As someone who has been a critic of many of the excesses and
science fiction currently present in clinical psychology, psychiatry, and
psychotherapy, I have often been frustrated by how little attention has been
paid in these professions to the problems that I bring up. Yeah, I know, awwww,
poor me, people won’t listen to me. But aside from my narcissistic injury, a
lot of patients are receiving substandard care due to the alignment of the
forces described in the masthead of my blog.
This excellent and entertaining book by Singal tackles
similar issues that have recently been plaguing experimental and social
psychology. For those who don’t know, the field of academic psychology is
actually two separate fields: clinical psychology, which deals with
psychotherapy and other treatments for people with psychological problems, and
experimental psychology, which studies both normal and abnormal psychology from
an academic perspective. Interestingly, these two branches of the academic
discipline are often very critical of each other, and members often refuse to
communicate with one another.
Singal’s focus is on what he clearly shows is an explosion of overly-simplified ideas about how to change widespread social behavior, which have been widely taken up by politicians, corporations and the media and praised in TED talks, but which are often backed by very weak and inconsistent evidence that was obtained by highly suspect means and invalid experimental designs.
Unfortunately, quick fixes have a strong appeal to human beings who
are often averse to complicated formulations that look at the wide variety of
different influences on human beings that results in their overall behavioral
tendencies.
He tackles such widely-believed ideas as the importance of
self esteem, fear of so-called “super-predators,” and the belief that societal
forces like sexism and racism can be defeated by victims who act as if they
were powerful, have grit, or think positively. He looks at notions of “implicit
bias” that corporations have been using to train their employees to make
themselves feel better about decreasing racism and sexism in their midst—without
actually doing anything about the explicit
biases which are really at the heart of the problem. Let’s focus on repairing
individuals without any reference to the collective forces with which they are
faced! Gee, sounds a lot like my criticism of the current treatment of patients
with personality disorders.
He brings up, often in very humorous ways, frequently ignored issues that are widespread
in psychological research such as self-report bias, third variables that aren’t
even considered, the fundamental attribution error (familiar to my readers),
the file drawer effect (studies which come out negative are not reported so
that the number of positive studies is misleading), the questionable use of p
values, overgeneralizing by ignoring the context in which a research project was
done, range restriction in statistics, the “jangle” fallacy (calling the same
phenomenon by different names), social
desirability considerations in subject self-report, hypothesizing after results
are known to explain away seemingly contradictory results (“HARKing”), the lack
of replication in findings, and “bullet point” bias (oversimplification of
complex situations).
Wow! Highly recommended.
As an aside, some research from the field of cultural psychology indicates that the fundamental attribution error may be an artifact of Western culture (Asians or "Easterners" have the tendency to do the reverse, over-emphasize contextual factors).
ReplyDelete