Psychology and Science Summer Reading List 2012
I had a few questions asking for psychology and general science book recommendations for summer reading lists. I started to put together a list of books that I have read, but I thought why not put it to all the psychology and science fanatics on tumblr for a more complete and fantastic list of books to check out this summer.
So I’m putting it back on you, tumblrs and tumblerettes. Please submit, ask, or even reply with any book from psychology, sociology, philosophy, criminology, anthropology, neuroscience, astronomy, physics, paleontology, astrophysics, biology, biochemistry, anatomy, geology, political science, zoology, technology, epistemology, meteorology, medicine, botany, mathematics, chemistry, cosmology, forensic science, general science, or any other field of science that I didn’t list off.
I am confident that all of our accomplished researchers and scientists, along with all of the budding scholars can put together an amazing and thorough list that everyone can look to for summer reading material. I’ll give it a week, and then I will compile everyone’s suggestions into a complete list.Or you can just ignore this, but I will be rebloggoing this over and over again, so just submit!
Image credit: Bibliophile: A lover and collector of books. (by eRachel11)
SUBMIT YOUR FAVORITE PSYCHOLOGY OR SCIENCE BOOKS!
(via approachingsignificance)
The Price Of College Tuition, In 1 Graphic
1. Sticker price is the full price colleges list in their brochures and on their websites.
2. Net price is the price students actually pay. Net price accounts for the fact that many students receive grants or scholarships. So it can be considerably lower than sticker price.
Quick example. Say you go to a school where the sticker price is $25,000 a year. You get a $10,000-a-year grant. The net price for you — the part you have to pay for through loans, work and family contributions — is $15,000 a year.
Notes: Prices do not include room and board. Numbers are adjusted for inflation in constant 2011 dollars.
Psychology and Science Summer Reading List 2012
I had a few questions asking for psychology and general science book recommendations for summer reading lists. I started to put together a list of books that I have read, but I thought why not put it to all the psychology and science fanatics on tumblr for a more complete and fantastic list of books to check out this summer.
So I’m putting it back on you, tumblrs and tumblerettes. Please submit, ask, or even reply with any book from psychology, sociology, philosophy, criminology, anthropology, neuroscience, astronomy, physics, paleontology, astrophysics, biology, biochemistry, anatomy, geology, political science, zoology, technology, epistemology, meteorology, medicine, botany, mathematics, chemistry, cosmology, forensic science, general science, or any other field of science that I didn’t list off.
I am confident that all of our accomplished researchers and scientists, along with all of the budding scholars can put together an amazing and thorough list that everyone can look to for summer reading material. I’ll give it a week, and then I will compile everyone’s suggestions into a complete list.Or you can just ignore this, but I will be rebloggoing this over and over again, so just submit!
Image credit: Bibliophile: A lover and collector of books. (by eRachel11)
Psychology and Science Summer Reading List 2012
I had a few questions asking for psychology and general science book recommendations for summer reading lists. I started to put together a list of books that I have read, but I thought why not put it to all the psychology and science fanatics on tumblr for a more complete and fantastic list of books to check out this summer.
So I’m putting it back on you, tumblrs and tumblerettes. Please submit, ask, or even reply with any book from psychology, sociology, philosophy, criminology, anthropology, neuroscience, astronomy, physics, paleontology, astrophysics, biology, biochemistry, anatomy, geology, political science, zoology, technology, epistemology, meteorology, medicine, botany, mathematics, chemistry, cosmology, forensic science, general science, or any other field of science that I didn’t list off.
I am confident that all of our accomplished researchers and scientists, along with all of the budding scholars can put together an amazing and thorough list that everyone can look to for summer reading material. I’ll give it a week, and then I will compile everyone’s suggestions into a complete list.
Or you can just ignore this, but I will be rebloggoing this over and over again, so just submit!
Image credit: Bibliophile: A lover and collector of books. (by eRachel11)
Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, Noted Psychiatrist, Apologizes for Study on Gay ‘Cure’ ⇢
This happened.
Dr. Robert Spitzer was a pretty prominent advocate for removing homosexuality from the DSM decades ago. He began studying reparative therapy and published his controversial study, which claimed that reparative therapy could be successful for “highly motivated” individuals that wanted to covert from homosexuality to heterosexuality. Years later, he know regrets his actions and is now aplogizing.
I believe I owe the gay community an apology for my study making unproven claims of the efficacy of reparative therapy. I also apologize to any gay person who wasted time and energy undergoing some form of reparative therapy because they believed that I had proven that reparative therapy works with some “highly motivated” individuals.
It is interesting to note that the original article was only published on the grounds that the publisher was going to print commentaries from other psychologists that opposed his “study.” The original study was full of experimental flaws and Dr. Spitzer made some curious assumptions and conclusions from his study.
One note: the NYTimes article linked above claims that “Dr. Spitzer could not control how his study was interpreted by everyone,” and while this is inherently true, all researchers have and obligation to ensure that their study is interpreted appropriately and have a duty to publicly correct any misinterpretations that may arise from their work. He declined to do so.
Read the draft of apology here.
Numbers: The Majority of Minors Have Faced Mental Illness ⇢
Not surprised by these figures at all.
82.5: The percentage of children and young adults who exhibit significant symptoms of mental illness at some point between the ages of 9 and 21.
The startling statistic comes from a collaborative study conducted by Duke University and the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, which surveyed 1,420 children over 12 years beginning in 1993. Investigators checked in up to nine times to test for anxiety, depression, addiction, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and more.
The results: 61.1 percent met the diagnostic criteria for mental illness during at least one appointment, while an additional 21.4 percent had problems bad enough to interfere with school, social life, or family relations.
“We have to destigmatize the idea of mental disorder. We shouldn’t be surprised that the brain has problems, just like the rest of the body.”
The Gruesome History of Eating Corpses as Medicine
The question was not “Should you eat human flesh?” says one historian, but, “What sort of flesh should you eat?”
Love these pieces.
The Marshmallow Test
Kids are given the option to either 1) eat a marshmallow, or 2) sit in front of the marshmallow alone and wait for the adult to come back and receive 2 marshmallows.
The reactions are great.
Psychologists are so cruel; I love it.
I just wanted to see this video again.
8 Myths About Scientists
I stumbled across this in Thick Books and Thin Films by Adam Ruben. Pretty good.
Myth #1: Scientists frequently make “breakthroughs.”
Truth: Scientific discovery is agonizingly slow. The only time I’ve ever run naked through the streets yelling “Eureka!” is when I forgot to refill my prescription.
Myth #2: Scientists work in isolation.
Truth: Scientists are even prouder of setting up collaborations than they are of actual results. Most scientific talks end with a slide listing all collaborators like little badges of honor—and the less similar the collaborator’s field, the prouder the scientist. “Well, you know, I might have discovered a cure for tuberculosis,” a scientist will say, “but what I’m really excited about is this new collaboration with an Icelandic poet!”
Myth #3: Scientists possess useful skills.
Truth: Scientists possess useful laboratory skills. But you should never allow a physicist to wire your house.
Myth #4: Scientists follow the scientific method as it was taught in high school: Observation, Question, Research, Hypothesis, Experiment, Conclusion.
Truth: In reality, the way scientists work is more like: Fiddle Around, Find Something Weird, Retest It, It Doesn’t Happen a Second Time, Get Distracted Trying to Make It Happen Again, Go to Chipotle, Recall the Original Purpose of Your Research, Start Over, Apply for Funding for a Better Instrument, Publish Some Interim Fluff, Learn That Someone Has Scooped You, Take Your Lab in a New Direction, Apply for Funding for the New Direction, Collaborate With an Icelandic Poet, Eat Chipotle With an Icelandic Poet, Co-Write Scientifically Accurate Ode to Walrus, Get Interested in Something Unrelated, Apply for Funding for Something Unrelated, Notice That 20 Years Have Passed.
Myth #5: Experiments always yield data that teach or reveal something.
Truth: Let’s say you’re doing an experiment with five mice. These particular mice will turn either yellow or blue. So you walk into the lab expecting to see five yellow mice, which will point to one explanation, or five blue mice, which will point to the other. Instead you would see one yellow mouse, one green mouse, one striped mouse, one plaid mouse (dead), and one mouse that has somehow sewn himself a little blue jacket, though he doesn’t wear it all the time.
Myth #6: A personal tragedy can turn a scientist evil.
Truth: Very few scientists are legitimately evil, though the number rises if you ask graduate students to characterize their advisers. Besides, it’s hard to be truly evil when you don’t have any practical skills.
Myth #7: A scientist can be proficient in all branches of science.
Truth: Exactly what discipline did the professor from Gilligan’s Island specialize in? Chemistry? Mechanical engineering? Coconut-based transistor radio construction? Any time a problem needed solving or a device needed building, the professor knew exactly how to do it. That guy could make anything. Except a boat.
People who don’t understand science assume that scientists can master any subfield. That’s why we’re often asked for our opinions about scientific news items, and we can only reply, “Uh … sorry … I know I’m a molecular phylogeneticist, and this story was about molecular phylogenetics, but, well, I’m a different kind of molecular phylogeneticist.”
Myth #8: Scientists are not sexy beasts.
Truth: Scientists are indeed sexy beasts. Not only do our lab coats make us look dapper and charming, those same coats look even better strewn unceremoniously over a standing lamp while we make passionate love to you.
The decline of the serial killer.
Serial killers just aren’t the sensation they used to be. They haven’t disappeared, of course.
But the number of serial murders seems to be dwindling, as does the public’s fascination with them. “It does seem the golden age of serial murderers is probably past,” says Harold Schechter, a professor at Queens College of the City University of New York who studies crime.
As the raw numbers have declined, the media have paid less attention, too. Sure, you’ve still got the occasional Beltway sniper or Grim Sleeper who terrorizes a community. But nothing in the last decade has captured the popular imagination like the sex-addled psychopaths of the ’70s and ’80s, such as Ted Bundy (feigned injuries to win sympathy before killing women; about 30 victims), John Wayne Gacy (stored bodies in his ceiling crawlspace; 33 victims), or Jeffrey Dahmer (kept body parts in his closet and freezer; 17 victims). These crimes caused media frenzies in part because of the way they tapped into the obsessions and fears of the time: Bundy, a golden boy who worked on Nelson Rockefeller’s presidential campaign in Seattle, seemed to represent the evil lurking beneath America’s cheery exterior. Gacy, who dressed up as a clown and preyed on teenage boys, was every parent’s nightmare.
Very intriguing thought. There does seem to be declining numbers of serial killers, but more importantly, or at least more interestingly, there does seem to be less fascination with serial killers as a collective whole.
We’ve seen them before. Yes, they might differ in their modus operandi a little, but essentially we have seen or heard of everything out there. And anything we haven’t seen done by an individual in real life, we see in the movies or on television shows.
Are terrorists currently the new sensationalized serial killers from the 70s and 80s? Probably so. What the real question may be, what comes next?
Anti-Semitic California Prof Now Attacking Black People With Lies | Hatewatch | Southern Poverty Law Center ⇢
This guy is a professor at my university. He has tenure and there has been a lot of pressure for him to leave for years now. The university even had to put a disclaimer on its website a few years back. All of the psychology department has completely distanced themselves from him, and even submitted articles and opinions to news organizations stating their distate for his work.
If you look him up on youtube, you’ll find student protests in his class and interviews with him that are outrageous. Personally, I’ve had a few classes with him. His classes are actually pretty decent and he is seems hilarious and intelligent, until you find out he is a complete racist. He never mentions any of his beliefs in class, but how can you take anything this guys says seriously when you know he also believes these things? How can you learn from and trust a professor that truly believes that all of America’s problems are caused by the Jews? Or Black people? Or Mexicans? Or any group that isn’t white and truly believes that it would be a good idea to close off immigration to this country in order for White people to reclaim their homeland? SRSLY!?!?!
Currently, he was offered early retirement and he accepted. While I am extremely happy his name will no longer be connected to the university after next semester, it is unfortunate they the state of California will be paying him retirement.
Here is his original article.
Here is his response. If you read it, be prepared for rampant victim-blaming, advocacy of structured racism, and a blatant misuse of facts. Here is one of his main thoughts that guides his research racism:
“The problem, of course, is that only White people of European descent are enduring a suicidal wave of non-White immigration that will make them relatively powerless minorities in areas they have controlled for hundreds, and, in the case of Europe, many thousands of years.”
(I’ve never heard of White people emigrating to another land, colonizing it, and making the natives there relatively powerless minorities.)
I don’t think I have ever posted about him or this issue at my university, but I just had to rant a little after I saw this.
I also did the youtube search for you, watch some of his crap here.
Japanese Researchers develop “slimming specs” which makes food look 50% bigger to help you eat less
A new set of Japanese inventions could revolutionise dieting - but Western dieters may find the drawbacks a little difficult to ‘swallow’.
Dieters have to wear a pair of goggles which ‘trick’ eaters into thinking food is 50% bigger - but reassure them their hands are the same size.
Another gadget under test in the same lab, called ‘MetaCookie+’, sends images of foods via a TV screen into dieters’ eyes, while wafting smells up their noses.
Some of their findings:
- People eat 10% less if they think the cookies are larger.
- The color blue in the glasses ‘calms’ the brain persuading dieters to eat less.
- The “Metacookie’ techno glasses use built-in TV screen to show dieters other foods as they eat.
While this is scientifically amazing and I am fascinated by “tricking” our brain, isn’t it a little sad that we can’t control the amount of food we eat?
Picture Captions:
- The gadget ‘tricks’ dieters into feeling fuller by making food look bigger
- MetaCookie Plus ‘transforms’ food by feeding dieters different scents as they eat - so that, for instance, a diet biscuit can taste like a chocolate Digestive.
- The glasses make food look 50% bigger, encouraging dieters to eat less.
- The Goggles enlarge the appearance of food by 50%, persuading people to eat less.
- The glasses ‘amplify’ the size of the food so that it looks bigger, encouraging dieters to have smaller portions.
Voyeurism, flashing, nudity, exposure, vulnerability, empowerment, femininity, sexuality.
Flashing female derrieres to near-exposure and using the double exposure technique common in photography on his oil paintings, Ho Ryon Lee’s Overlapping Images collection takes the idea of exposure to a whole new level.
See the rest here.
How Many Calories You Burn Having Sex, Eating Pizza and Smoking a Cigarette
Relevant information.
- Brushing Your Teeth:: 17 Calories, 47 Nikefuel
- Eating Pizza: 8 Calories, 23 Nikefuel
- Washing Dishes: 30 Calories, 86 Nikefuel
- Sending a Text: 0 Calories, 1 Nikefuel
- Shaking My Arm Up and Down for 30 Seconds: 9 calories, 26 Nikefuel
- Smoking a Cigarette: 8 Calories, 21 Nikefuel*
- Walking Up 4 Flights of Stairs: 7 calories, 19 Nikefuel
- Taking a Shower: 60 Calories, 169 Nikefuel
- Using the Restroom (#1): 2 Calories, 6 Nikefuel
- Using the Restroom (#2): 10 Calories, 31 Nikefuel
- Sleeping: 25 Calories, 79 Nikefuel
- Masturbating: 82 Calories, 231 Nikefuel
- Having Sex: 179 Calories, 514 Nikefuel
- A Night Out Drinking: 463 Calories, 1303 Nikefuel
- A Night Out I Don’t Remember: 1129 Calories, 3320 Nikefuel
- Being Hungover: 102 Calories, 292 Nikefuel
Image credit: Scotch Whisky and Zippo (by amore perras)
The Marshmallow Test
Kids are given the option to either 1) eat a marshmallow, or 2) sit in front of the marshmallow alone and wait for the adult to come back and receive 2 marshmallows.
The reactions are great.
Psychologists are so cruel; I love it.