Category: Psychology

“A thought comes when it will, not when I will.” – Nietzsche, quoted in Solomon (2003).

Nietzsche’s quote raises an important question about both thoughts and, implicitly, about emotions. Many people would say their emotions only come when they will and not when they want. So how do thoughts and emotions interact in everyday life and in therapeutic processes like cognitive behavioural therapy? Do we really have any control over our emotions or are they things that just happen to us?

Continue reading “Emotional Truth: The Search Starts Here”

We all rely on experts to make correct and consistent decisions: from medical professionals to fingerprint experts. We’d like to think these decisions are unaffected by their often highly charged emotional contexts, but is that really the case?

On the 11 March 2004 thirteen bombs were loaded onto commuter trains at Alcala de Henares station, 40km outside Madrid. Not long after, ten of them exploded killing 191 people and wounding more than 1,700. Using a fingerprint found on a plastic bag filled with detonators, the FBI, with automated computer matching and experienced experts, obtained and confirmed a positive identification with a US citizen, Brandon Mayfield. Mayfield, a recent convert to Islam, appeared to fit the bill perfectly and he was immediately arrested and imprisoned.

Continue reading “Fingerprints, Experts and Emotions”

The beauty of a novel is it can transport you inside someone else’s mind. Even the dreariest hack has to be on nodding terms with human psychology in order to pump out a half-decent airport novel. Few novelists, though, worship at psychology’s altar with the vehemence of J. G. Ballard. And few others can, in my view, match Ballard for his uniquely exhilarating and often equally disturbing results. Frequently referred to as the ‘Seer of Shepperton’ Ballard is a keen observer of all that makes us human, using his novels almost as laboratories in which he can pose questions about humanity.

Continue reading “J. G. Ballard, The Psychologist”

The BPS Research Digest recently drew my attention to a study published in Personality and Individual Differences, which has relevance for all types of psychological research. It asks a fundamental question: what types of people participate in research?

Continue reading “Why Do People Participate in Research?”

As promised the unity debate continues (start here) with a look at the whole second issue in the Journal of Clinical Psychology. Rather than summarising the articles – you can read the abstracts yourself – I’ve given each one a (very) short and personal review which will hopefully point the generalist in the right direction for further reading.

Continue reading “Unity: Toward a Useful Mass Movement”

Here’s a subject close to my heart: cycling. Not least because I’m a keen cyclist myself but also because cycling is good in so many different ways – but I’m not going to bang on about that now. This study, however, has some counter-intuitive findings (the best kind!) about helmet wearing that seems to suggest cars pass closer if you’ve got a lid on. Also, and in stark contrast to conventional wisdom among experienced cyclists, riding further away from the curb does not cause road users to leave more space when over-taking.

Continue reading “Vehicles Pass Closer to Helmeted Cyclists”

For those of you finding the discussion on unity in psychology a little dry (surely not!?!), I have good news: this is the penultimate post in the series. In the next I will foolishly attempt to summarise and comment on all of the articles in the second special issue of the Journal of Clinical Psychology. This is not, of course, the end of the discussion, just the beginning, but simply touching on this subject has opened my eyes to a wealth of debates within psychology. I want to reflect on this briefly.

Continue reading “Reflecting on Unity”

Stanovich (2004a) agrees with two central points of Henriques’ argument (start here). Firstly that human cognitive architecture can be split into ‘two broad domains’: quick-acting, unconscious parallel processes and logical-analytic processing, which is linear, slower and conscious. Secondly, Stanovich (2004a) agrees that the differences between humans and other animals are central to psychology.

Continue reading “Unity: Support From Cognitive Science”

The harshest criticism I’ve yet read of Henriques’ bid to unify psychology (starting here) comes from Stephen Yanchar. He sees Henriques’ work as an attempt to repackage extant theoretical perspectives and sidestep critical reflection.

Yanchar (2004) draws attention to the literature that cautions against unification. Indeed, the idea of unity would ‘force psychology into a theoretical straightjacket’. Henriques’ model is described as: ‘rigid’, ‘exclusive’ and ‘disciplinary agenda setting’. More important than unification, for Yanchar (2004:1280) is: “…a continual dialogue among psychologists from diverse research communities,” and, “…the pursuit of truth…”

Continue reading “Unity: Avoiding Critical Reflection?”