTS)."

Wow, if this is what the professors are like, just imagine what the standards of the students are like.

Sorry Barbara, but gosh, what hope is there for us if you're the sharp end?

Good luck to you, good luck to all. Sorry folks, but I just had to write it. I really wish I hadn't had to. And by the way, the first word "Look" is missing from the article.

I take any excuse to give support to the "human face". I am glad their is some progress in psychology - I want to see more of it present in advocating treatment - rather that drugs in Mental Health - but...

I find it is about emotional literacy aint it... it is about coping... about problem solving... about tolerance of self and others. It is, I feel at present, almost the only profession out there, attempting to do anything with people at a humane level - as in empowering a persons need for "self determination".

Councillors however need to get more "practical". In terms of their welfare roles for example... they need to make more of a committment to their clients. Listening with two-way dialogue is a start for most people but we need more active participation and support for people at a PRACTICAL level everywhere. There needs to be intregration and "linkages" between other resource bodies, pro-active solution frameworks based on partnership making to gain outcomes that will assist people cope with the ruthless problems we as a society are attempting to overcome - to day.

Ie: bullying at school, victimisation in the workplace, discrimination against the unemployed, single mothers or the many entangled in the system of mental health. Activities, new-skills-development, more networking and collaberation. The engagement of people working to-gether... actions are more often --- more useful than words alone...

It saddens me to see the arguement swing from one extreme to the other.... we need a more practical human face everywhere, don't you agree.

I would have to agree with Maximus, Barbara.

When I first saw the title of this topic, I thought "Uh,oh,. Here is another desciple of Ted Breggin who thinks psychiatry and psychology are the Devils work, and they are evil black magic because Hitler based his Eugenics program on science and genetics."

The article started off by appearing to attack psychology, erroniously claiming that "self help" books are in the "Psychology and Sociology" section of bookstores. As a person who can't walk past that particular bookshop section without sticking my nose in, I would declare this to be wrong. "Self help" books normally reside in the "New Age" section of bookshops.

But after denouncing the idea that authors should use applied psychology to inform their readers on how to improve their lives, Barbara then praises the idea that pschology can be used to improve people's lives.

Boing? Boing?

Sorry, Babs, ya lost me. Either Psychology is good or it is bad. Perhaps Barbara just wants to keep amateurs out of her territory and prefers that the Black Art of psychology must only be used by a priestly caste of qualified academic druids?

I think that we wouldn't need so much psycho stuff if people took the time to listen to each other, support each other and where possible help each other.

You shouldn't have to pay money to get someone to listen.

But then again maybe that is what the profession is worried about!

Hi there Barbara, and the other correspondents...I'm essentially a 'dullard', with little formal education, or life skills, for that matter. I'm a Veteran, an ex Prison Officer , and now a retired copper. As a former screw and copper, I've had occasion to deal with quite a few of these various 'ologists etc. And recently, with a couple of them at the 'Vietnam Veterans', Counselling Service too. Personally,I have found most to be very nice people, and for the main, easy to get on with. However professionally, they are generally of little or no value, in my humble view. Often they leave their client/patient more confused and depressed than if they had not intervened at all! During my police service, I spent four or five years, as a law instructor (powers), at the police academy. There, I found those recruits who possessed an undergraduate degree, with a psychology major, the least able to express their thoughts and comments on paper, at examination time. Basic spelling and syntax, seem to escape them completely. So too their practical skills. Prima facie, they seem to have a substantial foundation in formal education, but lacked basic common sense and judgement, at the coal face. Neither could they speak or communicate with ordinary people, in a crisis situation (domestic violence). And on the job, when we were required to bring in the 'on-call', CRT team, for a potentially high risk situation, (threats of suicide et al) more often than not, we had to pull them (the CRT) out, for fear that they'd exacerbate the problem, and antagonize the player/s involved. Seriously though, they obviously have their place, within the healthcare profession...where though, I really don't know?

You are right, the reliability of information presented is something we need to question more. Once the world was flat, and during those times, psychotherapists got results with maybe 20% of clients, and Freud said that his talking therapy cure would take a long time and be very expensive. How far we have come…

I find it ironic, that the people who pride themselves in the knowledge of the mind and how it works, can't come up with a way for people to become aware of the 'interesting and reliable information' - perhaps it's all really powerful stuff that people have no interesting in learning about,

Also, for someone who is dishing personality profiles such as the largest personality profiling tool in the world (Myers-Briggs - and please spell it correctly), would even suggest that psychologists would know the personality types that are prone to PTSD, and have "extensive research as to who they are likely to be". Let me see now, would that be via some profiling test you do? Oh, that's different..

Psychologists who support that cruel joke of Phonics should be ashamed of themselves. In the UK over the last 30 years phonics has destroyed the lives of many children, who grew up not knowing how to spell at all, and ended up with disgusting labels such as dyslexia, ADHD, and other useless tags, so that child psychologists could create a nice constant flow of clients in the future. For gods sake, you can't even spell phonics using phonics

I do have a suggestion: Find some clients to work with that can't afford to pay you. You might find that the only self-help books they can afford at the very ones you question.

Of course, I don't really mean this, I just want your reaction, in a way that will allow you to think twice before penning again. Oh, long live the power of psychology

To O Sung Woo.

I accept that your experiences with pschologists as you worked as both a police officer and prison officer, has given you a jaundiced view of the whole profession. But psychology has been of great benefit to law enforcement officers through the now widely accepted forensic science of criminal profiling.

Serial killers are a growing problem in modern societies, and such “motiveless” crime, usually inflicted on perfect strangers by psychopaths, often leaves little or no evidentiary leads for investigating police to follow. In such cases, police psychologists (profilers) are often the only means which investigating police have of obtaining a general description of the offender, his motivations, and patterns of behaviour. FBI trained criminal profilers are widely respected, and if my memory serves me correctly, an FBI profiler was loaned to the NSW Police during the hunt for serial Killer Geoffrey Glover (The Granny Killer).

Similarly, psychologists have conducted valuable research into the causes of criminal behaviour and have confirmed what many police have always suspected. That criminal behaviour does indeed have a genetic link, can be inherited, and is primarily caused by low intelligence. Would you agree that most criminals you have dealt with during the course of your careers are pretty dumb, and often come from "criminal" families?

Would you also agree that “intelligence” (or lack of) is usually considered a genetically inherited condition?

If you agree with the above premises, then despite your own day to day experiences with psychology trained students and psychology trained social workers, would you now consider that the Profession of Psychology has been of overall benefit to law enforcement officers?

Good morning to you redneck...
The only empirical evidence I can offer is from my own observations, and the observations and comments from those with whom I've worked. Personally, I've received treatment at both the Repat. and the VVCS. for PTSD and Depression. Though the psychologists involved, were nice people and apparently well qualified, I sincerely believe,that in my case, the treatment offered had more of a iatrogenic effect, rather than that which was at all beneficial.
Further redneck, I've also attended two Bureau courses in the US, (Tactical) and the Agents with whom I've spoken and interacted, don't hold these 'profilers' in particularly high regard. Some even suggesting that they (the profilers) would better fall within the aegis of, Special Agents 'Mulder & Scully' of that forgettable TV show. I can't remember the title? Anyway, they do concede that they've had their successes. But what we (the public) don't know, is the many many failures. Nothing beats 'dogged' at the coal face, police work. Ask any 'working' detective !

I've been fascinated by 'the proud scientific tradition' of psychology ever since my first university course when I and my fellow students had every psychopathology going. Then I found out about Freud and penis envy. I can't imagine how Freud ever got the idea we actually wanted to have a penis - play with one now and then maybe, but not have one all the time.

But seriously. Barbara rejects Myers-Briggs out of hand, and she may be right that Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has been poorly used as a hiring practice. This is not a fault of Myers-Briggs - it's simply bad employment practice. The flavour of the month in employment has moved on now to 'assessment centres', some of whose practices are as dubious as Myers-Briggs for making hiring decisions. I recently saw some 'integrity assessments' from an assessment centre. The results give themselves a scientific veneer by providing an 'integrity score' - how much integrity the person has based on their answers to the test - and a 'reliability score' - how much you can trust the results. I know the statistics behind these scores, but I wouldn't depend on them when hiring someone.

People involved in Myers-Briggs have done an enormous amount of research (eg see www.capt.org), and if used properly, Myers-Briggs does have a role. For instance, it can give people an insight into their own - and other people's - preferred styles, the strengths and weaknesses of those preferences, and the benefits of having a range of preferences in a work team.

I have also seen neurolinguistic programming used effectively in clinical counselling - helping a friend manage her fear of lifts, and in my own case to deal with a distressing memory. The people who developed NLP were very aware that memories can be altered by questioning. The technique that helped me to 'remember' my memory without pain isn't a million miles from what Barbara was talking about in relation to questioning and memories.

Psychologists often reject things like NLP and Myers-Briggs, forgetting that psychology itself has come a long way since penis envy.

Well said Maximus.

Cheers
Kay

Hey Kay is that you - rmember me...

Just saying Hi ya

One would expect from the genuinely dedicated scholars frequenting this site to elaborate on a far reaching ramifications for our democracy as a result of the willy-nilly carried out Insanity Tests in a Smart State. Where courtesy of the alarm risen by Michael Madigan in The Courier-Mail June 17-18 2006, we have an insight into macabre monstrosities perpetration behind the Iron Curtain. Queensladers are just one allegation away from incarceration in a mental ward, according to a retired Queensland teacher. Ray Collofello, a respected special needs teacher (with no history of mental illness) was forced by police into psychiatric examination in his home.

Apparently Mr Collofello's nightmare wasn't sparked by aberrant behaviour -- it was orchestrated by someone who objected to the 'height of trees in his yard'. Smart State government says, up to 70 similar examinations are carried out every month. Queensland Director of Mental Health Dr Aaron Grove said, there were safeguards to prevent vexatious complains, leading to Justice Examination Orders. But Mr Collofello has found that JEO's are relatively easily obtained, whilst privacy laws protect those who make them. "To be put through something like this is just so incredibly demoralising", he said. "To be forced to answer questions about whether I was suicidal or whether I beat my wife, was just extraordinary".

Under the Mental Health Act, JEOs can be obtained by anyone provided they are able to convince a JP or magistrate to authorise the document, while claiming to believe the subject has a mental illness, thus requiring examination. Doctors or authorised mental health practitioners are then empowered to enter any place to conduct their examination, accompanied by police (if they deem it necessary). Mr Collofello was prompted to go public after revelations in The Courier-Mail about the police officer, who had been forced into a mental health examination after conflict with superiors.

Further to the above canvassed insanity test's episode:

According to Mr Collofello's recollection, he and his wife were preparing lunch for family on Easter Sunday last year, when two Boondall police officers, accompanied by two mental health workers, knocked on the door of their Geebung home and requested Mr Collofello to undergo a mental health examination. Yet mental health workers refused to reveal who was behind the allegations, saying the information was confidential.

Mr Collofello said, the police and mental health workers were polite, professional and apologetic -- when they realised they were dealing with a vexatious complaint. However Mr Collofello is very concerned with other person's fate in similar circumstances, where scenario could be predicated on a negative reaction. "I think of many supported students with lower intelligence in learning, who could become agitated or even violent", he said. As a result ..."they could be forcibly placed in a mental health ward".

To recap chain of events a complaint had been made about the noise in Mr Collofello's house. The complaint also confronted him about the height of trees in his front yard. After months of inquiries, Mr Collofello believes that a same person was responsible for the JEO. One wonders for reader's reaction, bearing in mind that no immediate danger to public or property was ever an issue to justify these draconian powers role.

In reflection on the Smart State's legislative assembly make-up, adamant to churn-out autocratic decrees by stealth (with the representative democracy on mind), whilst civil liberties seem to snooze. Paradoxically, both the person making JEO and the JP or magistrate signing it, must by law genuinely believe such a kind of claims. "It is offence under the Act for a person knowingly give false or misleading information"... Queensland Director of Mental Health Dr Aaron Grove said.

What do we know about this issue that puzzles peoples minds everyday? I mean really do we pay much attention too anything these days? (Except maybe what we do in our everyday lives) We are so wrapped up in listening too what we really want to hear, instead of listening too ourselves. Listening to people gives you the key to relate, but where is your voice or opinion? Do you really understand whats been said? Or do we just listen because we think that's the problem? If you don't take the time to understand how you really feel, then who are we really? Can we say we are human beings. Our minds are so "overpowered" by everyone else's ideas, that eventually we forget about our own. This is why Psychologists come up with the books and theories, because they know that all people want is the answer. If in a book or article is what you find it in, then it's easy because it's given too you. It doesn't mean that what they give you is going to work for you. You need too find out on your own, it's the only way you can deal with it. If we don't do it now we never will and our voices and opinions as human beings are lost.
After all that's what we will always be. So why not give yourself a chance too be an individual, and focus on the voices we have all been given.

Given the above comments, I advocate that we all need to "do something" positive that may at least help others in their life-time.

Introducing 23 "big things" - advocates argue for changes in Mental Health at the National Mental Health Conference in Townsville next month.

Find out more - go to - http://www.themhs.org/
" REACH OUT and CONNECT "
Mental Health Services Conference
29th August - 1st September 9th

To download the 23"big things" look to the right on the front page of the link above.

The 23 "big things" document is the best effort I have seen in a long time...

http://www.miacat.com

hi there miacat!

Of course I remember you. Many thanks for the "23 STUFF" - brilliant. Will get back to you.

Cheers
Kay

Kay, could ya contact me on miacat@miacat.com...pls?
mia

Psychology places the client in their own private little universe and tends to examine past relationships and events, while in the real world we live in a complex social setting with many relationships going on.

I had a very difficult childhood, was developmentally delayed, I was emotionally unprepared for the world. Later on, I spent a fortune on psychological counselling and help and eventually concluded psychology was a self serving crock. I had never even heard a psychologist say anything insightful, brilliant or new.

It is not surprising that a person from this type of background also had poor nutrition, no role models, and low self esteem. This was treated by (a) extensive research and testing to determine what minerals I was lacking, and what brain foods i could benefit from, (b) self esteem can be raised through work, study and quaifications, and eventually a feeling of validation as a result. Vocational psychology is another "science" altogether if you have the bucks.

Only the individual can step outside of all the narrow paradigms and put it all together.

I also wish to comment on that idiot a number of posts back who claimed all criminals had a low IQ. The ones that get caught probably do because they were dumb enough to get caught. This doesn't mean that the rest of us with varying degrees of intelligence are all non-criminal simply because we haven't been caught. Perhaps that poster is a psychologist.