Fairly Criticized, or Politicized? Conflicts in the Neuroscience of Sex Differences in the Human Brain

Investigations of sex differences in the human brain take place on politically sensitive terrain. While some scholars express concern that gendered biases and stereotypes remain embedded in scientific research, others are alarmed about the politicization of science. To help better understand these debates, this review sets out three kinds of conflicts that can arise in the neuroscience of sex differences: academic freedom versus gender equality; frameworks, background assumptions, and dominant methodologies; and inductive risk and social values. The boundaries between fair criticism and politicization are explored for each kind of conflict, pointing to ways in which the academic community can facilitate fair criticism while protecting against politicization.

Family-Related Stress versus External Stressors: Differential Impacts on Alcohol and Illicit Drug Use in Young Men

Intense stress increases substance use (SU). However, little is known about the extent to which distinctive forms of stress should be weighted with regard to their effects on SU. This study aimed to determine whether family-related stress factors (FSF) influenced SU in a different way than external stress factors (ESF). Data was drawn from a Swiss cohort study on SU risk factors (C-SURF), involving 5,308 young adult men. Twelve month use of alcohol and of illicit substances was assessed. FSF and ESF for the time period preceding SU were measured. FSF and ESF were both significantly associated with SU. FSF had a greater impact on the use of most substances than did ESF. The FSF with the strongest association with SU was lack of parental monitoring. Regarding ESF, the cumulative number of stressful external events had a higher impact on SU than previous physical or sexual assault by a stranger. In contrast, physical or sexual assault by a family member was not found to be associated with subsequent SU. These findings have important implications for SU prevention programmes focusing on male teenagers, as it is difficult to screen and intervene in subtle forms of maltreatment in families.

Politics or paranoia: Reading between the lines when undertaking social research studies

Although reports of political issues in social research were popular in the 1960s and 1970s, more recent accounts of nursing research largely neglect this area. This paper highlights such political issues, offering guidance to help equip researchers to deal with these.

Published reports of research studies necessarily present a linear account of how, and how well, the research question was answered. It is rare for research to follow so straightforward a path, because interwoven is a little discussed, but not uncommon, political arena. Standard texts offer plenty of guidance on research ethics, but there is little advice to help researchers walking a thin line between diverse political elements. This paper draws on the literature and provides examples from the authors' research to illustrate some of the key political scenarios researchers may face. The advantages and disadvantages of insider/outsider status are discussed in order to present a 'matrix of involvement' to illustrate key issues. It is suggested that as the pressure to undertake funded research rises there is likely to be an exponential increase in the complex political environments in which research takes place. This paper offers some pointers towards reading between the political lines and navigating research successfully towards a conclusion.

You'll Never Guess Who Wrote That: 78 Surprising Authors of Psychological Publications

One can find psychological authors in the most unexpected places. We present a capsule summary of scholarly publications of psychological interest authored or coauthored by 78 surprising individuals, most of whom are celebrities or relatives of celebrities, historical figures, or people who have otherwise achieved visibility in academic circles, politics, religion, art, and diverse realms of popular culture. Still other publications are authored by individuals who are far better known for their contributions to popular than to academic psychology. The publications, stretching across more than two centuries, encompass a wide swath of domains of psychological inquiry and highlight the intersection of psychology with fields that fall outside its traditional borders, including public health, economics, law, neurosurgery, and even magic. Many of these scholarly contributions have enriched psychology and its allied disciplines, such as psychiatry, in largely unappreciated ways, and they illustrate the penetration of psychological knowledge into multiple scientific disciplines and everyday life. At the same time, our author list demonstrates that remarkable intellectual accomplishments in one scientific domain, such as physics, do not necessarily translate into success in psychology and underscores the distinction between intelligence, on the one hand, and critical thinking and wisdom, on the other.

Why many clinical psychologists are resistant to evidence-based practice: root causes and constructive remedies

Psychotherapists are taught that when a client expresses resistance repeatedly, they must understand and address its underlying sources. Yet proponents of evidence-based practice (EBP) have routinely ignored the root causes of many clinical psychologists' reservations concerning the use of scientific evidence to inform clinical practice. As a consequence, much of the resistance to EBP persists, potentially widening the already large scientist-practitioner gap. Following a review of survey data on psychologists' attitudes toward EBP, we examine six sources underpinning resistance toward EBP in clinical psychology and allied domains: (a) naïve realism, which can lead clinicians to conclude erroneously that client change is due to an intervention itself rather than to a host of competing explanations; (b) deep-seated misconceptions regarding human nature (e.g., mistaken beliefs regarding the causal primacy of early experiences) that can hinder the adoption of evidence-based treatments; (c) statistical misunderstandings regarding the application of group probabilities to individuals; (d) erroneous apportioning of the burden of proof on skeptics rather than proponents of untested therapies; (e) widespread mischaracterizations of what EBP entails; and (f) pragmatic, educational, and attitudinal obstacles, such as the discomfort of many practitioners with evaluating the increasingly technical psychotherapy outcome literature. We advance educational proposals for articulating the importance of EBP to the forthcoming generation of clinical practitioners and researchers, and constructive remedies for addressing clinical psychologists' objections to EBP.

A Vast Graveyard of Undead Theories

Publication bias remains a controversial issue in psychological science. The tendency of psychological science to avoid publishing null results produces a situation that limits the replicability assumption of science, as replication cannot be meaningful without the potential acknowledgment of failed replications. We argue that the field often constructs arguments to block the publication and interpretation of null results and that null results may be further extinguished through questionable researcher practices. Given that science is dependent on the process of falsification, we argue that these problems reduce psychological science’s capability to have a proper mechanism for theory falsification, thus resulting in the promulgation of numerous “undead” theories that are ideologically popular but have little basis in fact.

Deinstitutionalizing the history of contemporary psychiatry

While contemporary mental health services have been marked by the burgeoning of outpatient and preventive care, the historiography of psychiatry remains largely tied to the study of custodial and palliative treatment.The work in which contemporary psychiatry has been involved cannot be adequately understood as a singular, autonomous enterprise based in a residential facility. It has become a technoscience that operates in numerous settings and alongside multiple sciences, technologies and decision-makers. This paper explores what it might mean to 'deinstitutionalize' the history of contemporary psychiatry by examining the case of social therapy for sex offenders in West Germany.

Onanism and child sexual abuse: a comparative study of two hypotheses

For some decades now in the West, there has been a growing social anxiety with regard to a phenomenon which has become known as child sexual abuse (CSA). This anxiety is fed by scientific theories whose cornerstone is the assessment of these experiences as necessarily harmful, due to their presumed serious consequences for the present and future lives of the minors involved in them. This principle, widely held by experts and laypersons alike, was also part and parcel of the danger presumably posed by Onanism, a phenomenon which occupied a similar position in society and medical science in the West during the eighteenth through twentieth centuries. The present work is a comparative review of these two hypotheses and the central objective was to compare the evolution and fundamental elements of the two hypotheses in light of what history tells us about Onanism theory. This comparative analysis will allow a critical look at the assumptions of the CSA hypothesis in order to make evident the similarities to the conceptual model that enabled the Onanism hypothesis in the past.

From Knowledge Production to Implementation: Research Challenges and Imperatives

As evidence-based practice is increasingly accepted in social work, the challenges associated with its actual implementation become more apparent and pressing. This article identifies implementation as a critical issue for research; implementation itself must be better understood if evidence-based practices are to be used and resultant improvements to practice are to be realized. Social work needs to engage more fully in (a) service system research and (b) implementation research, each of which complements and has potential to extend the benefits of efficacy and effectiveness research. Service system research can enhance the fit of empirically supported treatments to the needs of real-world practice and thus facilitate their implementation. Implementation studies examine the acceptability of evidence-based interventions, the feasibility and likelihood of their sustained use, and the decision-support procedures that can help practitioners apply probabilistically based, empirically supported treatments to the individual case in real-world practice.

Publication visibility of sensitive public health data: when scientists bury their results

What happens when the scientific tradition of openness clashes with potential societal risks? The work of American toxic-exposure epidemiologists can attract media coverage and lead the public to change health practices, initiate lawsuits, or take other steps a study's authors might consider unwarranted. This paper, reporting data from 61 semi-structured interviews with U.S. toxic-exposure epidemiologists, examines whether such possibilities shaped epidemiologists' selection of journals for potentially sensitive papers. Respondents manifested strong support for the norm of scientific openness, but a significant minority had or would/might, given the right circumstances, publish sensitive data in less visible journals, so as to prevent unwanted media or public attention. Often, even those advocating such limited "burial" upheld openness, claiming that less visible publication allowed them to avoid totally withholding the data from publication. However, 15% of the sample had or would, for the most sensitive types of data, withhold publication altogether. Rather than respondents explaining their actions in terms of an expected split between "pure science" and "social advocacy" models, even those publishing in the more visible journals often described their actions in terms of their "responsibility". Several practical limitations (particularly involving broader access to scientific literature via the Internet) of the strategy of burial are discussed, and some recommendations are offered for scientists, the media, and the public.

Progress and controversy in the study of posttraumatic stress disorder

Research on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been notable for controversy as well as progress. This article concerns the evidence bearing on the most contentious issues in the field of traumatic stress: broadening of the definition of trauma, problems with the dose-response model of PTSD, distortion in the recollection of trauma, concerns about "phony combat vets," psychologically toxic guilt as a traumatic stressor, risk factors for PTSD, possible brain-damaging effects of stress hormones, recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse, and the politics of trauma.

Toxic mold and mycotoxins in neurotoxicity cases: Stachybotrys, Fusarium, Trichoderma, Aspergillus, Penicillium, Cladosporium, Alternaria, Trichothecenes

Presented is the argument that psychologists and neuropsychologists have no scientific basis for rendering opinions about causation given the current state of the literature. The critical question is whether in a residence or office inhalation of mold spores or mold metabolites, including mycotoxins, causes neuropsychological impairment or mental and emotional disorders. There has not been sufficient research to support such conclusions. Nonetheless, in the context of litigation, speculative opinions are rendered in lieu of scientifically well-founded conclusions. Resources for recognizing and coping with pseudoscientific arguments are suggested.

Five commandments for APA

The author delineates 5 rules of scientific review and publishing and argues that these norms need to be upheld even when to do so proves politically difficult. The 5 rules are: (a) Scientific articles should be judged only by their logic and the strength of their evidence; (b) the results of a competent peer review should be accepted; (c) disagreements with scientific articles should be aired in peer reviewed commentaries; (d) efforts to judge scientific articles on the basis of political concerns should be resisted; and (e) the explicit rules and normative expectations of peer review should not be arbitrarily altered.