Psychologist admits to faking dozens of scientific studies

reply to post by boymonkey74


Go to any V.A. You will see your thousands in one day!!!

Originally posted by Noey777
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

Go to any V.A. You will see your thousands in one day!!!

Sorry what's a VA?

reply to post by boymonkey74


Veterans Administration for soldiers after the wars and service to their country

reply to post by Noey777


That's not true. If a clinical psychologist recommends medication it is in conjunction with psychotherapy. In many cases things like CBT have a higher success rate and lower recitivism rate than medication. Used together however the results can be truly phenomenal.

reply to post by Noey777

Ah right, but you could argue that they didnt get the right treatment because of funding.
Iam in the UK and we are funded by the NHS and metal health is so underfunded it's scary here's a good article about it.

news.bbc.co.uk...

You could also argue that they didn't get the right treatment because society doesn't like to admit that people get mentally ill, we don't like to think off being mentally ill its almost a taboo subject.
Here is a good little blog by someone who is mentally ill
nicoleisbetter.com...

Originally posted by Noey777

Really every single psychologist gives input and suggestions to the psychiatrist on what the problem is and how they should deal with it chemically.

The only psychologists that work with psychiatrists are clinnical pyychologists and they have zero input on prescribing drugs professionally speaking as they dont have the medical background to make such a decision and saying that they do is nothing more than fanciful.

Psychologist dont believe in drugs, they go after the root problem in mental health issues and simply dont use a drug as a bandaide.

If you know a psychologist prescribing medication, you should call the authorities because its 100% illegal.

Well now this is a surprise. Kind of reminds me of people coming out about ufo's or the governments interaction with e.t's.(despite the validity of those claims) In theory though i think it makes sense that alot of this stuff was basically forged. Get people to beleive a false concept, and than they all start living by it because it makes sense.......because it was a scientist that told us about it, and hes a trained specialist. Some say psychology is the new god, and if these claims prove to be true than that may spell disaster for some people. Their whole perception of reality is going to be thrown out the window..........or maybe it will just change slightly and adapting to it won't be all too hard. Only time will tell.

Millions of innocent animals have been tortured & murdered so maggots like this can smile at you and say you need this medication .....
They should stick electrodes in their own *^$# brains ... sadist scumbags

reply to post by PhoenixOD


Psychologist are only there to make matters worse or to attempt to understand how the human brain works through words and how to make it worse. That is my opinion.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


Goodness people!

Let's take a look at what the wayward professor wrote about-- what kind of research he "undertook." Here are some article titles:

* When and how beauty sells: Priming, conditioning, and persuasion processes.
* When high similarity copycats lose and moderate similarity copycats gain: The impact of comparative evaluation.
* Reflection vs. self-reflection: Sources of self-enhancement determine behavioral outcomes.
* Happiness as alchemy: Positive mood leads to self-serving responses to social comparisons.
* Power increases dehumanization.
* Racist biases in legal decisions are reduced by a justice focus.
* The norm-activating power of celebrity: The dynamics of success and influence.
* Me tomorrow, the others later: How perspective fit increases sustainable behavior.

See anything profound?

These things are tripe for most of us. They have NOTHING to do with therapy.

If you are an advertiser, marketing type, corporate consultant, or a sociologists and looking for something to support or reject a theory, these are the sorts of articles you look at and footnote in your own work. That is about the extent his work can have.

Therapists don't find these types of articles useful, they have zero effect on diagnosis, make no therapeutic changes and, down to the specific: They will not come up, at all, in matters dealing with patients.

reply to post by Frira

Star for you.
But because he is a "Psychologist" people are commenting in this post slagging off all the good work that other Psychologist's do.....he could of been a business psychologist but people just read Psychologist and assume he treats the sick..
Iam not saying the field is perfect, far from it but it is a new science and we have to start somewhere, maybe if the original news source or title or the OP explained in better detail what he did we wouldn't have people posting stuff against people who are just trying to help the ill get better..

Originally posted by jewdiful

LOL, i also had an existential crisis. and i came to the conclusion of a complete revision, of my previous idea's. It wasnt fearfull or crazy, it was fundenmental to shaping me. However my mother was not so lucky, she held on to her belife system to the very end. She fought her soul, and thus i say to you that she went crazy. In my opinion at times, it is more easy to fight, then to give in.

edit on 3-11-2011 by TechniXcality because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-11-2011 by TechniXcality because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-11-2011 by TechniXcality because: (no reason given)

I received your PM about this but apparently I'm not allowed to send private messages yet, don't think I've reached the post threshold

Anyway though, I hope it didn't come across that I was attacking you or anything, I suppose I'm just sensitive about the notion of existential crises in general based on my own experiences. I mean, I suppose your Mom could have had one but failed to successfully resolve it like we have

I think whether it's easier to fight the process or become defeated by it is determined by an interplay of several variables, one being an individual's level of personal fortitude/determination.

oh no, no offense was taken i just found it an intresting subject and didnt want to derail the thread. Thnx

Science is corrupted to the bones by money.

Sad thing since science is the way to go.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by satron

 

Now then just because this guy has faked papers lets not assume everyone else has, while I do agree we are labeling to many things to mental illness (The area I work in) lets not forget that it affects 1 in 3 of us during our life times.
I see a trend of people going on about the Med's and I think Med's do work it's just a lot harder to find the right one's for each patient.
Also a big problem is self medication and people going on the internet to diagnose themselves.
Just because he is a bad apple don't think everyone else is.
The psychiatric professionals I have met are 100% dedicated to getting people better and do a job what most people could not.
Edit just saw the OP headline and then they guy's comments on med's but my post is still right

edit on 2-11-2011 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

Been brainwashed by your profession much?

Originally posted by Noey777

Originally posted by michaelmcclen
Can I make one thing very clear, psychology has zero, zilch to do with handing out medication unless studying the placebo effect or studying the effect of meds on patients and their surroundings.....Everyone that states psychology has a drug pushing agenda has no idea how the field of psychology works...

Psychologists study cause and effect nothing more and nothing less.....

For thoes that call it hocus and not a science again have nothing to add, yes alot of psychology is theory but alot has been proven using labatory techniques so at the least there is real hard core evidence that psychology is a social science at least in some respects.

Really every single psychologist gives input and suggestions to the psychiatrist on what the problem is and how they should deal with it chemically. They may not write the scripts but for the most part they certainly have say.

Sorry but the only way I can put this is that your statement is ignorant ill informed bull. A person who goes to see a psychologist doesn't even have to say If they've seen or are seeing a psychiatrist and not one bit of personal info is shared without the ok of the patient. And that would only be in the form of a referal.

If you're on antidepressants a psychologist needs to know in order to better gauge your emotional state ( so he knows you're propped up and doesn't rate your mental state as being better than it is)

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by steveknows

 

Yours is one of overreaction. No one is scrapping the field. The question is only as the one asking it perceives the question to be.

See, the way science is done is that you have to agree for the most part with your fellow academians. If you fly in their faces, like this chappy here, this is what you get. The guy who is the subject of this thread though did what he needed to for his survival. He got away with it pretty well too, you have to admit! But the question that arises from this is simply "What is Science looking for?" Do we submit to dogmatic practitioners or do we demand absolute rigor? It seems that many tend to rest too easily on their laurels.

Make the question relevant and chances are you'll get a relevant answer.

Have you read any of the posts? Or do you just like to have things spelled out to you? There's people on here calling it junk science so they're scrapping the concept even if one day they might need it to save their life. And tools who encourage the attitute are right up there with the tools who encourage people to not get inoculated against disease.

And. suprise suprise, your'e wrong about how science is endorsed. Fellow academians have to "agree with you" ( not the other way around as you've falsely stated) in order for any scientific conclusion you have to be endorsed by them and they don't just agree. They go away and recreate what lead you to your conclusion and "if" they agree then they will endorse you.

I think the biggest crime here is how the peer review system failed to spot any sort of fakery. Ive never trusted the peer review system to do its job in an unbiased way. If it can happen for this field then it could happen for any field of science.

I would just like to add that the stigma here agaunst mental health professionals is why so many people never seek the treatment they desperately need. I mean there are people with REAL mental health problems that NEED help. But most of you would rather sit back and watch and say 'thats just the way they are' then actually helping them take steps to improve their quality of life. You lot are no better than parents who take their kids to faith healers instead of medical professionals. End rant.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Not really a huge social psychology fan or anything like that, but that aside what this man did was monstrous. I mean how much money did this guy blow? Money that was thought to be going to the better understanding of how we as humans work under the hood. Oh and I know it's off topic so please forgive me, but for all of you talking about pharmaceuticals and corporations shoving them down our throats, here's a golden oldie, or possibly something you haven't seen yet



www.youtube.com...

So yeah, scientists totally have our best interests in mind. . .

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I think the biggest crime here is how the peer review system failed to spot any sort of fakery. Ive never trusted the peer review system to do its job in an unbiased way. If it can happen for this field then it could happen for any field of science.

What would your answer to that be? I can't think of any other way myself. A person would need to know what they're doing in order to review it. I mean you can't get a dentist to assess the research of a quantum physicist
and have them try to replicate the findings and vis versa.

Mind you peer review is international. It's not a case of your mates in the lab next door doing it. As soon as you release a paper the study is replicated all over the world if there's reason for it meaning that if it's ground breaking or perhaps hard to swallow the scientific community worldwide is going to have a very close look at it.

People are going on about the actions of this one person but has anyone botherd to research and see if there's papers released anywhere in the would conflicting with him? Has anyone checked to see if other people in the world in that field at the time of his publications said to him boo hoo your'e wrong?