Postcards from the Id

Book Quote - Defining Hallucinations

"In more contemporary accounts of hallucination, it has been difficult to find an unambiguous definition.  Nonetheless, it is important to agree on a suitable working definition that will guide theory and research, and in describing efforts at reaching such a definition, we will be able to demarcate hallucinations from other phenomena that might share some phenomenological features.  The APA Dictionary of Psychology defined hallucinations as "a false sensory perception that has the compelling sense of reality despite the absence of an external stimulus" (VandenBos, 2007, p. 427; see Exhibit 1.1 for the complete definition).  This certainly captures the essence of a hallucinatory experience, although a more precise description should be possible.  For example, the statement"despite the absence of an external stimulus" might not be entirely accurate, because some hallucinations are triggered by (irrelevant) external stimuli - for example, patients who start hearing voices when the vacuum cleaner is switched on.  Hallucinations have been defined in different ways (see Exhibit 1.1 for a list), although they have a number of elements in common."

- From Hallucinations, The Science of Idiosyncratic Perception, by Andre Aleman and Frank Laroi. pg. 15

Academic Writing: Increasing Productivity

Last week, I posted a few times on the subjects of statistics and research.  I acknowledged then that I have been a consumer of research and journal articles, but I have not done much in producing research, especially since completing my dissertation.  Coincidentally, last week I also started to read How to Write A Lot, by Paul Silvia, Ph.D.  It is a short, direct "how to" guide to increasing one's productivity regarding academic writing.

The book itself is easy to read, both in terms of understanding it, and in its style.  There is no effort here to empathize with the difficulties associated with academic writing: Silvia's attidue is pretty much, "Yes, writing is hard, and often boring/unrewarding/painful.  But, if you want to do it, rather than thinking about doing it without actually doing it, here's what you need to do."  Simple and to-the-point suggestions for being accountable tod increasing productivity are what the book offers.

Right off the bat, in Chapter Two, Silvia hits one nail on the head.  He notes people often have trouble getting their writing done because of various "specious barriers," which he describes as superficially legitimate reasons for not writing, but which "crumble under critical scrutiny."  His very first specious barrier is one I've often succumbed to: "I can't find time to write."  He notes, correctly, that to get anything done in a consistent, productive manner, one needs to schedule time for the task, not find time for it.  We schedule time for that which we prioritize: If we want to write more, we need to schedule time to do so, not simply throw writing in with other lesser tasks that we get around to now and then.  This little section impacted me right away; since I read it, I've been able to take multiple steps towards two different projects I'd been thinking about for some time, but hadn't actually made a move on.  Often, it is not that you don't know something, but that you need it put in your face a certain way, in order to make the information relevant and used.  In this case, How to Write A lot has started me on tasks I'd been pushing off.  I'm looking forward to reading more.

Book Quote - Considerations For The Treatment Of Methamphetamine Addiction

"The motivations and consequences of methamphetamine use examined in previous chapters clearly suggest that treatment models should be holistic in their approach and imbue a biopsychosocial paradigm that considers mind-body connections.  Biopsychosocial methodologies consider the interplay between the intrapsychic and biological processes of persons, their behaviors, the physical and mental health consequences of these behaviors, and individual influences.  Such treatment approaches support the view of addiction as a chronic brain disease (Leshner, 1997).  Specifically, imaging research has concluded that the methamphetamine-addicted brain has depleted dopamine function, reduced cellular activity in the frontal cortex, which affects decision making, and that reduced dopamine receptor levels may create a higher level of vulnerability to methamphetamine abuse and addiction (Fowler, Volkow, Kassed, & Chang, 2007).  Taken together, these elements indicate treatment modalities that underscore the biological elements of addiction, in addition to intrapsychic, behavioral, and environmental processes."

- From Methamphetamine Addiction, by Perry N. Halkitis (pg. 108) 

Good Article Summarizing the Specialization of Forensic Psychology

While in the process of conducting a literature search for a possible area of research interest (yes, I am actually doing, and not just thinking about doing, research-related tasks!), I came across an article published in Volume 39 (2008) of Professional Psychology: Research and Practice (the link provides access to the abstract only).  The article is entitled, "Specialized Practice in Forensic Psychology: Opportunities and Obstacles," and was authored by Ira K. Packer, Ph.D.  I like the article very much as a basic descriptor of what forensic psychology is.

More specifically, the article simultaneously notes that there continues to be a wealth of opportunity for psychologists in the various sub-specialities of forensic psychology, due to a significant need for quality work in the area.  Packer cites various statistics about the numbers of requests for various types of psycho-legal evaluations, and he also provides definitions for terms associated with forensic work. 

In addition, the author provides brief summaries of the most important areas that a clinical psychologist must address if he or she is to engage in forensic-related work.  The article reviews various areas of specialized knowledge, such as developing a conceptualized understanding of the areas related to competency to stand trial, as well as the various measures that have been developed to assit in this type of assessment.  The differences in professional roles between the clinician and evaluator are discussed, as well as the particular issues associated with providing expert testimony.  The importance of developing knowledge of the dinstinctive research associated primarily with forensic work is also reviewed. 

The limited amount of available pre-doctoral, internship, and post-doctoral training in forensic psychology is addressed, and recommendations for supervision in forensic work are offered.  The article, by itself, does not provide in depth detail with respect to a number of these issues; however, it does provide a nice outline for those seeking a basic primer regarding the field of forensic psychology, and what is involved in developing an expertise within this specialization.  I'd recommend it to anyone who who like a summary of the field, as well as some citations related to the topics, to provide for further inquiry, if desired. 

Language Creation for A Game of Thrones

Over at Geekdad, they've posted an interview with David Peterson, who has been charged with creating a new language specifically for the HBO adaptation of George R.R. Martin's A Game of Thrones.  I look forward to watching this eventually, as I don't subscribe to HBO.  I enjoyed the first three books of Martin's series immensely.  I didn't get through my first effort on the fourth book of the series - the main problem was the span of time between the third and fourth books, which was so long I had trouble picking up where the story had left off.  I'll probably go through the whole series again from the beginning at some point, especially now that I see this production being made.  HBO tends to do this sort of thing well, so hopefully the screen version won't disappoint.  The interview is worth a quick read; the linguistics of creating a new language based on a fictional world is interesting (at least to me!).

Nook News

As I mentioned yesterday, I purchased a Nook from Barnes and Noble back in February.  I really like it, and I'll have to post at some point why I chose the Nook over other options.  Here's an article from Techcrunch about the impact the Nook has had on sales for Barnes and Noble - clearly they are trying to stay relevant in the changing landscape of books and technology.  As a commenter notes, eventually the e-reader as a specialized device will likely become irrelevant, but likely not for a few years, anyway.  I know I am certainly satisfied with mine, in part because it doesn't do too much, it simply does what it is supposed to do really well (the last thing I need are additional distractions!).  Any way, I thought this was worth a link...

Statistics - Classification Tests - True Positive Rate

Classification tests are tests used to separate people into separate groups.  In other words, they categorize.  This is different than, say, an IQ test, which is primarily designed to provide information regarding one's various cognities abilities.  yes, IQ tests can be used to classify, but that is not their primary purpose, nor is that the way their data is presented. 

A pregnancy test is more of a classification test - women are separated into two groups, eith "pregnant" or "not pregnant."  With a classification test, we want to be able to differentiate between two groups of individuals as much as we can, without making errors in our classifications.  For example, a pregnancy test with a fifty percent error rate would be pretty useless - you can get those kinds of results simply by flipping a coin.  In addition, we'd have a lot of very upset people who had been wrongly classified. 

This post will briefly define "True Positive Rate."  Simply, the True Positive Rate (TPR) is the proportion of the group of interest who generate a positive score on the classification test being used.  In keeping with the example above, let's say our group of interest is women who are pregnant.  We want to develop the best pregnancy test possible, to include an excellent TPR.  So, let's say that a positive score on our pregnancy test indicates that the test-taker has scored positively - in this case, the test is saying the person is pregnant.  The TPR is the proportion of pregnant women who obtain a positive score when they take the test.  In other words, if the TPR is .8, then out of 100 pregnant women who take this test, 80 will test positive. 

Is this good?  It depends upon multiple factors, including the seriousness of the issue, a comparison to other techniques, etc.  It also depends upon the False Positive Rate (FPR), or how often an individual who does not have the condition also scores positive.  In the current example, if 100 non-pregnant women are administered the test, and 10 test positive (that is, the test says they are pregnant when they are not), then the FPR is .1. 

I doubt these ratios would be acceptable in the case of pregnancy testing, but these types of decisions are made in all sorts of situations, including in psychology.  We can also adjust the cut-off scores to increase the TPR or FPR, with an understanding that manipulating the cut-off score to enhance one rate will also impact the other.  This can get tricky, and it also depends on various factors.    here is one more example.

Let's say there is a new cancer screen, based on blood work.  The screen predicts the development of cancer in the next five years.  It is cheap ($10), easy to administer, and if positive, one can have a more thorough test (%100 accrate) as a follow up for $1000, as well as a series of procedures to then reduce the likelihood of onset by 50%.  In this case, the screen will be set to maximize TPR; we would want to capture as many people who might develop cancer as possible, in order to then administer a readily available follow-up test.  Yes, there will be more false positives, but the temporary anxiety over the possibility of having cancer would be overshadowed by being able to capture all of the people who do have the marker, along with the treatment intervention.  In this case, we would want as many true positives as possible, and tolerate false negatives it would save lives.

Conversely, let's say someone develops a test that categorizes people as "not college material."  Here, we would want the exact opposite, in that we would seek to minimize the incorrect classification of someone not being able to complete college, when they actually would be able to.  The risk of false positives in this case carries the more significant impact; it would be better for more individuals to go to college and ultimately not succeed (but having been given the opportunity to try), than to prevent individuals would would benefit from attending college (and successfully graduating) from ever having the chance.

These are just random hypotheticals, made up in order to demonstrate the importance of TPR and FPR.  In different situations, each can be the primary ratio.  Statistically, the important thing to note is that both measure someone scoring positively for the category being measured, either positive (correctly - TPR) or positive incorrectly - FPR).  The terms associated with scoring negative on classification tests will be (hopefully) addressed in another post.  For a more technical discussion, start here and here.

In Defense of Statistics!!!

In psychology, statistics are studied by most, and disliked by most as well. Rarely will you hear "Awesome! I’ve got Advanced Multivariate Stats this semester!" uttered in graduate schools. The problem for many psychologists and psychology students is simply that they have entered the field to do clinical work, and statistics doesn’t seem all that relevant; it’s sort of like taking a play therapy class if you work in corrections. In some cases, people enter this field because of the interpersonal nature, and non-mathematical nature, of clinical work. For others, math was a negative experience when they were younger, and they have a negative view of it, even though they are now older, and the statistics can be learned in a much more applied than theoretical manner. That is, it’s much harder to grasp the relevance of trigonometry as a teen, than to learn about a particular statistical procedure with an accompanying journal article related to one’s area of interest.

In addition, the advent of statistical software and electronic data gathering in general have rendered statistics and research much more digestible than those dark, pre-computer days. I’m not old enough to remember research before any computers at all, but I do remember stories from grad school, when teachers used to discuss how they would need to create numerous "punch cards" with their data in order to complete calculations, and run the cards through what has been described as precursors to computers; I shudder at the thought, but back then, there was no alternative.

It is this technological advancement that actually makes statistics so much more interesting than before. It’s not only that "doing stats" is easier; as long as you know the right statistics to use, the computer does all the work; the more significant development is that much more complex questions can be asked and answered, due to the wider variety of statistical procedures now available.

Back in the good old days, it seems much multivariate statistical ideas, if they even existed, were theoretical. That’s because the math involved in calculating, by hand, a significant amount of data with these more complicated formulas would take a lifetime. T-tests and, if really bold, ANOVAs were the way to go, if you ever wanted to finish something. But those tests limit the range of ways to examine data. Nowadays, with the processing power available, virtually anyone with access to data can answer questions earlier scientists could have only dreamed about.

Confession: I’ve always been more of a digester of statistics and research, rather than an active researcher. I don’t pretend to even be an expert or specialist in statistics, just someone who finds research important to review, and has occasionally considered crunching my own data at some point (beyond the obligatory dissertation, which was completed long ago). I’m hoping I am at a point where actual data collection related to relevant questions I have is not only available, but possible within the purview of my job. However, until it’s done, there’s really no need to talk about what I "might" do; I just need to do it.

Anyway, for those of you considering the field of mental health, or are already in it in some capacity, there’s no need to shy away from statistics. Yes, sometimes the stuff gets complex, and goes over my head, but understanding the fundamentals can help with understanding research, which can, in turn, pique your interest in your particular clinical, developmental, etc.  area. I know it works this way for me.

A Simpsons - Futurama Crossover? Count Me In!

Omnivoracious reviews a graphic novel crossover of The Simpsons with Futurama.  Needless to say, this looks to be a "no-brainer" purchase... 

Author and Book Review From The Past - Elizabeth H. Boyer

Having owned a Nook since February (an acquisition worth a blog post in its own right), I became interested in what sort of books are available in e-book format, particularly older books. I’m often surprised (and frustrated) by what newer releases aren’t available electronically, but less so for older books, which probably don’t sell as well, and are therefore low on the priority list.

It was during one such ten minute period of random searching that I started entering a few of my favorite authors of my youth. This included Elizabeth Boyer, who wrote several books I very much enjoyed from about 6^th grade on. In particular, The Elves and the Otterskin was re-read numerous times during a period in which I read as much heroic fantasy as I could my hands on.

During those days, getting these types of books was much harder than today, especially for pre-teens and younger teens. Basically, you went to the mall when you had a chance, and perused the three or four bookshelves dedicated to Science Fiction (mostly) and Fantasy (shoved in here and there). Tolkien was always available, obviously, and terry Brooks was starting to take up space, but there were relatively few other choices.

Though not her first book, The Elves and the Otterskin was the first I read. Elizabeth Boyer wrote fantasy that was heavily influenced by Scandinavian culture and folklore. When younger, I had some initial difficulty tracking the various names and places, but much like watching a film with a heavy accent, you catch up with it after a bit. There is no denying Boyer’s talent as a writer. Character development, setting, pacing, plotting - the four books of hers I read (her first four) were all well-written, at least from what I can remember.  In addition, the sense of humor found in her books was superior to most books in this genre - reading her books, you frequently find yourself chuckling.

When I saw that her books were not available on the Nook (no, I really didn’t expect that they would be), I did a regular online search. Sadly, I saw that her books are all out of print, though they are available used. I also noticed via Wikipedia Ms. Boyer ended up publishing 11 books, much more than I had realized. She published from 1980-1995, when she apparently stopped writing (or at least publishing). There was a three-year break in her books from 1983-1986, which means I had probably moved on at that point, after reading her initial four books. Wikipedia notes that she was an early pioneer of "mass-market fantasy," but her specialized writing prevented her from achieving a wider acceptance.

After this bit of research, I scavenged the basement, looking through old paperbacks I’ve kept over the years. The collection gets smaller and smaller, but I did turn up my old copy of The Elves and the Otterskin! None of the others remain, however. I read the book again for the first time in at least 20 years, and it has held up remarkably well. Older now, I can appreciate more the Scandinavian influences and how they enhance the story. This is a book I will definitely encourage my kids to read once they’re a bit older. In the meantime, I may "need" to go on a bit of a quest of my own, to see if I can track down some of her other books, both the early ones I read as a kid, and the later ones I am unfamiliar with.

Poking around the Internet, there isn't much about Boyer.  Several short biographies note she attended BYU, and that she moved to a farm near Atlanta after her writing career.  A short bio can be read here and here.  Also, the reviews of The Elves and the Otterskin on Amazon pretty much say it all, though you can read another description here, that also has a different cover image than my copy.  If I end up reading anything else by Ms. Boyer, I'll write a follow-up post.  In the meantime, I'll simply note that I loved her books growing up, and only wish she were still publishing.