Life of a Psychology Ph.D. student

Women in Academia - Interpersonal Relationships/Family Issues

2008-07-18T13:36:00.008-04:00

This is a continuation of key points gathered from: Denice Park and Susan Nolen-Hoeksema article from: Zanna, M., Darley, J., & Roediger, H.L. (Eds.). The Complete Academic: A Practical Guide for the Beginning Social Scientist. Washington D.C. The American Psychological Association.

NOTE: I want to thank all my readers who leave comments sharing their experiences. I'd like to think that knowing YOU ARE NOT ALONE makes people feel a bit better...and that's the point of this whole blogging experience.

c) Interpersonal relationships including sexual relationships and sexual harassment

When you first arrive in a department, it is wise to be somewhat restrained in developing intense personal friendships. You are vulnerable at this time and people may not be what they initially appear.
Women often build intimacy through self-disclosure. Such disclosure early on to a colleague that you don’t know very well and with whom you might work for the next 30 years can be a very dangerous behavior
Don’t have sex with anyone in the department, ever. (Psychstudent adds: ALSO, don't flirt too much, if you tend to flirt when you drink - don't drink around your coworkers).
Never threaten anyone about what you intend to do about any grievance you might have. Litigation is a painful route to go—but tolerating bullying and harassment is unnecessary. Deal with problems earlier rather than later and save any e-mails or other materials that are suggestive of harassment.

Psychstudent says: Save all your emails and document everything! If people know you do this, they might think you are a bit paranoid, but they won't mess with you.

RIDICULOUS sexual harassment PSA ad from the 80's

(d) Family issues

With respect to your life in the department, it is much more acceptable for men to say they have to leave a meeting to go pick up a child than for women to do it. The man gets gold stars for being a good daddy but the woman reminds the group of her overwhelming responsibilities with respect to child-rearing.
In general, it is probably better to not bring up child-care responsibilities as a limiting factor for scheduling a meeting or teaching a class during weekday hours from 9-5.
When you've had an extra semester or year before the tenure decision, tenure review boards, and especially external reviewers, may expect more of you than a faculty person who has come up for tenure on the traditional clock.
This is never stated explicitly, but the implicit evaluation may be that "she had 7 years instead of the normal 6 before tenure, and she still only has X publications."

Issues of abandonment by your adviser

2008-07-15T18:21:00.006-04:00

A good thing about my adviser is that he loves our (well, *his*) department and that he will work there until he dies. (I once had a conversation with one of the janitors who has been working for our department for over 20 years, and he says that one of the oddest things is having to clean up the offices of professors when they die. As a side note, a professor who has been dead for 8 years still has a mailbox and he gets more mail per week than I've gotten during my graduate school carrier. Creepy). A classmate of mine has been abandoned by her TWO advisers (you know, the primary adviser and then her backup adviser). I have another friend who was recruited to another university to work with a specific professor. The professor who recruited her (she had another very tempting offer) KNEW he would be leaving, but didn't tell her until she arrived to her program. When she arrived there, she couldn't find another professor who shared her research interests and consequently she's been struggling by conducting research she hates.
What's particularly "unpleasant" is that one of my friend's adviser's decided to take the students he liked with him and leave the other ones adviser-less....she was left behind.
Now, I'm all for people leaving their jobs for better one, but I always assumed their is an implicit/unspoken agreement between adviser-advisee. One implicit agreement is that you go to a university to work for/with them, and they don't leave.
I think that a lot of reason why graduate students are unhappy is that they don't know what to expect from their adviser (the correct answer: NOTHING). Unlike, regular bosses, advisers expect their graduate students to follow in their foot-steps. Unlike most bosses, advisers feel their duty is to tell their students that unless they go into academia they will be worthless. (It is my understanding that bosses in the "real world" don't give a damn about what you do when you leave your job). That is, I think the problem lies in the role of an adviser being something in-between a boss and a mentor - a role that is not clearly defined.
In summary, I've read lots of department memo's explaining what graduate students are expected to do; however, I don't know that advisers are expected to do anything for their students.
My relationship with my adviser improved greatly when the only thing I began to expect from him is that given I have my own funding, he shouldn't purposely hinder my process. That is, I expect him not to hurt my career unless he had a good reason (e.g. one day I became grossly unethical). Since, I truly settled for that expectation, I've been less miserable in graduate school and I think my adviser has began to respect me more.
(Note: I'm not necessarily recommending this, I'm just saying it has worked for me).

NYT Article - Urge to End it

2008-07-06T14:38:00.001-04:00

Great New York Times article on suicide.

Interesting passage:

As it turns out, one of the most remarkable discoveries about suicide and how to reduce it occurred utterly by chance. It came about not through some breakthrough in pharmacology or the treatment of mental illness but rather through an energy-conversion scheme carried out in Britain in the 1960s and ’70s. Among those familiar with the account, it is often referred to simply as “the British coal-gas story.”

For generations, the people of Britain heated their homes and fueled their stoves with coal gas. While plentiful and cheap, coal-derived gas could also be deadly; in its unburned form, it released very high levels of carbon monoxide, and an open valve or a leak in a closed space could induce asphyxiation in a matter of minutes. This extreme toxicity also made it a preferred method of suicide. “Sticking one’s head in the oven” became so common in Britain that by the late 1950s it accounted for some 2,500 suicides a year, almost half the nation’s total.

Those numbers began dropping over the next decade as the British government embarked on a program to phase out coal gas in favor of the much cleaner natural gas. By the early 1970s, the amount of carbon monoxide running through domestic gas lines had been reduced to nearly zero. During those same years, Britain’s national suicide rate dropped by nearly a third, and it has remained close to that reduced level ever since.

Women in Academia - Presentation of the Self/Common traps

2008-07-05T07:16:00.009-04:00

I came across the most wonderful article by Denice Park and Susan Nolen-Hoeksema from the Michigan Department of Psychology.
The article is from: Zanna, M., Darley, J., & Roediger, H.L. (Eds.). The Complete Academic: A Practical Guide for the Beginning Social Scientist. Washington D.C. The American Psychological Association.
I decided to outline the main points of the article and post them here, starting with "presentation of the self" and "common traps for women". Some my view this as "cynical," but I have seen this happen in a lot of departments (not in my department because there are no female professors - but the advise extends to graduate students).

(a) The presentation of self

What adjectives would your colleagues use to describe you -- as smart, positive, productive, creative, a leader, firm, confident, and a great collaborator?
Or would they describe you as cooperative, someone you can count on, kind, quietly competent, warm, and thoughtful? In an ideal world, you might hope that your colleagues would describe you as all of the above, but it is the first set of attributes that will get you tenure. (PsychStudent's comment: essentially, in academia, it is better to be respected than liked. Ideally you want to be BOTH, so...good luck with that)
Never start conversations with self-deprecating remarks about your own competence.

People who are frequently stressed out at work over personal matters, and who discuss their personal lives at length with others, are often not viewed very favorably in business or in academia. (Lucky for me, I have no personal life!). On the other hand, people who can cope with their personal and professional stresses and appear hardy and optimistic are seen as leaders and as attractive colleagues. (I will never ever appear optimistic, even if I force it...so I'm passing on this one).

Men can get away with looking like impoverished graduate students, but women often can't.

Dress somewhat better than is normative, even for women in your department. (This is absolutely true, and in part we have other women to blame. But since women, by default, are not taken seriously, it is important to dress for the part. Something else I've always wondered - are pretty women taken less seriously?)

Do not express your feelings of unworthiness to colleagues; express them to a partner, close friend not affiliated with your job or even to a therapist (Rambling: I ran into my ex-therapist the other day, it was awkward because I dumped him for no reason)

(b) Common traps for women academic

Cooperative and helpful on the job is that you can end up being exploited. Look around your department—you may notice that women are chairing a lot of committees and writing a lot of reports, and handling virtually all of the socializing. (My department avoids this by NOT hiring women)

Women may also be asked to teach more of the undergraduate service courses, because they are perceived as more interested in, or in tune with, the undergraduates. (I do not make it a secret that I dislike undergraduates)

It is desirable to be viewed as cooperative and helpful, but the very people that are thanking you for all the things you do (WAIT - people are supposed to THANK YOU?) are the same people who won’t think twice about voting against you for tenure if your teaching or scholarship is inadequate.

Academia and spawning.

2008-06-29T16:22:00.004-04:00

My adviser has asked me to write up a plan for what I shall accomplish the next few years. What he wants to hear from me is that I plan to do insane amounts of research for the next two years, do an internship that's light on clinical work so I can do more research, and then get a super-academic job. I told him I want to get a post-doc so I can do more research and take time to "mature" and he told me that postdocs are useless (that is, they are for people whose graduate program did not prepare them to do what they are supposed to and thus it reflects poorly on the graduate program).
While I already got his feedback on personal things like relationships (my career should come first and women who pick men over research end up with husbands who cheat on them and leave them). There is another issue that will affect my career - having children. I feel that given the pressures of getting tenure during your reproductive years, unless you are superwoman, children do affect/hinder your career. Now, is this something you bring up with your MALE adviser? And should they really be providing advise on reproductive timing? (Long time readers of this blog have read my posts describing professors unwilling to fund a female student because she got pregnant, and FEMALE professors telling a grad. student that an abortion would be the best thing for her career).
Part of me wants to bring it up for the sake of making him feel uncomfortable (that's what he gets for giving people unsolicited advise on their personal lives!) and because I know he would say something ridiculous that would both amuse me and anger me.
The odd thing is that I think my adviser *means* well. When I was telling my narcissistic friend about the creepy conversation I had had with him she was upset that her advisers weren't using scare tactics to convince her to become a professor.
Pardon my french, but academia is so fucked up...and I've seen what graduate school does to relatively sane, strong, intelligent women. I wonder if it's any worse/better than other institutions!

(NOTE: the regalia picture symbolizes the ridiculousness of it all)

Give me research or give me death!

2008-06-26T11:38:00.004-04:00

I had a meeting with my adviser to talk about what I want to do when I grow up.
I started the meeting by asking what the purpose of the meeting was, to which he replied that he wanted to know what my career goals are so he can allocate resources appropriately and so he knows what to tell other people about how to help me (or something like that).
To this I replied "Oh OK, so if I tell you I want to be a clinician you can tell people to start ignoring me and not waste any resources" (in retrospect that was pretty insolent of me, but...whatever, it's part of my charm). He looked at me in shock so I said "oh, I'm kidding...I don't want to be a therapist...really."
Then for about an hour I started listing jobs that involved some form of clinical work, or not being in a psychology department (I just wanted to see what sort of stuff he would say). He started telling me all these absurd (but sad, I guess) stories of people who turned down being a psychology professor and their lives fell apart (some ended in death...really).
He told me about a friend of his who used to be a full professor at a prestigious psychology department but he got tired of it and decided to open a private practice - apparently clinical work was so awful that he ended up committing suicide. (For some reason I almost could not control my laughter - not that suicide is funny, but the fact that my adviser was serious and he told me it was a "cautionary tale".) Of course I asked if there might have been other contributing factors to his suicide, but my adviser was convinced that it was because being a professor is so great and being a clinician is so unbearable. He had a couple of stories like that - one ended with a woman becoming a severely depressed single mother, and the other with a man decompensating into a psychotic episode after being denied full professorship.
It's creepy but humorous in it's absurdity. There is no doubt in my mind that he was serious about it. In a way I'm flattered that he finds me "worthy" of such "noble" profession - it's worse when your adviser tells you "there are a lot of things out there for you, like in the fast food business" (no offense to anyone in fast food - but why are you reading this blog?

My adviser is trying to give this "advising thing" a try.

2008-06-19T19:34:00.002-04:00

After 3 years of little contact with my adviser, I get the following email from him (my comments in bold):

In the spirit of trying to do advising well, (at least he is honest, read "oh yes, so I do some of that advising thing I'm supposed to do but with minimal work") I'd like you (not "us") to develop a plan for what you hope to accomplish (what research topics you wish to tackle and questions you want to answer (the publishable ones) and a practical level like meeting program objectives (I must ESCAPE), along with a time line, for the next three years (I thought I had 2 left!!!) (third year is presumably internship, but it's still possible to do research) (oh yes, internship is that year where you have to do things that get in the way of research). Part of the plan should be a clear statement of what job opportunity you want to be prepared to apply for (oh no, we are going to sit down and have "the talk" where I tell him I don't want to be a professor and he tells me I am dead to him) during your internship year. Your time line should be divided into quarters and pretty specific for the the next few quarters (hmmm...the university switched out of the quarter system about 10 years ago. Nice)

How to explain "research"

2008-06-09T17:29:00.002-04:00

I find it difficult to explain to people who don't have a Ph.D. (or have no idea what 'clinical psychology' is) what I do. I think people just assume that a Ph.D. involves taking a bunch of classes (which in a way is true). People understand the concept of "seeing patients" and "doing therapy" and I can explain "teaching a class"...but I really have problems explaining the term "research". For example, a lot people say things like "do you have a break this summer?" and I say things like "well...it's hard to say...I'm always supposed to be doing research but most of the time I don't do it." I also have a hard time explaining the concept of "basic research," which is essentially research that has no purpose. But the best thing I can come up with is "essentially they pay me a low salary to run statistical analyzes on data and if I find something interesting I'm supposed to spend a lot of time writing a paper about it. Then I submit a paper to a journal - no they don't pay for submissions - and then they reject it and tell me it's terrible. I then make changes to the paper and keep sending it to other journals where anonymous professionals who don't get paid to review, take 4 months to write me angry responses. If I successfully in get a paper published then I can add it to my CV and it supposedly increases my worth as a human being"

On Hillary's defeat

2008-06-07T12:22:00.002-04:00

I am too sad and angry to write anything intelligent about Hillary dropping out (being forced to drop out) of the presidential race.
But there is a wonderful article by Gail Collins from the New York Times that I encourage everyone to read - even if you are not a Hillary supporter.
Here it is

People are irrational and I feel ambivalent about this

2008-06-06T09:38:00.003-04:00

I'm currently on vacation. Vacation is fun, but I always feel like a need a vacation from vacation. My S.O. just got his Ph.D. and I get to spend time with his parents. They have been good to me, but they are very anxious and I absorb anxiety like a sponge. Maybe it is because my parents used to be extremely overcontrolling, overbearing, and infantalized (ha - I first typed inFATALized) me until I no longer needed them for financial support - but to me, the best kind of family relationship is the kind where people leave you alone. During adolescence I developed the self-concept of being a dependent person because my parents controlled every aspect of my life - I just recently realized that the opposite is true (that is, it is very important for me to interact with people because I WANT to, not out of a sense of responsibility).

This has also led to one of the best discoveries - most people are crazy and their opinions of the world are almost never based on rational thinking but clouded by insecurities, faulty heuristics and distortions of reality. I know that everyone knows this - but I think most of the time we are not aware of this (because of our own distortions). It is when we start seeing patients or really trying to observe others from a distance that we realize how serious this is.
Anyway, the "good" thing about being aware of this aforementioned fact is that you don't have to take what other people tell you seriously. That is, if someone criticizes you or tells you to do something, it is important to stop and think what reason the person has for doing this. The sad thing is that you will find yourself disappointed by people you like and respect - but as Sylvia Plath said "if you never expect anything from anybody, you are never disappointed"

"Boundaries" and hugs

2008-05-28T17:36:00.007-04:00

Today was my last day at one of my practica sites. The site has been good to me and I really like my supervisor. Anyway, my (ex) supervisor is really open about his personal life (e.g. how he picked one antidepressant over others because of the sexual side effects; he has done all major categories of drugs except for meth). He took me out to lunch which was sweet. At the end of the day he said "I can't believe it's been a year since we started working together". Then he got teary eyed (which I thought was super-sweet; as a side note, I'm so good that supervisors cry when I leave :-) ) and said how the problem with being open with students is that he becomes attached (awww). Then he gave the typical "you are great" speech and I gave the typical "thank you for teaching me so much...etc."

So as I was walking out he extended his hand. But for some reason I just said "hmmm...I'm going to hug you" and he was all like "Are you SURE? I mean, I try to be conscientious about the boundaries I maintain...etc." I just gave him a brief hug while he was saying that. Since I'm very sensitive to social awkwardness I now feel really bad...he might think I have "poor boundaries"...but oh well, I'm done with the place. It was an interesting learning experience and it was a pleasure working with someone as generative as my ex-supervisor.

How do you all feel about hugging? I'm very comfortable with touch unless I dislike the person. Also, I have never interpreted a hug or pat on the shoulder or touch of my arm as sexual or inappropriate (except when a client kept trying to touch me). I don't go around touching people (unless I've had too much wine) but I think people in this society are a bit uptight about it.

Overwhelmed by political angst. My memory of the Clintons

2008-05-26T14:11:00.004-04:00

I'm in my mid-twenties. Yet, I remember being fascinated by the Clintons as long as I can remember. A lot of people my age state they are of the "Obama generation" since they do not remember the Clinton White House years. I guess I have a very good long term memory. I remember being in High School and being enraged when some of my classmates called for Bill's impeachment. I remember arguing about it so fervently that a classmate of mine (a moderate Republican) locked me out of my AP Government class. During the whole "scandal" I had traveled to Italy and maintained contact with people from other countries who ridiculed Americans for making such a huge deal over the president having an affair.

As Churchill stated "great and good are seldom the same man" and I've always believed that a person's work, or abilities have nothing to do with their goodness - or mental health for that matter. I think some of the world's greatest leaders/inventors/scientists have had some raging Personality Disorders that, combined with out of this world talent served some good. Great leaders tend to be narcissists and a bit psychopathic (fearless-dominant). Great scientists might have Asperger's or Schizoid PD, as to trully be "great" I believe one must focus on one thing and neglect everything else. But I'm rambling.

I remember being in college during the 2000 election. I had supported Bill Bradley for the primary and Al Gore for the general election. At the time I had a picture of Bill, Hillary and Chelsea posted on my dorm room's wall. During the day of the 2000 election I remember telling a classmate (she can back this up), "you know, I've been doing my research and I think that it's so close, that whoever wins Florida will win the election." When the networks called Florida for Gore I was overwhelmed.

I had an election party that night (as a side note, my wonderful professor had schedule a Neuroscience exam for the next day) and I remember when they called Florida for Bush. I just started crying because I was overwhelmed by a sense of dread for the country (you know, the "compassionate conservative" and the "great uniter"). A year or so ago I received an email from a friend saying that she had thought I had completely overreacted to Bush winning, but that in retrospect she realized I had been right....

After 9/11 I was horrified by the "state of the nation". People were afraid. And fear made (a lot of people more paranoid), more conservative and willing to give up their rights. "Love America or leave it." The dictatorship of Bush and Cheney and Ashcroft was terrifying. Luckily, I was living in a very liberal area of the country - but I was still horrified. The whole time I did feel nostalgia for the Clinton years where things were going so well that oral sex was the most terrible thing ever ("how will we tell our children!).

As a side note, I have always like Hillary. I don't think she's a "good person." But I've never admired goodness (it's easy to be good because then everyone admires you). She is so intelligent, so shrewd, so eloquent, so tenacious. She has the thickest skin of anyone I can think of. People gave her "crap" because she behaved too much like a man. She was/is assertive, almost aggressive. She puts her career above her husband. She cares more about health care policy than baking cookies.

I remember that when I was in middle school, my mom once got me a t-shirt that said "SOME DAY A WOMAN WILL BE PRESIDENT". I wore it to school and got teased mercilessly about it. And I honestly thought to myself this would never happen in my lifetime (and yes, I was in middle school). When Hillary decided to run I was ecstatic. She had worked so hard and sacrificed so much. I was also proud of the American people for "catching up" with some of the other nations that had had other female presidents/prime ministers.

(post to be continued)

Feeling socially trapped, depression, personal post.

2008-05-25T13:23:00.005-04:00

I have always been an introvert. I used to be more than an introvert, I used to have full-blown (aka meets diagnostic criteria) social phobia. Suffering from serious social phobia from age 11 (I was an outgoing child) until approximately age 19 (when I downgraded to "very shy") was for the most part, not a good idea. Adolesence is when you form you form your identity (Identity vs. Role Confusion) and my identity became that of someone who is socially inept and depressed. (I'm not going to go into how my parents were both overcontrolling and extremely critical because people sound so whiny when they blame their parents).

While my "intellectual brain" was advanced (very accomplished academically, had been in gifted program) I think my social intelligence was stuck at age 11. I have always been very good at reading people and at empathizing and at knowing how others think. The problem was that I felt like a very flawed human being and this was at the core of my interactions.

I believe in that in a few years I had to "catch up" in terms of development I had missed. My SO, who is both sensitive and a pragmatist at heart, pointed out my self-defeating behaviors and encouraged me to improve myself (I'm a big fan of tough love). I had/have a wonderful, very wise, mentor who pointed out to me, with incredible patience, all the good things I had to offer. A lot of them were intellectual but others included things that I'm proud of such as my ability to "read" people, my dark sense of humor, and my creativity. (He also kept telling me that I was physically beautiful which I know sounds creepy but he did it in a way that wasn't).

Now I have overcome a lot of my shyness (but I'm still very introverted), and I'm actually pretty assertive. My assertiveness was not in purpose. I'm just very very honest and straight forward which comes across as assertive (esp. for women). Unlike before, I pay attention to the way I look (make-up, dressing well, etc.). I'm constantly trying to face my "phobias" (exposure) and battle my depression. Also, I am lucky that I have a very STRONG sense of self. This is a bad thing when I'm trying to change it, but I do not envy my Histrionic and Borderline patients who have gone all their lives not knowing who they are...To be honest, I don't even know what not having a sense of self is like - but it sounds terrifying.

While I haven't been severely depressed in a while, I do know what Kierkegaard meant by calling depression his "mistress" or Churchill calling his depression a "black dog". I feel that "it" is always there lurking in the back of my mind. I find myself beginning to slip into it (an episode?) but having to pull myself out on a regular basis. To the extent one has control over their depression, I feel like I'm constantly struggling.

Wow...I complete ignored the point of my post which is as follows: I only interact with people from my department. I like some of them OK, but we are all busy, stressed, and in a competitive environment. I REALLY wish I could meet people outside my department but I'm usually too low in energy/fatigued to do so. But realistically it's not the energy as much as me not knowing how to meet people outside an academic setting. I have always met my friends in school, my dorm or my job. I don't even know where people go to meet other people. Also, when people I don't know speak to me my first thought is (what do they want?). I am polite...but often come across as very aloof and self-contained.

I have awaken from my slumber...

2008-05-25T04:41:00.006-04:00

What happened with my blogging reflects a lot about my personality-psychopathology.

I kept thinking of all the semi-interesting things that were happening to me in graduate school. In this case, the word "interesting" does not have a positive or negative connotation, but more of a "gee, I'm sure a lot of graduate students can identify with my experience". However, I grew increasingly paranoid that if I shared what I WANTED to share then it would be incredibly easy for someone who knew me to identify me.

I have contemplated multiple things such as going public with my identity but keeping things PG. You know, talk about how much I love my research and how I want to grow up to be like my adviser. Clearly this was not very appealing.

I have been thinking of deleting my blog and starting from scratch with a new identity. This is particularly appealing because I feel slightly uncomfortable that my significant other gets to read my posts (sorry sweetie). Not that I will reveal anything too personal - but I crave anonymity.
But what really happened is that graduate school is NO LONGER "fun" for me to blog about. I have been consumed with thoughts about the Democratic primary. However, I know that a pro-Hillary rant would upset a lot of my readers. I also enjoy other things like fashion, crappy books about vampires and tons of TV shows. Thus, if I blogged about things I enjoyed, then my blog would lose focus.

So, I've decided to jump on the narcissistic band-wagon and make this blog about ME and things I enjoy. If readers don't like it, it's a shame...but if you try to please everyone, you will end up pleasing no one. AND, if someone I know figures out who I am...I'll deny it or take it from there.

Universal truth of undergrads

2008-04-08T12:23:00.003-04:00

Undergrads appear to be relatively healthy individuals with carefree lives, but horrible illnesses almost always strikes the night before a big assignment is due.

Furthermore, they tend to ignore their TA's/Instructors all semester until 1-30 minutes before huge assignments are due when they wish to elaborately communicate their awful illnesses and how their dogs ate Microsoft Word.

My self-righteous classmates look down on me because I'm not filled with bubbling passion for enlightening young minds. I think teaching is OK. It would be better if I had TA's. However, it's not a sexy job - it's messy just like research is and like clinical work is. It seems that people like to romanticize what they do. Since I lack that fundamental ability, people look at me as if I lack moral quality.

Willpower article

2008-04-03T12:26:00.003-04:00

There's a great article in the New York Times that caught my eye:

The brain’s store of willpower is depleted when people control their thoughts, feelings or impulses, or when they modify their behavior in pursuit of goals.

A lot of what the article says reminds me of Freud's idea of the Libido, or energy that gets depleted from engaging in certain mental tasks such as repressing murderous urges toward certain faculty members. (NOTE TO THE HYPERSENSITIVE: I don't have the intent or plan to hurt anyone)

My favorite "discovery" from the article is that sugar helps maintain willpower.

Gender and mentoring

2008-03-09T17:07:00.004-04:00

I don't know about your programs, but mine is very "research" and "science" oriented. 90% of professors are male and most graduate students are female.
Unlike the "hard" sciences where women don't even make it to graduate school - what happens in our field (at least MY department) is that graduate school turns women off to the field. I honestly think that lack of mentoring plays a HUGE role.

Here's an article from "Inside Higher Ed"
Differences between the ways male and female science students relate to mentors could have a significant impact on efforts to attract more women to certain fields.

TAing: Learning from students...

2008-03-08T22:12:00.003-05:00

I have had a relatively positive experience TAing (compared to what I expected, and I have a very vivid imagination). I like my students (most of them), they are not particularly bright or creative, but they are very pragmatic. They respect "authority" and have come to terms that assignments don't always make sense and that knowledge is sometimes useless. They know what they want to do when they grow up (Oh, the envy) and they are happy with their decisions. A lot of them just want to get a 9-5 that pays their bills. Most of them just majored in psychology because it seemed like a good major for someone who didn't know what to major in. How did they become so wise? Why did no one tell me this was an option?

I find myself constantly apologizing for making them learn things that seem arbitrary (and by 'seem', I mean 'are') and for having to assign some homework that will not contribute to anything in their lives other than getting a grade in the HW. Their reply is usually "of course, we understand, there is a task you need to assign and we will complete it and think of it as jumping another hoop."

Where is their sense of entitlement? Where is the self-righteous indignation? Where is the complaining?

I admire their pragmatism - life is full of stuff that doesn't make much sense that you have to do. The best thing to do, is just do it and not complaint or dwell on it. (But I can't help it!!!!)

Psychology vs politics

2008-03-08T21:10:00.005-05:00

One of my current problems is that I find the Democratic primary is waaaaaay more interesting that Graduate School. For some reason, I don't have the same passion about psychology topics that I do about politics. This concerns me. Shouldn't I be passionate about my field? I get upset when people are unethical clinicians...but that's about it.
I no longer see the purpose of research, it just seems that either people keep finding contradictory results about a topic so they have to argue about who uses the best methodology, or people keep showing the same thing. Furthermore, a lot of people (myself included) get to work with very large sample sizes. This is great because you can get almost anything to be significant - but what does this mean! If you say children of Schizophrenics tend to be 5 points higher on Neuroticism than children of Alcoholics...how does this matter? What does it say about the individual? How does it apply to real life? If I gained 5 points of Neuroticism tomorrow (impossible as I am in the 99th percentile - ha!) how would my life change?

There's also covariates...I feel we end up "controlling" for everything until we get something completely artificial. For example, "controlling" for other psychopathology... It makes results CLEAN, but then I see patients with GAF's in the high 30's, low 40's and they have so many Personality Disorders, substance use problems, health problems, neurological problems, etc. it seems utterly ridiculous to say, well, if we controlled for all your other problems (including your personality!) your depression wouldn't be so bad!

Like the famous line by Otto von Bismarck "Laws are like sausage, it is better not to see them being made", the more I see the way people gather data, run statistical analysis and select what goes into the manuscript, the less I want to know about it.
The same applies to the more clinicians I meet. (I think the TRUE reason why self-disclosure is not a good idea in therapy is that then the patient knows how messed up their therapist really is...)

I know and accept that politics are nasty, messy and unfair. I know that there are puppets and puppet-masters and to get things done there needs to be blood. This is the way things are the way things are going to be. I don't mind this at all as long as the outcome leads to the greater good. Without politics we would have a bunch of narcissistic, manipulative, shrewd psychopaths running around without benefiting anyone, with politics we get them passing laws (ends justify the means) that hopefully maintain some order and benefit a lot of people.

I do NOT feel the same way about psychology - I don't like the various shades of dark gray. The manipulative faculty members are just not as admirable as the manipulative politicians. A lot of basic research is intellectual masturbation. A lot of patients just will never improve (they might change...a little).

deep-fried colleague

2008-03-06T14:12:00.002-05:00

I wrote an email referring to a "steamed colleague". Nice.

(I haven't blogged because all my self-righteous indignation toward graduate school is being overtaken by my self-righteous indignation toward the primaries....I don't know how long I can keep up my political indignation (I have a lot of stamina) but I'll start blogging soon).

As a side note, I "manipulated" (aka used my awesome/subtle questioning SKILLZ) my therapist into revealing he supported Obama...this might interfere with our therapeutic relationship. Specially when I stood up and yelled "WHY DO YOU HATE WOMEN? WHY?" Just kidding, I didn't do that, but it would have been funny in retrospect...

Bitch is the new black

2008-03-05T02:37:00.001-05:00

Irrationality

2008-02-26T13:41:00.001-05:00

http://www.predictablyirrational.com/?page_id=117

I'll tell you my score if you tell me yours.

Ok...Ok...I am 1pt irrational. Interesting test.

Uterly Unmotivated

2008-02-18T14:29:00.002-05:00

I've taken a break from research for the past couple of weeks. It was on purpose for the first week, but now, for the love of me, I have developed some sort of utter repulsion to it. There are always OTHER things to do, so it's easy to justify not doing research. But I also want to graduate...ASAP. Can anyone recommend any methods to make research less aversive (other than: just suck it up and do it).
That is, research feels like a punishment only to be inflicted upon enemies...is there a way to make that feeling go away?

Female leadership

2008-02-10T14:38:00.001-05:00

It appears that the democratic primary will not resolve itself anytime soon (despite the $30 I donated to the Hillary campaign).
This means you will get more posts from me about gender, race, and politics. On a positive note, everything having to do with human behavior can technically fall under the umbrella of psychology.

Here I present to you another interesting New York Times article called "when women rule".

Kristof goes on to mention that many great leaders in history have been women. In particular, women who climbed to power in monarchies have had extremely high success rate.

This success rate has not been replicated in democracies. Kristof proposes the following theory: in democracies in the television age, female leaders also have to
navigate public prejudices — and these make democratic politics far
more challenging for a woman than for a man.

In the "Goldberg paradigm," people are asked to evaluate a particular article or speech, supposedly
by a man. Others are asked to evaluate the identical presentation, but
from a woman. Typically, in countries all over the world, the very same
words are rated higher coming from a man.

Moreover, promoting their
own successes is a helpful strategy for ambitious men. But experiments
have demonstrated that when women highlight their accomplishments,
that’s a turn-off. And women seem even more offended by self-promoting
females than men are.

For ambitious women, if they’re
self-effacing, people find them unimpressive, but if they talk up their
accomplishments, they come across as pushy braggarts.

For women, but not for men, there is a
tradeoff in qualities associated with top leadership. A woman can be
perceived as competent or as likable, but not both.

Psychstudent says: it's been widely documented that being a woman sucks in multiple ways because of prejudice. What I wonder is, why does this prejudice occur? I would understand it if it were just men against women, but women against women? And why does it appear to be a universal phenomenon?

Projection, sexism, and the psychology of politics.

2008-02-04T23:00:00.001-05:00

This is a link to an article left by "anonymous" it talks about extreme Hillary haters.
Some good tidbits:

"The hostile characterizations of Clinton do not add up to a coherent account of her hatefulness. She is vilified for being a feminist and for not being one, for being an extreme leftist and for being a “warmongering hawk,” for being godless and for being “frighteningly fundamentalist,” for being the victim of her husband’s peccadilloes and for enabling them. “She is,” Horowitz concludes, “an empty vessel into which [her detractors] can pour everything they detest.” (In this she is the counterpart of George W. Bush, who serves much the same function for many liberals.)

This is not to say that there are no rational, well-considered reasons for opposing Clinton’s candidacy.

But the people and groups Horowitz surveys have brought criticism of Clinton to what sportswriters call “the next level,” in this case to the level of personal vituperation unconnected to, and often unconcerned with, the facts. These people are obsessed with things like her hair styles, the “strangeness” of her eyes.

Respected political commentators devote precious network time to deep analyses of her laugh. Everyone blames her for what her husband does or for what he doesn’t do. (This is what the compound “Billary” is all about.) If she answers questions aggressively, she is shrill. If she moderates her tone, she’s just play-acting. If she cries, she’s faking. If she doesn’t, she’s too masculine. If she dresses conservatively, she’s dowdy. If she doesn’t, she’s inappropriately provocative.

I'm going slightly mad

2008-02-03T17:13:00.001-05:00

I think I'm displacing all my anger/sadness/etc. onto this election. I've become somewhat obsessed over Hillary winning, and I can't figure out whether this is part of me being "a very passionate person" (as my therapist tries to convince me) or sort of nuts. I have to admit that there's somewhat of an obsessional quality to my personality. I am quite sure I don't have Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder or Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder. Actually, I'm constantly getting into arguments with people with OCPD because of their black and white thinking and their inability to do "nuances".
Anyway, I'm so preoccupied with keeping up with election news that I've neglected things like doing my work, laundry and other basic functions. That's pretty nuts. I think that part of it is that I'm extremely sensitive to sexism as it's such an issue in my department that no one brings up (other than female grad students quietly "gossiping" in closed offices). I am frustrated at having everyone in power be male. Please don't get me wrong, my best mentors and some of the people who have been the nicest to me have been men. It's crazy that professors tells us that if we want to be "successful" we have to "be like men". The amazing thing is that academia is liberal and extremely gender-neutral compared to other fields - like business and politics.
In a way I understand why some men try to put women doing. I take the psychoanalytic view that there's a fear of regressing to the state when a "giant woman" burped you, changed your diaper and was the whole world to you. What I don't understand is women's destructiveness toward other women. (Which I've been guilty of in the past). I don't necessarily think that women should be nicer to women than men just because of their gender. But rather, try not to be their own worse enemy. I've met some women who, because they consider themselves "too emotional", or "bad at math", or "dumb", assume that those are feminine traits and project them onto all other women. I won't even get into the discussion about how assertive women are viewed compared to assertive men. (In my defense, I call some men "bitches" all the time).
Anyway, I think the first step toward dealing with sexism or any other form of discrimination is to have insight into when we are thinking or acting in sexist ways. There's nothing worse (or more irritating to ME) than when people DENY being sexist, while they are spewing sexist statements.

That being said, I REALLY hope Hillary wins the primary because otherwise I'll have to put up with myself for months. I would like to add, that I'm 100% sure that I would vote for Hillary if she were male. However, I think I feel particularly passionate about her as a candidate BECAUSE I feel that a lot of the criticism she's draws is based on her being a woman and not because of her abilities as a politician.

A Voter's Guide

2008-02-02T23:01:00.000-05:00

From a great New York Times Op Ed article:

I’m a Democrat hoping to vote solely on the basis of the issues. What should I be pondering?

Unless you have very, very strong feelings about the details of mandatory coverage in a national health care plan, there is less than a millimeter of serious policy disagreement between them.

What if I want to pick the one with the best chance of winning?

Experts in voter behavior could not figure out what little New Hampshire was going to do five minutes before the primary. What makes you think you can predict how people in Ohio and Florida are going to feel in November? This is the line of thinking that led us directly to John Kerry.

Hillary and sexism in this country

2008-02-02T18:43:00.000-05:00

Wonderful article from the New York Times written by Gloria Steinem

I know I'm constantly sounding like I'm outraged over something. While most of it is true, sometimes I exaggerate for the sake of exaggeration. However, I'm trully trully horrified about the anti-Hillary messages in this election. If someone disagrees with her views, fine. They can print t-shirts saying "don't vote for Hillary because some people aren't worthy of health care" and I'd think "ok, you are a jerk, but that's your point of view."

My problem is that if you look at most criticism toward Hillary it is rooted in sexism. For example, there's merchandise saying things like "life is a bitch, don't vote for one." Oh, I get it, Hillary is bright, assertive, hardworking, and cutthroat like the other (male) presidential candidates so she's a bitch. Ha! cute. Then there's slogans stating she's a "Mad Cow" (because she's an average looking, put together middle-aged woman) and that "not even Bill wants her" (it's great to know that NO ONE has been cheated on by their significant others). She gets crap for having Bill Clinton involved in her campaign, but it's OK to criticize her because hypocritical republicans had to make Bill getting oral sex from some intern an international political issue. Then there's slogans like "Hillary should be running the dishes, not the white house" (because a woman's place is in the kitchen).

Then there's good old products that just have her dressed as a witch (because she's female) and my favorite in matters of taste "don't elect another Bush".

As a side note, I think it's good that it's not OK to be overtly racist. But why is it acceptable to be overtly sexist?

I think Gloria Steinem posed a great question in one of her articles:
For all those who don't support her, the bottom-line question is: would you support a male candidate with the same issue positions?

PsychStudent endorses Hillary Clinton

2008-02-01T21:29:00.000-05:00

Gratitude Continued

2008-01-27T15:38:00.000-05:00

Not feeling any happier - but here we go:

I am grateful that:

1. I have a comfortable bed.
2. I get to drink some good quality tea
3. Electric heat prevents me from freezing to death.
4. I only have to wake up at 6am once a week
5. I can look forwad to seeing my significant other in 2 weeks.
6. I have health insurance
7. Being in grad school was my choice (even though I'm a determinist)
8. My quality of life is high enough to allow me to do things like keep a gratitude journal.

The positive psych book I'm reading also has other suggestions for increasing happiness. The one's that would be helpful to me are: decreasing number of social comparisons and being more optimistic. Social comparisons are deadly because people who are "better" than me make me feel inadequate but I feel bad for those who are worse off (then I feel bad about being so arrogant that I feel pity for others...and so on). According to the "How of Happiness" very happy people don't compare themselves to others so much. But, what I don't understand, is how to stop comparing myself to others. You can't just turn thoughts off. That's my problem with cognitive strategies, I understand that I have to "stop" some thoughts, but I never know what to think about instead. For example, if I'm not worrying about something, what should I think about?
The "optimism" exercises talk about always looking at the bright side of life. But I think that some things just don't have a bright side.

Some things in life are bad
They can really make you mad
Other things just make you swear and curse.
When you're chewing on life's gristle
Don't grumble, give a whistle
And this'll help things turn out for the best...

And...always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the light side of life...

If life seems jolly rotten
There's something you've forgotten
And that's to laugh and smile and dance and sing.
When you're feeling in the dumps
Don't be silly chumps
Just purse your lips and whistle - that's the thing.

And...always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the light side of life...

For life is quite absurd
And death's the final word
You must always face the curtain with a bow.
Forget about your sin - give the audience a grin
Enjoy it - it's your last chance anyhow.

So always look on the bright side of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath

Life's a piece of shit
When you look at it
Life's a laugh and death's a joke, it's true.
You'll see it's all a show
Keep 'em laughing as you go
Just remember that the last laugh is on you.

And always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the right side of life...
(Come on guys, cheer up!)
Always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the bright side of life...
(Worse things happen at sea, you know.)
Always look on the bright side of life...
(I mean - what have you got to lose?)
(You know, you come from nothing - you're going back to nothing.
What have you lost? Nothing!)
Always look on the right side of life...

Gratitude Journal

2008-01-25T17:25:00.000-05:00

I've decided that I'm so sick of unhappiness and switching medications that I will engage in certain activities that I might have, in moments of not-enough-desperation considered as "cheesy". I just got a book called "The How of Happiness"which describes "empirically-validated" (I put it in quotations marks because knowing how some researchers gather and interpret data, and knowing the biases of journals, I no longer trust most research) treatments by the positive psychology folks (I have strong opinions about some of the positive psych "guru's" but as an anonymous grad student, it's not worth getting into personal/professional attacks).

I've decided that I would attempt to make my gratitude journal "public" (by public, I mean, the 2 people who read this journal - excluding my significant other).

Today I'm grateful for:

1. Good music
2. Sushi with questionable levels of mercury.
3. Electric heat.
4. Good health
5. Antidepressants
6. My sources of funding.
7. Being alive
8. Having a great significant other
9. Caffeine

Kiss of death?

2008-01-16T13:04:00.000-05:00

I interviewed with a practicum supervisor today for next year's practicum. I thought I hadn't sucked but at the end of the interview he said "after the "practicum fair" interview a couple of more people to see who is the best fit for this site, I will get back to you in February - let me know if you need a decision before then" (note: I contacted him earlier than anyone).

Is this a way of saying "I'll see you in hell"?

I didn't say anything sketchy, but I have no experience with children (but I have to start somewhere!) .... so that's a bad sign. Sigh.

Gender and likelihood of paper accenptance

2008-01-10T01:48:00.000-05:00

Double-blind peer review (neither author nor reviewer are revealed) leads to an increase in papers first-authored by women.

YAVIS vs HOUND and how I want different patients

2008-01-06T15:24:00.000-05:00

YAVIS is an acronym for Young Attractive Verbal Intelligent Successful. The term is commonly used in psychotherapy as it is assumed that these individuals are most likely to have successful experiences in therapy. I believe they are successful, in part, because therapists (and other human beings) like those who are attractive, intelligent and successful. I don't know how being young factors into the equation; but being successful in other domains in life, obviously predicts success in therapy (I think... I don't have any citations for this one). I do wonder if being verbal is *trully* helpful in therapy - or rather, verbal abilities give the impression of achieving therapeutic goals. For example, someone with higher Verbal IQ might be better able to verbalize their internal state, and appropriately use psychological jargon in a way that pleases the therapist.

The opposite of YAVIS is HOUND. Homely Old Unattractive Nonverbal and Dumb. As a heart-bleeding, liberal do-gooder, I used to be scandalized by the concept of the desirable YAVIS patient (actually, I was not scandalized that much, but I'm playing up my naivite for dramatic purposes). Thus, I was excited about the prospect of working with low-SES people with very little education. (Note: I realize that there are many educated immigrants who come to the US with nothing and are thus considered low-SES. So, I do not believe that no education and low-SES are the same; they are just highly correlated). Also, I was not really "excited", it was more like "this should be interesting and it will look good on my APA internship application"...but please bear with my dramatic license.
I've been treating a lot of people who are not "psychologically minded". I believe this is a euphemism for not very bright/verbal or for people who have no formal education. I feel guilty, but I don't want to work with HOUNDs anymore. Specially, since I'm not getting paid. (Please see Limousine Liberal). Now, the concept of the desirable YAVIS makes a lot more sense to me.
I feel like I explain VERY basic psychological concepts in VERY plain language and 90% of my patients just nod when they clearly have no understanding of what I'm saying. So I repeat it over and over again.
This is an example: "the way you think, that is your thoughts, influences way you feel. For example, if you think that you are a terrible person, you begin to feel sad or guilty. However, if you think about all the positive things you have accomplished and the good things you have done for your family, you start feeling better." (Then I ask them to picture an awful scenario and tell me how they feel. Then I ask them to picture a happy scenario and tell me how they feel - here I lose 60% of people). Then I say "you see, the way you think affected the way you feel which in turn affects the way you act". Since it is difficult to control and change one's feelings, we are going to work toward changing some of the thoughts that make you feel sad and contribute to your depression. The purpose of counseling is for us to work together to help you think rationally....blah blah".
Then I hear things like, and I quote "I don't care about thinking rationally...my husband is a no good *&%&^%%((**!!!!".
Perhaps I am a crappy therapist - this is always a possibility. However, when I explain to my supervisor what I did in session (almost verbatim) they just tell me that some people simply cannot understand such basic concepts. People have recommended that I learn D.B.T. which apparently is good with low VIQ people. I am afraid that if I learn D.B.T., I will become "the DBT person" and get all the Borderline PD patients. (Yes, I also don't want to work with Borderline patients. If that makes me a bad human being, so be it. I don't have an office phone so I'm sick of patients calling my cell-phone).

Next installment - Women who love Cocaine dependent, Antisocial Personality Disordered men, (who have cheated on them and been to jail multiple times) AND how the women believe this time he really means it when he says he's going to change (7 times court-ordered substance use treatment is the charm!!!!!).

Another semester....sigh

2008-01-03T12:39:00.001-05:00

I am back from vacation. I am cold and lonely. There's nothing I can do about the cold other than avoid going outside at all cost. To NOT be lonely requires me to go outside and seek people out. This is most unfortunate. All (most of) my classmates and program-mates are smart, decent people. However, everyone is too busy, tired, cranky, ill, depressed, disillusioned, etc. to just "hang out". Even when I do "hang out" with people, all we have to talk about is how there is no time to do research, how the undergrads we teach are not very bright, and how our personality disordered therapy patients keep calling us. (There's the occasional really COOL diagnostic case. But honestly, everyone is freaking out because we are not getting enough clinical hours). Other things we talk about: how our advisers are 1. psychopaths, 2. womanizers, 3. unethical, 4. female to male transsexuals, 5. Schizoid, 6. Autistic, 7. Narcissists, 8. "raging Cluster B". There's also the fact that we are broke.

At the same time, when I talk to people who are not, or have not been in graduate school, I have a problem relating in more than a superficial level. They ask "how do you like grad school?" and I start weeping (hyperbole). I know that there is a polite answer "oh, I'm learning so much, it's a great experience" but I can't even force it out. Research is so specialized and we use jargon so frequently that it is unclear what people who are not in our fields understand and what they don't. We (or maybe "I") are so used to people coming in and revealing very personal, disturbing stuff immediately so it becomes unclear what is personal and what is not. Adviser-advisee relationships are, supposedly, based on apprenticeship models (now-a-days almost unique to academia) so the expectations are not the same as boss-employee (specially when they are not funding you, and both your goals are to get you out of the program).

16 characteristics of psychopaths

2007-12-27T17:52:00.000-05:00

I was getting a manicure today and the manicurist was telling me about her ex-husband who, from her description, sounds like a psychopath (I did not tell her). This conversation made me want to look over my "Mask of Sanity" copy. So, for whatever reason, here are the 16 characteristics of a psychopath as listed by Checkley.

1. Superficial charm and good "intelligence"
2. Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
3. Absence of "nervousness" or psychoneurotic manifestations
4. Unreliability
5. Untruthfulness and insincerity
6. Lack of remorse or shame
7. Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior
8. Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience
9. Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love
10. General poverty in major affective reactions
11. Specific loss of insight
12. Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations
13. Fantastic and uninviting behavior with drink and sometimes without
14. Suicide rarely carried out
15. Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated
16. Failure to follow any life plan

A summary of "superficial charm"

More often than not, the typical psychopath will seem particularly agreeable and make a distinctly positive impression when he is first encountered. Alert and friendly in his attitude, he is easy to talk with and seems to have a good many genuine interests. There is nothing at all odd or queer about him, and in every respect he tends to embody the concept of a well-adjusted, happy person. Nor does he, on the other hand, seem to be artificially exerting himself like one who is covering up or who wants to sell you a bill of goods.

More than the average person, he is likely to seem free from social or emotional impediments, from the minor distortions, peculiarities, and awkwardnesses so common even among the successful.

Psychstudent says: beware of people who have NO social anxiety and appear TOO well-adjusted

Education and dementia

2007-12-13T13:28:00.001-05:00

A good thing about over-education

More on justified outrage.

2007-12-11T12:55:00.000-05:00

As a follow-up to my previous post and to the comments it has received.

I don't remember if I had posted about this, or not. But an acquaintance/friend of mine from a prestigious clinical program (not the one I'm in) got pregnant a while ago (she was in a steady relationship but not married). She was very distressed about it and talked to a few professors of both genders she felt close to/trusted (BIG MISTAKE). Now, given that I only heard one side of the story, I don't know what the professors said exactly, but from what my acquaintance told me they were unanimously (even the women) advising her not to have the child as it would ruin her career/take time away from research. She ended up getting an abortion (I found out about it after the fact). Probably she would have gotten an abortion regardless of what professors had said - but needless to say I was horrified (even though I'm pro-choice). The friend then had her first major depressive episode and not just because of the abortion (but she had gotten sick since it was relatively late-term procedure) but because the same professors were pissed off she wasn't producing research at an expected rate.

She's doing fine now, but hates academia and the field of psychology with a passion. Which I think it's a shame because I think she loves the work, just hates the people.

Not-very-subtle sexism

2007-12-09T21:11:00.000-05:00

Yes, I am morally outraged again. But I think I have good reason.
A woman in my program who is in her 30's took a semester off to give birth. Prior to her semester off, she worked her ass off to make up for what she would be missing. In terms of grades/research productivity/clinical skills, she is a solid student. Her adviser, unlike most advisers, funds all his students. He had funded her up to her semester off. In discussing her return to the program, he politely brought up that now that she has a child, he feels that she will no longer be able to produce a lot of research and he doesn't see her as having a future in academia because her child will take up too much time. Given her selfish decision to have a personal life, he will no longer fund her. Luckily, she found another processor who needs grad students to do his bidding.
Since being a grads student is NOT a job, she can't do anything about discrimination. Actually, I don't think she's even thinking about doing anything, because it will probably be a losing battle.
Which brings me to another point: graduate students are not people, they are an investment. Think of yourself (if you are a grad student) as a small business with potential. Professors are investors who will show financial/time interest only if they think you, as a "business", will be successful and turn a profit. If, due to poor advertisement, or poor sales you are no longer seen as a profitable business, they will drop you.

With friends like this...

2007-12-01T17:49:00.000-05:00

I have practicum with a good friend from school. That is, we both have the same supervisor. We were reviewing our cases with the supervisor and he was chiding me for making a mistake. The mistake was that I jumped right to CBT without explaining the rationale of CBT, that is, that CBT is important because thoughts impact how you feel and modifying thoughts is easier than modifying feelings but it is an indirect way of doing so. I made the erroneous assumption that this was obvious. (In part because I want to treat patients like I'd want to be treated and if a therapist told me what I mentioned above - I'd get offended and ask him if he thought I was retarded). I also made the more erroneous assumption that thinking logically is it's own reward, and I would point this out to the patient and the patient would find it interesting.

Anyway, my friend starts saying that she had done everything that the supervisor had done, and not made the obvious mistake I had, and proceeded to repeat what the supervisor said and say how she had said it and her patient had told her she was wonderful and he had had an epiphany. OK, I would have let it slip except that when the supervisor criticized me she would say "oh, I totally did the exact thing you are saying and it worked wonderfully and all my patients love me and are getting better". The thing is - she should have described her awesome strategies when it was HER turn to talk. Am I overreacting in thinking it's NOT COOL to make your friend lose face?

I then spoke to a mutual friend to try to see why she had done what she did - that is, was she mad at me? was she trying to show off? And then our mutual friend told me that *I* was hypersensitive and insecure. That she had obviously just wanted to describe her therapeutic skills and I was being irrational and that *I* need CBT.
Oh, I should add that when the supervisor had asked my friend a question she didn't know (how many weeks CBT lasted - I slipped her the answer and she was all like "oh, of course I know it is 12 weeks).

Were this an isolated event it would be one thing - but I also have another supervisor that she used to have, and she CONTINUOUSLY brags about how much he liked her and how he gave her better cases than he gives me because she is so competent and everyone loved her and respect her.

I mean, I know she's smart and competent, and she's better than me at some things and worse at others (she certainly works way harded than I'm willing to). But I'm self-deprecating all the time, so I don't understand why she needs to remind me how much lovable she is. I don't want to look bad and incompetent in front of others - but if I'm not the best then c'est la vie. I certainly would not point out her mistakes in front of a supervisor, or argue that a supervisor thought more highly of me than her. I mean...it's ridiculous.

This video made me happy

2007-11-27T19:12:00.000-05:00

A model of a psychopharmacologist (Gilbert & Sullivan spoof)

Emo, mood disorder, then stream-of-consciousness.

2007-11-27T18:06:00.000-05:00

So apparently some young people now a days are into something called "being emo". (I'm getting so old). Pardon my lack of full understanding but I think they are the new Goths, but with less make-up and more Cluster B'ness (Goths seem to have more of a Cluster A component). I've been reading about this "pop culture" phenomenon and I can't figure out whether it is just a "phase" teens go through, and laugh it off as being ridiculous, or whether some of these people have some serious Cluster B (in particular Histrionic/Borderline features) issues.

My problem with the histrionics of "Emo-ness" (such as bragging about their pain/depression and cutting themselves) is that, assuming this kids are going "through a phase", adolescents with TRUE mood disorders will be accused of crying wolf. If reporting symptoms consistent with a mood disorder and self-injury becomes a "pop culture movement", then how are individuals with true mental illness supposed to be identified? (assuming that "emo-ness" isn't a red flag).

This is an important subject for me because 1. I am studying mood disorders in adolesence and 2. I have had double depression (depressive episodes superimposed on dysthymia) since age 11 - which, if you read this blog regularly, I have mentioned 10000 times. (Yes, I am a cliche, I got into psychology because of my depression/anxiety).

When I was a teenager, I did not dress in black, I was very withdrawn, mild-mannered and got excellent grades. I didn't do drugs or act out. The histrionic "emo" kids got all the treatment and attention and I resented it because I felt I needed help and no one would pay any attention. There's the assumption that if you are "sick" it needs to show. And those who scream the loudest are in most pain (and I understand why this is the case). For this reason, I don't fault people who use suicidal gesture/attempts as an instrumental way to get help they cannot/are not receiving. (But I don't recommend it, unless it's a LAST resort (i.e. gesture and reporting ideation) and you know what you are doing - suicide attempts are always a bad idea, especially for overachievers - but I'm only saying this because it is an anonymous blog. I would NEVER say this to a patient).

I have known happy-go-lucky individuals who have acted "Goth" (cough...Schizotypal...cough) and talked about pain and suffering and death and darkness because it was "cute" and "sexy" and "romantic".

While I do think that some of the greatest art (poetry, literature, painting, etc.) and research have been driven by great suffering (in combination with hardwork and talent), the beauty is not in the suffering per se but on the intelligence, creativity and elegance of the defenses (aka coping mechanisms for those of you who mock psychodynamic theory without realizing how much of the other theories have drawn from it but embellished it with fancier terms like "cognitive schemas").

In conclusion (hmmm...I don't have a point, but I'll try). 1. Mental illness is NOT fun, even though 2. Mental illness will give me and lots of people jobs, 3. Pretending, or having, a psychiatric problem IS NOT fashionable, it prevents people who are really sick from getting attention/help (I won't get into the argument that people who pretend to have symptoms have a disorder themselves - e.g. is factitious disorder really a disorder? "This issue is beyond the scope of this article"). 4. Suffering is only beautiful in as far as it is combined with talent to produce beautiful work.

I heartlessly summarize: don't wear ridiculous outfits or write crappy poetry. If you can't do anything useful/beautiful/helpful with your suffering (mature defenses!) do what I did half an hour ago and call your psychiatry and tell him/her you need more meds. And make an appointment with a therapist. If YOU MUST wallow in suffering, I recommend reading some Plath, Ibsen, and anything Russian. Watch war movies, and read international news. For a more bittersweet neuroticism watch/read Woody Allen and Kurt Vonnegut.

More feminist angst

2007-11-19T11:32:00.000-05:00

I found this link on a feminist site I frequent. The link from from (ANOTHER) APA (american philosophical association!) and the "article" is written in the form of a letter from mother to daughter talking about the hardship of being a woman in a couple where both people are academics.

If this topic resonates with you, enjoy. I hope you find it helpful.

Nerdiest. Pumpkin. Ever.

2007-11-08T14:58:00.001-05:00

Learn about the test

Cover your butt at school

2007-11-06T15:38:00.000-05:00

A while ago there was an article in LifeHacker that talked about how to cover your butt at work. I thought it provided excellent advise that applies to graduate school as well. I think of my adviser as my boss, but with a bit less power since he does not control my salary. If your adviser is extremely busy, forgetful, or somewhat of a bastard. I think it is essential to document your interactions.
I am sure a lot of people have had their advisers tell them "go run (insert complicated statistical analysis that requires a software package you don't have)" and then, a couple of months later when they have managed to do this, their adviser tells them "why did you run such convoluted analysis? you should run (insert original analysis you ran months ago and took you half an hour)."
Another likely scenario is that you share a research idea with your adviser, he/she tells you is crap, and a month or so later you find out that he gave your idea to another student.

While you can't prevent this from happening, keeping good documentation is a professional way of communicating to your adviser "don't fuck with me".

Here's a summary from the LifeHacker article:

What do butt-covering notes look like? First, all your notes should be dated. Date the top of each page and when someone makes an important statement, put a time next to it when you write it down. Dates and times become difficult to argue against when one person says one thing and you say another. Time and date specifics trump general claims in verbal arguments every time.

adviser says: "I told you to run a very complicated and useless analyzes, why haven't you done it?"
you look at planner and say: "well, in our 5pm, September 9th meeting, when we were discussing how fun it is to learn a new statistical package in order to run analysis that will yield uninterpretable results, you said, and I quote "maybe you should ask Student B, who I dislike more than you, to run a useless analyzes" then I replied "thank you, please email him and have it do it" to which you replied "sure thing".

Of course, your adviser might ask you to go do it anyway, but the point is, perhaps he will not, or maybe next time he/she will think "PsychStudent obsessively keeps notes, I should go abuse someone else".

Build a file on your adviser. Do not stalk your adviser. Do not go out of your way to "build a file" - you are not Nixon. You are simply observing behavior during meetings and one-to-one interactions and keeping notes. A lot of professors get away with very unethical behavior because they know that they are not held accountable. In particular, record notably good or bad things they do. E.g. when they say something really offensive. Write it down, date and time stamp it and put it in the file.
More from LifeHacker:

Your notes will cover you. When you write down the request with a date and time, it is like building a shield. Poor [advisers] learn they cannot lie about you and thus will keep away. Good [advisers] will respect your thoroughness.

Friendly reminder: Everyone is trying to get ahead, and sometimes certain people will see you as a stepping stone to get there. Protect yourself.

Friendly reminder #2: Save all your emails. If you don't have enough space get gmail and forward your emails to your gmail account. Also, we happen to have a nosy system networks guy who reads a lot of the emails people send when they are logged on to our lab's network. For personal emails I recommend not using a university account, use some other email. Also remember, that for information that might bite you in the butt (e.g. venting about certain professors) is better conveyed verbally than through email. I know that most people are not bastards, but you don't want to misjudge someone as a non-bastard, send them a mean email about your department, and have the bastard show the email to people.

Essentially - assume everyone is keeping notes.

(Note: I don't take thorough notes because I'm lazy. But I DO save my emails. It might seem paranoid, but in retrospect, there are many instances I wish I would have followed this advise.)

Long time...and starting therapy

2007-11-04T14:16:00.000-05:00

Hello everyone. If anyone has noticed, I apologize for my absence. I really have no excuse, sometimes I feel like blogging, sometimes I think it's too narcissistic (no offense to other bloggers - I actually LIKE reading other people's blogs and I don't think they are narcissist - I just have double standards for my self). I've been feeling depressed off and on. Which is nothing new. It has NOT been a depression characterized by painful, depressed mood and crying (I hate those depressions) but more of a very anhedonic, fatigued, "general malaise" kind of depression. Perhaps this is a function of making a transition from beginning to advanced graduate student. It's like limbo. With freedom comes the responsibility of structuring your own schedule and making yourself be productive. Having my own funding (yes, I can't complaint) everything I do, I do it because I WANT TO. I mean, there are some basic program requirements, but *I* choose how much research I do, and what topic it is on. I also essentially handpicked my practicum site AND my practicum supervisor for this year. For therapy, I choose to take more patients than I have to (well, keeping in mind the internship application requirements which are honestly ridiculously high in terms to face-to-face hours - especially when you are in a VERY research-oriented program). I applied to teach next semester, and I might be doing neuropsych assessments for a research project.
In a way, I'm fulfilling requirements and working to buff up my CV; but compared to other people in my program who have not been as lucky in getting what they want (esp. in terms of funding) I'm doing pretty darn good.
Here's where I get whiny - even though I have a great deal of choice (or perceived choice) in what I do (very rare for grad students) with it comes the additional responsibility that I am responsible for the outcomes and responsible for my unhappiness (let's forget for a moment that I'm , philosophically, a determinist). In a very structured world where you are told what to do, and your day is planned, the world feels extremely suffocating (I'd expect an increase in prevalence of panic attacks), but there's the safety that you know what you HAVE to do.
On the other hand, I appreciate the feeling of being relatively young and that I could potentially have lots of career choices.
Anyway, my "existential ramblings" seem so ridiculous when on a weekly basis I see people who the best I (and their team of mental health professionals) can hope for is that they don't kill themselves anytime soon. I get to see people with no jobs, no family, no home, no reality testing, and with no sense of self (this is particularly disturbing); so I feel like I have no right to complaint. (I should note that all my practica have been with severely and persistent mentally ill individuals, and that within the practica I have always asked my supervisors to let me take on the most challenging - i.e. the most ill - cases).

While I have always considered diagnostic assessments to be like a one day concentrated therapy (lots of crying and suicide prevention), I am now conducting therapy. I don't really get to pick my therapy cases (I take the ones who return) but it has been a very interesting experience. I've been doing a lot of couple's therapy (which I don't particularly like), but mostly I end up seeing partners separately and then together.
I want to delineate a situation that seems to be almost the "norm" for the population I am seeing: Psychopathic/ASPD emotionally/verbally abusive male and depressed/low self-esteem/Borderline female. Despite having the man being manipulative and abusive they both want to stay together and make the relationship work. I am used to having the same goals as my clients (they want to be less crazy/I want them to be less crazy), but it is very difficult when they ask you to help them make their relationship work but YOU KNOW that this will be bad for them (in particular the woman).
I know that "what is good for someone" is a subjective "judgment call" (although sometimes it really doesn't seem that subjective). And I usually tell them that my opinions on whether they should stay together is irrelevant, that they are my clients and if they want to work toward staying together I will help them. But for the love of me, it seems almost unethical... (NOTE: I'm not talking about PHYSICAL /SEXUAL abuse, the men I'm talking about cheat on their spouses, are EXTREMELY manipulate - e.g. threaten to kill themselves if their S.O. leave, are very controlling/jealous).
Has anyone had a similar experience?

(I should add that most of my classmates seemed to really enjoy being in a position of power and being treated by clients as such - for some reason, I don't feel that way - I feel like I'm there to "serve" them.)

academia and religion

2007-10-08T13:54:00.001-04:00

A while ago I meant to post a link to an article in the Harvard Alumni magazine. They have an interesting article about the religious beliefs of professors. Yesterday, I watched a David Horowitz interview were he was, for lack of a better term, bitching about professors' godless liberal agendas. I've never had a professor try to convert me to their beliefs. What I suspect is happening is that people with certain personality traits are drawn to certain careers and fields of research. And for whatever reason, individuals who are drawn to academia tend to (compared to the rest of the population) be more politically liberal and not as religious. I think by the time people enter college/graduate school they already have well-established political beliefs (or political "leanings"), it's rather ludicrous to think that taking a class from a professor who has certain beliefs will "convert you" to their beliefs.

I know a senior grad student who is extremely religious and politically conservative. She supports Bush and the war in Iraq. She's extremely pro-life; she has a strong dislike of homosexuals; she has never tried alcohol in her life because the body is "god's temple"; she thinks people who drink or have premarital sex are sinners. Essentially she thinks everyone who isn't her is a sinner. (I realize this is an extreme example). Anyway, no one has attacked her personally for her views - and while I disagree with her, I just didn't care - what got to me, and why I'm blogging about her, is that she feels oppressed and wronged because she's surrounded by people who don't go to church every week, or are against the war in Iraq, or don't have a problem with homosexuals. I don't think that being surrounded by people who disagree with you counts as "oppression" if they don't attack you for your beliefs.

Anyway, here's an interesting section from the article:

A professor’s field of research or discipline is also predictive, he
adds: psychologists and biologists are most likely to be nonbelievers
(61 percent are atheist or agnostic), followed by mechanical engineers,
economists, and political scientists. The most likely believers are
professors of accounting (63 percent have no doubt that God exists),
followed by professors of elementary education, finance, art, criminal
justice, and nursing.

The data don’t show why psychology
professors are much more likely than professors of accounting to be
atheists; that would require a longitudinal study over decades. But
theories abound, says Gross. One suggests that social scientists work
hard to prove their fields of study are in fact science, and
distancing themselves from religious belief helps in their attempt to
do that. Another possibility is that social scientists spend their time
analyzing man-made institutions, which Gross notes could have a
“de-divinizing effect” on them.”

Psychstudent says: By the time people are professors they already have well-established beliefs. I don't think the field "changes" people, I think people are drawn to environments which match their personalities/beliefs and these environments, in turn, reinforce their predispositions. (Gene-Environment Correlation!)

Note: thank you for pointing out I got GE correlation and interaction mixed up. To clarify:

Gene-environment interactions are expressed through genetic variation in the susceptibility toward particular environmental risks, whereas gene-environment correlations are genetically mediated propensities in the exposure toward certain environments.

RANT: advisors, career choices, happiness - or lack thereof

2007-09-23T17:15:00.000-04:00

This post is so long it has 3 parts. I actually had more to say but got tired.

Part I - My cognitive bias

So, I just had what feels like an epiphany. I'm writing it down because I have a terrible memory for positive things.
(As my significant other once pointed out, I don't remember objects or events per se, unless there was something about them that made me very angry or depressed. Example: My S.O. kept talking about a fan that I own, he was describing it in detail and for the love of me I thought he was delusional. Then he said "remember it has the blue light that annoyed you so much," then I remembered it immediately and I started cursing. In a nutshell, I think that things in my brain are categorized but what about them upset me.)

After washing dishes for 3 hours (my first activity after spending the past two days in bed) it dawned upon me that I'm really fucking tired of being unhappy. I always tell myself, that at least I'm not miserable like I used to be when I was severely depressed. And I'm happy that I don't have any severe MDD anymore. However, it seems that since grad school started other than a constant feeling of anhedonia and fatigue the only thing I can get myself to feel is anger (well, I'm more irritability than anger, which I have no outlet for - I'm not the yelling, histrionic type) or anxiety.

Anxiety/fear is good in the sense that it motivates me to do things. But I am also tired of doing EVERYTHING because I'm afraid of what would happen if I don't do them. It seems that very little I do is motivated by a positive drive. (I want to say that I think SOME anxiety/fear is a great thing - it helps you plan for the future and prevents you from doing stupid stuff. I think it reinforced impulse control and generally I don't trust people with very little anxiety).

For example: I don't eat because I enjoy eating anymore, I eat because I have an irrational fear of scurvvy (OK - I'm joking here, essentially I eat because I need nutrients and calories and because I want hunger to go away). Even, I realize, that I don't go to social events because I like social events - it's usually because one of the following: If I don't go people will get upset at me, socializing will help me develop socials skills, I should be less introverted...etc.

OK: so now you are thinking I should go see a shrink because I'm depressed (yes, I'm a little depressed) or because I have prodromal schizophrenia (just plain wrong). Essentially my problem is that I find it very difficult to experience positive feelings. What personality theorists would describe as "low in trait of positive emotionality."

Part II - Grad school propaganda.

People (including myself) seem to be driven by a very strong fear of "failure" (it's unclear how people operationalize this term, but I suspect most of the time is really vague. Vagueness has the neurotic benefit that you can always tell yourself that you are failing.) A large part of "failure" seems to be beliefs from the establishment (our department) that we internalize.

For example: we fail as human beings if we don't become uber-researchers. This bothers me for a number of reasons, mainly that it requires that we constantly put down people who aren't uber-reaserches (think about it, if we define success as being a uber-researcher, then 99.999999999999% of the population is a failure).
I'm sick of being told that students who went on to not become like professors in our department are failures - what scares me the most is that I think some of this message is subconsciously stuck with me (I feel so ashamed to admit it!). It's like the automatic thoughts of depressives that they might not be even aware they are having.

Example: a classmate of mine, lets call him John, has taught every semester, spends a lot of time teaching, and seems to enjoy it a great deal. I was chatting with another grad student, let's call her Yoko, and I said "I can totally see Johnny as a professor in a teaching college". Yoko replied "do you think that he's not smart enough to be at a research 1 place?".
I find that even people who have left the department and are now professors are small liberal art colleges keep justifying that they, indeed, had the research background to be a research 1 professor, but that they CHOSE to turn down those places and go to a teaching college. THERE SHOULD BE NO NEED TO JUSTIFY THIS!

Part III - the epiphany.

Anyway, so here it goes: why do we care so much about what professors in our department think? I mean, who the fuck are they? Just because we agree to be in a Ph.D. program for 4-6 years, why do we give them the power to determine what makes us "worthy as a person"? Also, isn't it a bit suspicious that what makes you "worthy" is to become LIKE THEM? Really think about it. I mean, we all think about it, but if we break down what's going on it's incredibly irrational! I see people with IQ's in the 135-145 range who could be great at a number of things made to feel like CRAP because they don't like research (or don't have an aptitude for it).
The world is a huge place. If you are very sharp and relatively hardworking (hmmm...sorry if you are not sharp) you should be able to find a job that at least makes you content. (OK, this doesn't apply to countries with strict cast systems or where women are not allowed to work).

My points are (BTW, in my mind a lot of these are addressed to my classmates, but they generalize well):

1. Your professors are just people, they don't really have THAT much power over you. Yes, they have power in terms of funding and writing you rec letters, but what makes them so god-like that they get to determine your self-worth?

2. If you want to be an uber-researcher that is great, I'm not criticizing uber-researchers. What I'm saying is, it's NOT the only way to NOT be a failure. Actually, the message that the only way to be "worthy" (OF WHAT?) is to be a research 1 professor is absolutely ridiculous when you think about all the people who have other jobs and have fulfilling lives.

3. A lot of smart people feel that since they are blessed with a good brain, it is their responsibility to society to use it in ways that people with not such blessed brains can't. This is a tricky feeling because it shows a lot of altruism and a lot of narcissism at the same time (at some point I'll post about how I agree with Anna Freud that altruism is selfish). If you are concerned with being a useful member to society, just do something and do it well. Everyone is good at SOMETHING. If you care about the greater good, volunteer, stay out of jail, don't vote republican (snap!), recycle...etc.

Closing on a cynical yet hopeful note: most people want to "make a significant contribution" to something. Honestly, unless you are someone like Gandhi, Churchill, Freud, Voltaire, Newton, etc...you probably won't make that big a difference in the world. The best you can hope for is to help a few people and not make society any worse. So once you are aware of everyone's insignificance, I think you can take everything less seriously and start to enjoy things.

Oppressed populations, misery loves miserable company

2007-09-15T17:05:00.001-04:00

I have to thank my wonderful anonymous significant other for the following post. Actually, a lot of "wise" discoveries I post about on my blog, he helped me discovered. But anyway, I have the anonymous blog so I get the anonymous credit from the 2-5 people who read it (I love you guys!).

I will start with a quote from a movie I have not seen, but plan to:

You got a dream, you gotta protect it. People can't do something themselves, they wanna tell you that you can't do it. You want something? Go get it. Period.

I also want to add the corollary that if people don't think they can do it themselves, they will tell you you can't do it. (Not necessarily malicious, some people will really think you can't).

How this applies to grad school:
If you are a typical grad. student in a new city, you will become friends with your classmates/coworkers. Very often, they will be your only friends in that city (if you are lame like me). If you are lucky, you will make a couple of really good friends, and you will bond thanks to the horrors and shared experiences of grad school.

There are two extreme views of human nature, I subscribe to neither. As I get older I keep coming to the conclusion that the truth is somewhere "in between" of most things.
I will illustrate the two "extreme" views using quotes from the excellent TV show Scrubs. (No philosophers for you!):

One: No one's pure evil! I mean, yeah, some people have a hard outer shell, but inside, everybody has a creamy center. (PsychStudent says: clearly she has not spoken to psychopaths in prison who say the individuals they killed/raped deserved, and feel absolutely no guilt or remorse over their gruesome crimes).
Two: People aren't chocolates. Do you know what they are, mostly? Bastards. Bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling; but I don't find them half as annoying as I find naïve, bubble-headed optimists who walk around vomiting sunshine. (PsychStudent says: I agree with the vomiting sunshine part, but most people have "creamy parts". I would say that amount of creaminess is normally distributed in the population - and leave it at that).

Anyway, you might become friends with grad students who have a good amount of creaminess. And if so, you are very fortunate. While I'd like to say "Trust no one", I think it's okay to trust some people with some aspects of your lives. All stuff you already know.

To the point: You (as grad students) will feel, at times, like members of an oppressed population and experience much learned helplessness.
I think, grad school environment can sometimes feel like professors are doing the following (Also from Scrubs!):
Dr. Cox: When I crush a person's spirit, I like to use a combination of intimidation and degradation. Dr. Kelso: I prefer to create an environment in which the subjects end up crushing themselves! (PsychStudent says: this one is the most insidious of all)

Grad students will feel competitive with each other (be particularly wary of those who deny it). Classmates might congratulate you for your publications and your fellowships - but deep down, no matter how creamy they are, there will be envy and a sense of competition. In particular because the stakes are so low.

My advise: never ask (or always get a second opinion) fellow grad students in the same position as you for professional advise, or advise on how to take on the establishment, get more funding, etc. Post-docs or very senior students who are successful and do not perceive you as a threat/competition might be a better bet. (Actually, don't take advice from insecure people who might feel, rationally or rationally threatened by you). Your classmate might be nice and they might think they are trying to help, but if they are unhappy or in any way perceive they are competing with you they will NOT have your best interest in mind.

This might seem very obvious to you (good) or incredibly cynical (ah, you have much to learn, Grasshopper) but as you get closer to your grad school friends and the comfort zone increases you will find yourself naturally telling them lots of things and asking for advice.

If you don't believe me, you can test it. Next time you have a professional "issue" ask impartial people in your life what the best course of action would be. (If you don't have people in your life, ask a competent therapist...if you don't have a competent therapist, ask random successful people/professors). Once you've made up your mind (cost benefit analysis!) what the best course of action would be, ask your classmates for advice. (This sounds awfully sneaky, but actually I've done this without realizing I was "testing" people, and ended up extremely disappointed).

After Antidepressant Warning, Youth Prescriptions Down, but Suicides Way Up

2007-09-15T13:27:00.000-04:00

Oh lord. Granted I'm biased because 1. I predicted this would happen, and 2. I think, like fluoride, they should have low grade doses of SSRI in the water.
I know that correlation is not causation, but...suspicious.

From WEBMD

Sept. 13, 2007 – Warnings that antidepressants may increase teen suicides appear to have backfired, a new study suggests.
The study shows that a steep drop in antidepressant prescriptions for children and teens followed the FDA and European drug authority warnings. At the same time, there was an unprecedented spike in child and teen suicides.
The study isn't proof that the antidepressant warnings caused the increase in suicides. But the circumstantial evidence -- from both the U.S. and the Netherlands -- is very compelling.
"The FDA actions look like they had very serious unintended consequences," Brown tells WebMD. "Our analyses show that the FDA actions, which should have reduced or at least not changed the number of suicides for youth, had just the opposite effect."
On the advice of an expert panel, the FDA in 2004 put a "black-box" warning -- its highest warning level -- on antidepressants for pediatric use. The panel's advice was based not on actual suicides, but on indications that suicidal thoughts and behaviors increased in some children and teens taking newer SSRI-type antidepressants.
It looks as though the FDA effort backfired, says Boris Birmaher, MD, director of the child and adolescent mood and anxiety program at the University of Pittsburgh's Western Psychiatric Institute.
Researcher Robert D. Gibbons, PhD, of the University of Illinois, Chicago, was a member of the FDA panel. He voted against the black-box warning. "The FDA has overestimated the effect of antidepressant medications on suicidality and dramatically underestimated the efficacy of antidepressants in the treatment of childhood depression," Gibbons told WebMD in April 2007.

Bipolar soars as diagnosis for the young

2007-09-03T22:19:00.001-04:00

The number of American children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder increased 40-fold from 1994 to 2003, researchers report today in the most comprehensive study of the controversial diagnosis.

Many experts theorize that the jump reflects that doctors are more
aggressively applying the diagnosis to children, and not that the
incidence of the disorder has increased.

But the magnitude of the increase surprises many psychiatrists. They say it is likely to intensify the debate over the validity of the diagnosis, which has shaken child psychiatry.

Some experts say greater awareness, reflected in the increasing
diagnoses, is letting youngsters with the disorder obtain the treatment
they need.

Other experts say bipolar disorder is overdiagnosed.
The term, the critics say, has become a catchall applied to almost any
explosive, aggressive child.

What do you guys thing? As usual, I think the truth lies somewhere in-between. However, I have seen (at least in adults) that bipolar has become increasingly "fashionable," in terms of psychiatrists/psychologists handing out the diagnosis liberally. So the question is, is it better to overdiagnose people with bipolar (err on the side of giving non-bipolars a bipolar diagnosis) or risk underdiagnosing (correctly diagnose non-bipolars as non-bipolars at the risk of leaving some bipolars improperly diagnosed).

Don't cry in front of your adviser

2007-08-25T16:19:00.001-04:00

I would describe my relationship with my adviser as neutral. I don't care if he likes me as a person as long as he respects my work and as long as he will help further my career. I wish he were more hands on, but other than ask for help when I need it, there is nothing I can do. He won't change his advising style.

Anyway, I keep hearing from lots of female ex-grad students that he is a cruel sadistic man who likes to put people down and make them cry. (It's my understanding that more women have cried in his office than in most therapists'). I certainly don't get that vibe from him. I'm sure he's capable of it, but he's too pragmatic to be sadistic (hopefully). But here's my theory, and it applies to other faculty members too - a lot of faculty hate weakness. (I'm not saying these women were weak, it's more the display of signs of weaknesses). Perhaps it's tough love, perhaps is sadism, but there is something about displays of submissiveness and self-doubt that make other people (read: NOT ALL people) want to push the submissive person further.

I actually had a member of our faculty tell me that he likes pushing people's buttons to 1. test how they react, 2. toughen them up.

While I'm a very anxious person plagued with self-doubt (and I don't really hide this), I think I've done a couple of things to my favor: 1. when I feel a faculty member is "being mean", I call them on it. (Surprisingly, sometimes a 'look of death' works - but I have perfected mine :-) and tell them it's not cool. 2. I don't cry - NOTE: work on your poker face. (Well, I can leave someone's office and weep like a baby, but the point is, as far as THEY know I was no affected by what was said).

The more you don't reinforce sadistic behavior, the lower it's frequency.

I am addressing women, simply because I have not seen male students complaint of this, but I think it applies to both genders. I can't emphasize this enough - CRITICIZING WORK DOES NOT MEAN CRITICIZING THE PERSON. I've had a method's section figuratively torn to pieces by my adviser, this would have upset a lot of people, but I thought his advice was actually quite good. So rather than wallow in self-pity that "he hates me because he rewrote my methods section", I was happy he made it so much better.

A lot of people get upset when their adviser's overly edit their papers, even if the adviser is known for doing that. My positive outlook on it is - be happy he's reading it! I get more concerned when I get a draft with nothing on it.

All of the above being said: there's no substitute for producing good work. (no pressure there). In the world of academia almost everything is forgiven if you produce good research.

Scientists induce out-of-body sensation

2007-08-23T16:01:00.001-04:00

For those of you interested in perception, there's an interesting article in the New York Times about inducing out-of-body sensation in healthy participants.

Using virtual reality goggles, a camera and a stick, scientists have induced out-of-body experiences.

I wonder how much the RA who gets to poke people with the stick gets paid...

Unorthodox Get-Well cards.

2007-08-22T15:54:00.001-04:00

It's always an awkward situation when people tell you they will be away either because they will commit themselves as an inpatient at a mental health facility, they are going to rehab, or they are starting a course of ECT. Same thing if you find out someone is in the hospital because they have attempted suicide.
I wish they made cards for these situations - Get Well! cards seem too impersonal, and Good Luck! cards are too cheerful.

Relationship with your adviser

2007-08-22T00:39:00.001-04:00

There's a nice one page article in gradPSYCH (american psychological association) about what adviser's expect for you, or more specifically, what is expected in the adviser-advisee relationship. In a way I feel they are stating the obvious, but most of the problems people have with their advisers seem to be rooted in having a problem understanding the nature of the relationship (or simply not being happy with it).

Take the initiative. Don't wait for your adviser to suggest meetings—set them up yourself. Be appropriately assertive about what they need or want. At this point in your career, it's time to take the lead—you are ultimately responsible for making sure your research and other work gets done.

psychstudent says: this is certainly the case with my adviser. You can disappear for months and he won't even notice. I don't think he's ever set up a meeting. However, he will gladly schedule one if I request. I have found most professors operate this way, but a lot of students become upset because their advisers don't reach out to them and schedule regular meetings.

Understand the purpose of the relationship. (psychstudent says: this is CRUCIAL) Some adviser-advisee relationships may
be closer than others, but remember that this is ultimately a professional relationship. An adviser is your introduction to the profession, someone who will help you define your research topics and provide guidance as you negotiate the demands of a graduate program. He or she is not your therapist and doesn't want to spend extensive time discussing personal concerns.

This is a tough one because relationships vary so much. I went from having a mentor with whom I had a personal relationship to one who shuns away from any exchange of personal information. It can be quite a shock if you are not used to it. My advice is to think of your adviser as a boss in a business setting. Don't try to force a personal relationship if he/she doesn't want one. You can obsess over how your adviser is cold and doesn't care about you as a person, but you won't achieve anything. Also, there are other mentors out there...

Give back. Advisers appreciate students who bring new perspectives. Try to adjust to your adviser's work habits. For instance, if an adviser is scattered, you may have to remind him or her of where you are in your project.

This is common sense, but I think sometimes grad students, including myself, get upset that their adviser's don't know what their grad students are working on/what year they are/their name. Again, don't take it personally. I just assume that my adviser doesn't know who I am or what I'm working on, so every time I email him or every time I meet with him I remind him of all these things.

Be professional. Don't be late for meetings or miss (basic common sense). Take deadlines
seriously and turn in papers you're proud of. (I always think everything I do is poor quality work, so if I had to wait to be proud of something I'd never get anything done. If you have the same pathology/neurosis I do...you probably shouldn't follow this advice.) Some students expect too much of the work to be done by the adviser. (Yes, like them remembering your name).

My OWN "tip": Remember that your adviser doesn't OWN you. While adviser's do have a lot of power over grad students, remember that a lot of their power you give to them. For example, while they have power over the work that gets done, how they make you feel about yourself is ultimately up to you. (Easier said than done). Another things to consider: there are always OTHER professors in your department, there are always OTHER departments, there are always OTHER school, and there are always OTHER careers.

Top searche queries that lead to my site.

2007-08-18T14:56:00.000-04:00

Still odd: Also, how the hell does "orgasm school" lead to my website - well, I guess now that I'm writing about "orgasm school" more disappointed individuals will be led here. Someone searched for "despair wow" AND "wow despair"?

Top search queries		Average top position
1. auf wiedersehen		10
2. orgasm school		9
3. wiedersehen		9
4. anhedonic		10
5. despair wow		1
6. yay me		7
7. "auf wiedersehen"		10
8. still awake		3
9. boudaries		1
10. wow despair		11

Ethics and a very ill coworker

2007-08-17T22:37:00.000-04:00

A friend of mine and myself have this coworker who had a "nervous breakdown". He has gotten help from a social worker who diagnosed him with depression and anxiety and prescribed him Celexa. (No idea how the social worker has prescription power). My friend and I, however, think he has some serious paranoid delusions. We also have noted multiple negative symptoms, and essentially think he's headed for a psychotic break (right age too). Officially, he's not our responsibility, he is the mental health workers responsibility. Also, he is very very angry - but hasn't made any specific threats so we can't report him. Other than telling him to seek professional help (which he did), I don't know what else can be done...He's a very angry person, so saying "hey, we think you will soon develop a psychotic disorder" won't go over very well.

Conditioning women to be sad, and men to be angry (and men to be men)

2007-08-16T18:19:00.000-04:00

This really pisses me off. So I guess I'm coming across as incompetent.

Workplace anger viewed differently by gender
Study: Antagonistic men admired, while women seen 'out of control'

A man who gets angry at work may well be admired for it but a woman who shows anger in the workplace is liable to be seen as "out of control" and incompetent, according to a new study presented on Friday.

Men and women recruited randomly watched videos of a job interview and were asked to rate the applicant's status and assign them a salary.

Scripts were identical except where the candidate described feeling either angry or sad about losing an account due to a colleague's late arrival at a meeting.

Participants conferred the most status on the man who said he was angry, the second most on the woman who said she was sad, slightly less on the man who said he was sad, and least of all by a sizable margin on the woman who said she was angry.

(psychstudent says: clearly women are being reinforced for feeling sad and punished for expressing anger. While men are rewarded for being angry.)

The average salary assigned to the angry man was almost $38,000 compared to about $23,500 for the angry woman and in the region of $30,000 for the other two candidates.

In a second experiment, the script was similar except that the job applicant also described his or her current occupation as a trainee or a senior executive.

"Participants rated the angry female CEO as significantly less competent than all of the other targets, including even the angry female trainee," Brescoll wrote. She said they viewed angry females as significantly more "out of control."

That impacted salaries. Unemotional women were assigned on average $55,384 compared to $32,902 for the angry ones. Male executive candidates were assigned more than trainees, regardless of anger, with an average $73,643. (oh okay, so men are being reinforced for being male and women punished for being women).

To ponder: "depression is anger turned inward" and "rates of depression in women are twice as high than in men".

Last interview ever given by Albert Ellis

2007-08-15T12:38:00.000-04:00

Here are some tidbits from an interview conducted by Jules Evans of Portrait Magazine. Go here for the whole interview. I highly recommend it.

Last interview Albert Ellis ever gave, some nice candid descriptions about the man.

”He is also a colourful character, given to swearing like a fishwife (he has suggested that Freud's ideas were "horseshit from start to finish") and insistent on his view that "most human beings are out of their fucking minds." You could say he is a modern Diogenes: foul-mouthed, free-thinking, trying to liberate us from the mental habits that make us miserable.”

He read philosophy widely when he was growing up in the Bronx, and he was particularly struck by a comment of the Stoic philosopher Epictetus: "It's not events, but our opinions about them, which cause us suffering."

Both stoicism and CBT teach you to become aware of these unconscious or automatic (psychstudent says: clearly then, Freud’s ideas are not “horseshit”!) opinions.

Replacing irrational opinions with more philosophical ones is not easy, because such opinions are deeply ingrained, so you have to wrestle with them, over and over again.

Ellis himself used these techniques when he was growing up, to overcome his fear of talking to girls. He sat on a bench in the Bronx Botanical Gardens, and promised himself he'd try to talk to 100 girls. He did so, and managed to get one date. "She didn't turn up," he says, "but I did better on the next 100 girls, and eventually became one of the best picker-uppers in New York." (good for him!)

About the Albert Ellis Institute controversy:

He founded the institute (Albert Ellis Institute) amid the idealism of the 1960s, as a not for profit trust to spread his philosophy, which he calls rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), around the world. He bought a desirable house near Madison Avenue, and signed it over to the trust. He then channeled all his royalties from the 70 or so books he wrote, plus the earnings from the therapy and teaching he did every day, into the trust, withdrawing a salary for himself of around $12,000 a year.

In 2005, at the age of 91 and after a serious illness, he married a teacher at the institute, Debbie Joffe, 40 years his junior. This seems to have startled some members of the board of the institute, who were perhaps wondering who would be in charge after Ellis died. Whatever the reason, the board called an extraordinary board meeting, at which Ellis was told that the institute could no longer pay his sizeable medical expenses without risking its not for profit status, so he had to be fired from the board. This, the present executive director of the institute, Robert O'Connell, tells me, was "the only solution."

He was kicked off the board of the institute he had spent his life setting up, which still made millions of dollars from his teachings. His credit cards were cancelled. And he has now spent most of his savings on his healthcare. (This is unbelievable). He was also banned from giving his usual Friday night group sessions in the institute, where any member of the public could turn up and receive free counseling.

Ellis himself manages to stay stoical about the whole nasty business. "They [the board] have behaved abominably," he says. "But they're fucked-up, fallible human beings, just like everyone else." He has continued soldiering on, even teaching students from his bed just a few hours after an operation.

Ellis, self-centerdness, psychopathology

2007-08-12T11:55:00.001-04:00

Another article from the New York Times.

Interesting (perhaps controversial) quote from Ellis:

From “How to Stubbornly Refuse to Make Yourself Miserable About Anything: Yes, Anything!”:

Not all emotional disturbance stems from arrogant thinking. But most of it does. And when you demand that you must not have failings, you can also demand that you must not be neurotic. ...

Neurosis still comes mainly from you. ... And you can choose to stop your nonsense and to stubbornly refuse to make yourself neurotic about virtually anything. ...

Will insight into your emotional problems help you overcome them? ... Conventional insight will help you very little. For it says that your knowledge of exactly how you got disturbed will make you less neurotic. Drivel! It will often help make you become nuttier!

---
I have been thinking about things that are common across different disorders and one of them is narcissism. Not as in "narcissistic personality disorder" but the tendency of thinking that everything is about YOU (or ME!). I remember reading somewhere that depression and narcissism are two sides of the same coin (I believe that this was a psychodynamic book!). At the time, I thought it was preposterous since narcissism, I thought, is about how great YOU are and depression is about how terrible YOU are. But if you think about (stereotyped) depressive cognitions/ruminations: "*I* am so terrible. *I* am guilty of all the evils in the world. *Everyone* hates me because *I* am the most awful person in the world." There's an underlying assumption that you are important in your awfulness and insignificance. (Hey, I've been depressed, so I'm not knocking depressed people). Another example is Social Phobia. Social phobics thinks that everyone is watching them and judging them (hmmm..well, maybe they are...), and social phobics tend to ruminate about social interactions and think that people are still thinking about them.
My last example (but there are more, like the self-centerdness that underlies borderline personality disorder and essentially all cluster B - Histrionic PD, ASPD) is paranoia (the symptom). If the FBI, CIA, and outer space beings are all after YOU - you must be pretty darn special. Even milder (non-psychotic) paranoia like "I often feel that strangers take special notice of me" or delusions of reference "there are special messages being broadcasted to me from the TV" calls attention to one's specialness. (disclaimer: just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. I think some degree of paranoia is healthy and warranted). Another good example is magical thinking "If I think of something, it will happen".

Now, before I get angry emails, I'm NOT saying that people with mental illness are arrogant. And I'm certainly not saying that the cause of depression, personality disorders or psychotic disorder is narcissism. I'm just pointing out the fact that these very different disorders share a focus-on-the-self cognition, very often found in non-mentally ill people. I DO think that one of the keys to being "well-adjusted" is realizing one's insignificance, acknowledging it, and accepting it.

"I need to buy that for when I see patients"

2007-08-11T22:05:00.000-04:00

I don't know if other people do this, but I keeping using the excuse that I need to look nice and professional for patients to buy tons of clothes. Last year was my first year of practicum so I purchased black/gray pants and lots of nice shirts "for when I see patients". Next year I will have 2 practica, which means I will see patients TWICE a week, which of course, I rationalize, means I need to double my "professional" wardrobe. One practicum will be assessments and the other practicum will be therapy - obviously this requires different "assessment" and "therapist" outfits...

I think the moment I realized this was an absolutely ridiculous excuse was when, in a "shopping to look professional" rampage I bought a Revlon lip gloss named "Sassy Sangria". I think there is no way to rationalize that I bought "Sassy Sangria" to "look professional when I see patients"

The Milgram Experiments - Obedience

2007-08-11T02:34:00.000-04:00

Don't let your coworkers diagnose you

2007-08-11T01:56:00.001-04:00

The following NYTimes article was brought to my attention by one of my blog's reader and a classmate of mine. It is written by a psychiatrist and is about a psychiatric nurse he worked with. This nurse suffered a "nervous breakdown"....keep reading.
It it essentially about how knowing your patient may have a negative impact on your diagnostic skills and treatment options (less likely to take risks).

All-Nighters

2007-08-11T00:52:00.000-04:00

Yes, I still pull "all-nighters" in graduate school. I procrastinate until the last moment and then cram cram. Everyone advices against it - but it works for me. Still hasn't failed me in terms of grades. Anyway, here's an interesting article called "Anatomy of An All-Nighter". It describes what goes on with our bodies and gives you tips on being successful at staying awake.

I don't live in the US?

2007-08-08T13:35:00.000-04:00

HowManyOfMe.com

There are
0
people with my name
in the U.S.A.

How many have your name?

Cheapest days to buy certain items

2007-07-26T22:55:00.000-04:00

Because grad. students are poor...

The following information is from SmartMoney.com

The best days to buy:

Airplane Tickets
Wednesday morning.
Why: "Most airfare sales are thrown out there on the weekend," says travel expert Peter Greenberg, a.k.a. The Travel Detective. Other airlines then jump into the game, discounting their own fares and prompting further changes by the first airline. The fares reach their lowest prices late Tuesday or early Wednesday.

Books
Thursday.
Why: Price compare between major chains Borders and Barnes & Noble. The former releases its weekly sales and coupons on every Thursday; the latter, every Tuesday.

Cars
Monday.
Why: "Car dealers live for the weekend, which is when they make most of their sales," says Phil Reed, consumer advice editor for Edmunds.com. "On Mondays, the low foot traffic makes it seem like the weekend will never come." That dealer desperation, paired with fewer consumers on the lot, give you more negotiating power.

Clothing
Thursday evening.
Why: That's the day when stores stock their shelves for the weekend, and when many retailers — including Ann Taylor, Banana Republic and Express — start their weekend promotions, says Kathryn Finney, author of "How to Be a Budget Fashionista." You'll find great prices and the best selection. "It's an effort to get people to shop in the middle of the week," she says.

Department-Store Wares
Saturday evening.
Why: Department stores have a lot to mark down for their Sunday circulars, so they frequently start the process on Saturday evenings before store closing, says Finney. "They're preparing for the big rush," she says. Bonus: Even if the markdowns haven't been made, many employees will honor the sale price if you ask. Print out the circular preview from the store's web site, and bring it with you when you head to the mall.

Dinner Out
Tuesday.
Why: Most restaurants do not receive food deliveries over the weekend. "Sunday is the garbage-can day of the week," says Kate Krader, senior editor at Food & Wine magazine. "No doubt, they're cleaning out their fridges. Tuesdays, they're starting fresh." Dining out on that day offers the best odds you'll get a meal worth paying for, no matter your price point, she says.

Entertainment
Wednesday.
Why: Plenty of movie theaters, amusement parks and museums offer extra discounts to consumers who visit midweek. Six Flags theme parks offer a $12 discount to AAA members — three times its usual discount of $4. AMC Theatres offers members in its free AMC Movie Watcher reward program a free small popcorn on Wednesdays. (This summer, it's also the day select theaters offer free Summer Movie Camp screenings.)

Gas
Thursday, before 10 a.m.
Why: The price of oil isn't the only factor influencing costs at your local pump. Consumer usage plays a role, too — and weekend demand is high, says Jason Toews, co-founder of GasBuddy.com, a price-monitoring site. Prices usually swing upward on Thursdays as travelers fuel up to head out the following day. By hitting the pump before 10 a.m. (when many station owners change their prices), you'll beat the rush and the price jump.

Groceries
Sunday — or Tuesday.
Why: Maximize savings by combining store sales, which run from Wednesday to Tuesday, with the latest round of coupons from your Sunday paper, says Mary Hunt, publisher of Debt-Proof Living, a money-saving newsletter. "It's a smart idea to wait until you have those in hand to match up with the week's sale items," she says.

Hotel Rooms
Sunday.
Why: There are two kinds of hotel managers, and the kind that won't give you a discount on your room rate has Sundays off, says Greenberg. Call the hotel directly, and ask to speak with the manager on duty or the director of sales. These employees are open to negotiation, he says. They'd rather have a booked room at a discounted rate than an empty room. (The rest of the week, your call would get you a so-called revenue manager, who monitors profits — and is rarely willing to lower rates.)

Albert Ellis, RIP

2007-07-25T13:42:00.000-04:00

As most of you probably know, Albert Ellis the "father" of R.E.T. passed away yesterday. In response to his death they asked the readers of the NYT what they thought the best therapeutic approach is. Some of the responses are interesting.

Read his obituary.

“Neurosis is just a high-class word for whining.” - Ellis (NOTE: I don't know if I agree with this, but it's a sassy quote).

asking for help

2007-07-16T16:10:00.000-04:00

A lot of my classmates are "too proud" to ask for help from other people. I never had a problem with this, but since a lot of people do, I wanted to post an article I found on Yahoo!Personal finance titled: Master The Art Of Asking For Help At Work . I think it also applies to asking for help in academic settings.

Let me add a personal note. If you want to ask help from extremely narcissistic professors, I think it's okay to use a bit of flattery. A lot of people are "too proud" to flatter, but if you like a professor's work and you want their help on how to do work similar to theirs, I think there is no shame in saying "I think your research is very interesting". (Someone once called me a manipulative psychopath because I told a professor I thought their research was interesting, huh)

WTF? top search queries

2007-07-01T18:58:00.000-04:00

According to "Google Webmaster Tools" the top queries that directed traffic to my site are:

1. orgasm school (oh boy, will people who searched for this be disappointed)
2. anhedonic (yeah, that's me)
3. psychology grad school despair (wow, these people are very much in the right place)
4. exhistentialist (hmmm...could be a branch off the existentialist movement, I like it)
5. am i good at psychology (no)
6. are work activities helpful to mental patients (work = yes, grad school = no).

Gender, boudaries, anger

2007-07-01T18:45:00.000-04:00

It drives me insane that female students have to deal with all sorts of "boundary crossings" from certain male professors.

This makes me angry for the following reasons: it's an additional stress that male students don't have to deal with, and are often not even sympathetic to (that is, a lot of male students don't understand why it would make a woman upset - note I'm not saying that there aren't sympathetic male students, I just haven't found them in my department); AND, the professor is not the one who gets blamed. It's usually SOMETHING about the woman's behavior, and there is always the speculation that she must be doing it to advance her career..yadda...yadda.
Male students can hang out with professors and they are "go getters", but a woman can't have a closed door meeting without raising eyebrows.
Then there is the accusation from FRIENDS that a professor is nice to you because of certain "assets" you have, or because you look pretty, or because you wear skirts and make up.

(NOTE: while some of the above has happened to me, a lot has happened to women I know and/or I'm friends with).

Vonnegut quote that reminds me of grad school

2007-06-28T20:59:00.000-04:00

"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way." - Bokonon from The Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut

airplane rant pt. 2

2007-06-27T13:52:00.000-04:00

More from my trip. I must have been having some mild form of racing thoughts. But I always do. When I write them down, I am always overwhelmed by how boring and neurotic I am.

---

I have already boarded since i do so much fucking flying (oooh, alliteration!)I have SkyTeam alliance "Elite Status" which allows me to board early and select exit row seats. I really hope people's lives don't depend on me doing anything physical because I have a terrible back. Thinking about plane crashes...I wish people could carry something with them so in case of an imminent deadly crash we could euthanize ourselves. Morphine induce comma?. I'm not going to get into a euthanasia discussion because according to the APA people killing themselves is never OK. But morphine to the jugular sounds more pleasant than burning alive. I wonder if I have to count this as "thoughts of death" to a psychiatrist assessing me for depression. I think I always over-report and people think I am crazier than I am.
Since 90% of crashes occur during take off or landing (don't quote me on the statistic) I am always a nervous wreck before take-off. I've learned to deal with turbulence by imagining I'm in New York, or Boston, or London riding some subway cart that is falling apart and carrying WAY more people than it should and that the turbulence is simply a subway cart that is shaking. Then again, the subway cart would have to be between 30,000 and 45,000 feet above mean sea level.

Old fashioned airport rant pt 1.

2007-06-27T13:31:00.001-04:00

So I wrote the following a week ago, on pen and paper at the airport/plane. In retrospect is seems sort of lame, but since I took the time to write it out, I might as well type it.

I'm writing this blog post on paper and pen. I am, once more, sitting at the airport terminal. Have I mentioned how much I hate flying? Well, sitting at the terminal is actually quite fun because you can do some quality people watching. I always feel bad because I might be watching someone with paranoia and I'm just making their psychopathology worse. Unfortunately, like Social Phobics whose disorder affect their social skills. Paranoids act so strangely that people indeed "take special notice" of them.
There is a very cute blond child who is showing typical "secure attachment" patterns of behavior. Good for him! It's good noticing lack of psychopathology for a change. He seems very energetic and has low stress reactivity. His whole family is wearing clothes with lots of stains on them. I assume they are not into the old fashioned "dress up while you fly" habit, which is still found in some parts of Europe (well, the French are always well dressed so I don't know if they should count). The mother and grandmother are wearing makeup, so I guess it is not a matter of dressing down for the airport. I always throw away clothing with stains which makes me feel all capitalist and wasteful. I also feel terrible about donating clothes because I feel I'm making the statement "Oh, I'm too good to wear this any longer, please sell it to people with lower standards".
CNN is playing at the terminal and they show the clip of Hillary picking her campaign song. The family I'm observing start talking about Hillary being a bitch. I briefly give them the "evil eye" of disapproval. (NOTE: then I proceeded to write a bunch about politics but I won't bore you with it. I'm very liberal. In an ideal world I would vote for Dennis Kuchinich in the primary, but I know that's wasting a vote so I will vote for Hillary).
The "grandma" just dropped a pen and I pick it up for her. It is decorated with minature American flags. So is her purse. All I say to her is "you dropped this ma'am". I feel like I'm very creepy writing about someone who has no idea.
(NOTE: then I wrote a long page about wondering how others perceive me based on what I'm wearing and how I'm carrying myself. It's very boring. I mention how I might seem shallow because I own expensive jewelry and wear makeup, but then I read fun things like "SPSS advanced modules technical manuals").

"Auf Wiedersehen!"

2007-06-07T22:38:00.000-04:00

I'm leaving for Germany tomorrow. It's going to be a loooong flight.

By the way, is anyone going to Iowa City for the Society for Research in Psychopathology conference? No offense to Iowans, but I was more excited about San Diego Last year.

Can anyone recommend some fun conferences? (I guess it depends on one's research interest and I've been making a point not to reveal mine...so more "global topic" ones).

Nature Nurture

2007-06-06T20:59:00.000-04:00

Does anyone NOT have crazy parents?

When I got off the airport the first person I saw was my dad. My flight had been delayed so he told me that my mom had freaked out from waiting and had ran off somewhere and he didn't know where she was. He then said "you are done with your second year, right?" I said "yes". He said "so soon...that's terrible". To which I replied "well, I really want to get out of there so it's actually a good thing". Then he told me that as you get older years go by more quickly and time slips through your fingers and all you can think of is how little time you have left.
Very uplifting.
Then we find my mom who gets angry at ME because my flight was delayed. Then she looks at me and says "I remembered you as being skinnier". Ouch.

airport rant

2007-06-05T23:29:00.000-04:00

I’m currently sitting at the airport. I’m waiting for my connecting flight. It will take me a total of 10 hours to get to my parents’ place…sigh. Oh wow…just as a typing this, a little bird flew to the seat next to me. Are there supposed to be small birds in airport terminals? There were actually two birds but when I reached for my digital camera they flew away. I am NOT hallucinating. (As a free association note, I remember learning in a neuropsychology class that one symptom of Parkinson’s dementia is hallucinating small fuzzy animals. A very smart professor told us this, but I haven’t seen it written anywhere).
Anyway, I made it through the flight without taking any tranquilizers, except that the woman sitting next to me was clearly on something and I envied her. She sat on the seat, closed her eyes, and did not move until we landed (a few hours later). People tell me that essentially, flying is safer than breathing or eating; however, there’s always a point in the flight were it dawns on me that I’m in this very heavy metal tube filled with fuel and that there is a loooooong way to fall. I also realize that while they can’t make word processing software that doesn’t make my computer crash, I’m supposed to trust engineers that have worked on the massively complex computerization of the plane. I realize this is faulty logic and is the equivalent of saying “we put men in the moon…but the stupid woman at Starbucks gave me a regular coffee instead of the latte I asked for” (this was me 15 minutes ago). Thankfully, the people who put humans on the moon are not the ones messing up my order. (Yes, I know it sounds petty and bourgeois, like when I get cranky because people at the coffeeshop where I do practicum can’t tell the difference between a latte and a cappuccino).

Sorry for the bitchiness. Anyway, something to be happy about: SPSS 15 now can run Generalized Estimating Equations (statistics with correlated/clustered data). This means I can stop using SAS. A very good thing because I lost my SAS when my computer died last week…and all I was doing was using a word processor.

Going "home"

2007-06-04T23:49:00.000-04:00

Tomorrow I am going to visit my parents. Every time visit-time approaches I feel a vague impending sense of doom ( a little dramatic, I know). They are good people and I don't want to be ungrateful and a cliche and blame them for my psychopathology/issues, but I feel that being away from them has been a contributing factor to my improving mental health. There is just something about interacting with my mom that makes me extremely angry (I used to think it was anxiety, but now I am introspective enough to differentiate the two).
My parents and I are going to Germany for about a week. I am feeling very tense and I think this can be attributed to my plane phobia (which doesn't go away even though I fly constantly), fear of the psychological effects my parents will have on me, and novelty just makes me tense. Anyway, I am excited to go to a country I've never been to before.

As a side note, I cannot emphasize how important it is to get funding that doesn't come from your adviser (this is what allows me to escape for the summer). One of my professors once told me that people have as much power over you as you let them; however, I'd say that it is easier not to let them have power if they are not signing your paychecks.

Hopeless cause?

2007-06-04T12:54:00.000-04:00

My adviser has a reputation of editing things with a fury. However, I seriously suspect he doesn't read anything I send him. Every time I send him an abstract, fellowship application or anything to read, he always replies something like "OK", or "looks fine" or if he's feeling particularly verbose "it looks good".

Still awake

2007-05-22T04:55:00.000-04:00

My ride will be arriving soon. I am no longer sleepy, but I'm anxious/paranoid. Also my muscles hurt. I am getting to old to not sleep. Now I feel guilty that I spent my night watching old House M.D. episodes instead of doing research. Grrrr...

Killing time

2007-05-22T02:27:00.001-04:00

I have to leave for the airport at 4:15 in the morning to catch a 7:00 am flight. I'm staying up late, since I have been going to sleep between 2-3pm I figure I might as well not sleep tonight. Since I am going to be gone for a while, I'm staying up eating left over food (so I don't have to throw it away) and watching reruns of House M.D. I usually have problems falling asleep (I can take naps without a problem, but I can't fall asleep after 8pm) - but now that I know I can't fall asleep I feel exhausted

On a positive note, I'm going to be away from my department for a while - yay. Hopefully my adviser won't notice.

My first non-A and I don't care

2007-05-17T02:02:00.000-04:00

So some of my grades are up for this semester. Up until now I've been the only person in my cohort with a 4.0. I got a B+ in one of my classes and I really don't think I care. This is very odd, I usually say I won't care but then I get this knot in my stomach. But this time when I saw my grade I was just like "WTF? I thought I'd get an A minus...eh, fuck this". I mean, I wish I'd gotten an A, but I'm not devastated...and I'm usually devastated by less than perfect performance. Anyway, I'm quite excited about my standards decreasing because it means I will be less unhappy.
That being said, I am SO DONE with taking courses...except for the ones I took first year, they've all been useless....

Third Year

2007-05-15T18:30:00.000-04:00

It just dawned upon me that I’m going to be a third year student. In a way it should be exciting that I’m a third of the way done with my Ph.D. (My plan is to complete it in 5 years and go on internship on the sixth). I wouldn’t say that time has “flown by” because I was “having fun”. But “it seems just like yesterday” that I was a freaked out first year…as opposed to a freaked out third year. It seems like the first to years you can slide by hiding behind “the heavy course load” but the third year is when they expect you to really start producing/publishing.
Also, I think about all the milestones to come and the things that need to get accomplished in the next three years…sigh. I miss the feeling of being done with classes and feel like I really had a vacation…

Wonderful "personality disorder" movie.

2007-05-14T17:24:00.000-04:00

My friend who does research on personality disorders, specifically Cluster B, recommended the movie Notes on a Scandal as a great psychological thriller/good depiction of (extreme) Borderline Personality Disorder and some (extreme) Psychopathic features.
I watched it an it's quite excellent, it has a very personality disordered character but no bunny gets boiled.

I am not dead

2007-05-13T17:03:00.000-04:00

For a while there I considered to stop blogging. I became increasingly paranoid that people in my department would find out I have this blog. That would not go over too well. Furthermore, I find myself constantly thinking of crazy things that happen to me that I could blog about, but I become concerned it would mean that people could easily identify me. Thus, I feel that I have to pick between having a good blog, or being completely anonymous. Now that my semester is over I have more time to blog. Also, now that I am getting more sleep, I feel less paranoid :-).
I won't go into detail about interesting/not so interesting things that have happened to me over the semester but I will be blogging about them. If I report events outside the true sequence of time they happen then it will not be as easy to figure out who I am. I don't think that people really care...but if someone who knows me very well stumbled upon the blog, then they would ID me.

There is one issue that I will be talking about that I think a lot of grad students might deal with. That is, competing with friends for departmental resources. It very difficult to be friends with classmates and coworkers when you are graded on a curve or you are competing for the same fellowships. I think things are particularly intense when the stakes are actually so low...For example, I had a friend get mad at me because her adviser is willing to teach me some statistical procedure. She feels that since it is HER adviser he should be spending time helping HER and not someone who is not his student. When she found out I had met with her adviser and he had been relatively helpful, she started accusing me of kissing everyone's ass and that he was being nice to me because he thought I was attractive. Crazy.

I much rather be envied than envy other people, but still, I don't like what the grad school environment does to otherwise sane people (granted most people are not THAT sane).

Yay for me!

2007-04-14T18:15:00.000-04:00

So I have been feeling down and really depressed due to a paper rejection and missing my S.O. But last week I found out that I got this VERY competitive fellowship that is worth a LOT of money. I really worked very hard on my application and I really really wanted it. (I've been driving everyone crazy about it). Yay for me!!!!
The bad thing is that I was competing with lots of classmates/friends for it, so I have to break the news. Unfortunately, I know that if someone who wasn't me had gotten it I would have been very envious and resentful of them (because I'm immature, I guess). So I worry people might feel this way toward me.
But I'm still happy I got it.

This semester is dragging on.

2007-04-08T19:21:00.000-04:00

In all my authority I proclaim that this semester should be over by now :-).
Spring semesters always drag on. I'm still carrying the residual tiredness from Fall semester. Also, spending all your time in a windowless building is not as fun when the weather is beautiful outside. Unfortunately, summers have become that time of the year were you catch up with all your research because you were too busy doing a 1000 other things. The end of the year school year is also the time to think about all the things you said you were going to accomplish but never did. Sigh.
There are no updates on "unethical person". Probably nothing will happen. There is no evidence other than hearsay. I don't know that "what goes around comes around" or that there is such a thing as karma, but I do know that if you cheat and tell people about it, one day someone will turn you in.

Ethics.

2007-04-02T22:36:00.000-04:00

One of my fellow grad students did something unethical. And another graduate student decided to report this individual. While what the person did was very unethical, I think the report was driven not by a sense of ethical obligation but by anger. (Should this make a difference?) Essentially some people are submitting abstracts to a conference. The person walked into a professor's office when the professor wasn't there, read the competitor's abstracts, changed theirs accordingly and THEN turned their abstract in. The person then proceeded to tell(brag to) others about what they had done.
Sigh.
(By the way, I'm neither of the people)

I am back: personal life, blogging, ethics.

2007-03-25T13:37:00.000-04:00

Dear Readers,

I apologize for being away for one month without any warning, and I want to thank those who emailed me with concern.
Nothing to dramatic has happened. I was overwhelmed with midterms (I can't wait until classes are over!), fellowship applications (which I did not get :-( ), and then I was out of town for a while.
The big news in my personal life is that I got engaged, I am very happy.
On a practical level being engaged makes my work life slightly easier. That is, when I have to go out of town and miss things and make work sacrifices, people are more understanding if you say "fiance" than if you say "boyfriend". And certainly more understanding than if you say "lover".

Another thing I wanted to mention: There was an article in GradPsych (from the APA) about psychology graduate students who blog. It essentially warned students that everything you say online will come back to haunt you and could ruin your career (great). So I want to make a request from my readers:
If you think you know who I am (with some certainty) or you are sure you can identify my insane graduate program PLEASE let me know. (also, what information gave it away).
I do try to change some information, but I "sound" like myself an awful lot.

The woman who wrote the article also criticized grad. students for talking about their patients on their blogs. I know this was a source of discussion in my blog a while ago. My thoughts are as follows: in the same way that instructors change identifying information to present case studies in class, I don't see anything unethical about doing the same. What one of my supervisors told me (about case studies) was "change the information enough so that one of the patient's relatives couldn't identify them if they read/heard the case study".
I don't give (correct) demographic information or location, I just talk about their symptoms.

Soon I will be posting about a very personality disordered man who is extremely manipulative (trying to get disability) and makes everyone's skin crawl. Given that almost all clinician's have dealt with someone like this, I believe there is no way this person could be identified from reading my blog. Now, does anything think it is unethical to post about people? If so, how is this different from instructors handing out case summaries?

Is that man my adviser?

2007-02-24T19:46:00.001-05:00

Terrible Life Choice

2007-02-24T19:44:00.001-05:00

The Simpsons make fun of graduate student "lifestyle" (or lack-of-life style)

Bipolar 2-year-old

2007-02-23T13:04:00.000-05:00

This is a story from the New York Times that is a bit old. Nevertheless I haven't been able to get it out of my mind. I don't know if people who are doing practicum/clinical work have had the same experience as I have, but a dx of bipolar disorder is handed out like candy.
For example, a patient I saw who had Borderline PD and MDD was misdiagnosed as having Bipolar Disorder. He was put on high-doses of Lithium and the psychiatrist never even recommended that he get his blood checked for Lithium levels. His kidney's shut down and he almost died.

--------------
Early on the morning of Dec. 13, police officers responding to a 911 call arrived at a house in Hull, Mass., a seaside town near Boston, and found a 4-year-old girl on the floor of her parents’ bedroom, dead.
She was lying on her side, in a pink diaper, the police said, sprawled across some discarded magazines and a stuffed brown bear.
Last week, prosecutors in Plymouth County charged the parents, Michael and Carolyn Riley, with deliberately poisoning their daughter Rebecca by giving her overdoses of prescription drugs to sedate her.
The police said the girl had been taking a potent cocktail of psychiatric drugs since age 2, when she was given a diagnosis of attention deficit disorder and bipolar disorder, which is characterized by mood swings.
The girl’s treating psychiatrist has taken a voluntary, paid leave until the case is resolved. And New Englanders are raising questions that are now hotly debated within psychiatry, and which have broad implications for how young children like Rebecca Riley are cared for.
Tufts-New England Medical Center, where the child was treated, released a statement supporting its doctor and calling the care “appropriate and within responsible professional standards.”
Indeed, the practice of aggressive drug treatment for young children labeled bipolar has become common across the country. In just the last decade, the rate of bipolar diagnosis in children under 13 has increased almost sevenfold, according to a study based on hospital discharge records. And a typical treatment includes multiple medications.
Rebecca was taking Seroquel, an antipsychotic drug; Depakote, an equally powerful mood medication; and Clonidine, a blood pressure drug often prescribed to calm children.
The rising rates of diagnosis and medication use strike some doctors and advocates for patients as a dangerous fad that exposes ever-younger children to powerful drugs. Antipsychotics like Seroquel or Risperdal, which are commonly prescribed for bipolar disorder, can cause weight gain and changes in blood sugar — risk factors for diabetes.
Some child psychiatrists say bipolar disorder has become an all-purpose label for aggression.
“Bipolar is absolutely being overdiagnosed in children, and the major downside is that people then think they have a solution and are not amenable to listening to alternatives,” which may not include drugs, said Dr. Gabrielle Carlson, a professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at Stony Brook University School of Medicine on Long Island.
Paraphrasing H. L. Mencken, Dr. Carlson added, “Every serious problem has an easy solution that is usually wrong.”
Others disagree, insisting that increased awareness of bipolar disorder and use of some medications has benefited many children.
“The first thing to say is that the world does not see the kids we see; these are very difficult patients,” said Dr. John T. Walkup, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Still, most child psychiatrists agree that there are still questions about applying the diagnosis to very young children. Recent research has found that most children who receive the diagnosis are emotionally explosive but do not go on to develop the classic features of the disorder, like euphoria. They are far more likely to become depressed.
And many therapists have found that some patients referred to them for bipolar disorder are actually suffering from something else.
“Most of the patients I see who have been misdiagnosed have been told they have bipolar disorder,” said Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, a professor of psychiatry at Boston University who runs a trauma clinic.
“The diagnosis is made with no understanding of the context of their life,” Dr. van der Kolk said. “Then they’re put on these devastating medications and condemned to a life as a psychiatry patient.”

Can good, ethical people be successful in academia?

2007-02-17T12:47:00.000-05:00

Well, that's really not the message I'm getting from my department. Academia appears to be very little about the search for knowledge (although it is advertised as such). It is to some extent related to the search for "truthiness" (for those who watch the Colbert Report), but it is essentially a business meant to feed people's egos. Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are profs/researchers out there who are excellent scientists and do research because of a search for noble constructs such as "truth" and "knowledge." But it seems like the successful big shots, who get all the grant money and run large studies are cold, calculating, manipulative bastards (successful psychopaths) driven by their own egos. In a way I'm happy they exist because they are the ones who get the grant money that helps people get their degrees, or research assistants get a job.
It wouldn't bother me if they didn't hide behind the virtues of intellectual pursuits, or some other similar "value". CEO's and businessman at least admit they do it for the money. I wish academics would admit that they do it for the grant money, because they get off seeing their names on publications, or because they like having power over (at least in psychology) mostly women in their 20's and 30's.

10 steps to a better brain.

2007-02-11T19:35:00.000-05:00

Here is a very interesting article from New Scientist on how to keep your brain in tip-top shape. Of course, my best advise is too pick your parents carefully.

Top 10 steps to a better brain.

Keeping my mouth shut advice

2007-02-04T14:01:00.000-05:00

I know that in my department the walls have eyes and ears. And I know that, usually, if you tell someone something it will travel at the speed of light. While I'd like to think that people don't share what I tell them in confidence, I do know lots of private stuff about people I don't even know - why is that? because they told someone they trusted a secret, then the trusted person told someone they trusted the secret, and so on and so forth.
I have a very hard time not talking about other people. I don't do it to be malicious (unless someone has really pissed me off and I'm bitching about that person - case in point, the little incident I had with my adviser a couple of weeks ago). But mostly I just spend so much time in my department that knowing about people around me keeps me amused. Also, when I have interesting conversations with let's say, insane faculty members, I like to tell my friends about it - because they usually make a good story.
I think this is a really really bad habit because I then worry about if maybe I said too much, or maybe the person will repeat it. And sometimes people take stuff one says in jest very seriously...that's the worse.
So, how do you keep your mouth shut? I have a need to vent. but..I can't fully trust people within the department and I don't want to bore the people I know outside the department. I also can't blog specific details because then someone might identify me. I realize this is a character flaw of mine, so I need some help!

I am not endorsing this...

2007-02-02T22:40:00.000-05:00

My boyfriend mentioned to me a case of a Math Ph.D. student who after 19 years of working toward his degree murdered his adviser after the adviser told him he would not grant him a degree.

Here are a couple of links about this case:

Kids, leave those teachers alone.

What not to do when the system is broken.

I am in no way endorsing, or insinuating anyone should consider harming anyone. I just think it is interesting what unstable people can do in drastic environments.

"We dangle our three magic letters (Ph.D.) before the eyes of these predestined victims, and they swarm to us like moths to an electric light. They come at a time of life when failure can no longer be repaired easily and when the wounds it leaves are permanent" ––William James, "The Ph.D. Octopus", 1903.

semester is picking up

2007-01-27T17:33:00.001-05:00

I've been bad about blogging again. It's not that interesting things aren't happening. But the following usually occurs: something insane happens in my department --> I think it would be a great blog post --> I get paranoid that someone will identify which program I am talking about and OUT me.

Some things that have happened:

I found out that my adviser gave a more senior advisee my research idea (that is, he TOLD her to carry out research he knew I had been working on for a few months). I found out since I saw her and asked her how her paper was going - she said "oh okay - I got the same results that you did". I told her that was my paper idea and she just shrugged and said "sorry, our adviser told me to do it". I went to speak to our adviser and I told him what the other student was doing - he was all like "oh, I'm so outraged she would steal your research idea". Then I gave him some time to confess he had told her, but he didn't. So I said "well, YOU told her to do it." And he said "really? I don't remember." - (mind you that he wrote a long note in her paper draft telling her to do it - so there is evidence).

He then suggested that I sat down and come to an agreement with her and I said "it's my idea, my paper, the only compromise will end with me publishing it and being first author". Then he said he didn't want to decide in favor of one student over the other because things get ugly. To which I responded "yes, I see why you would not want to make this decision. For example, If you "ruled" against me I know I would be very very upset."

To be continued...

New semester

2007-01-12T01:08:00.001-05:00

My fourth semester in graduate school is about to start. I am so tired of dealing with the same issues: patients that don't show up for their appointments, having a total psycho-bitch of a supervisor for the work I do for funding, taking useless classes to meet requirements (more papers, exams, assignments), and of course feeling like no research is getting done.

I really miss having a personal life - granted I've never been one to have much of a personal life, but I miss living with my boyfriend. And the only way I can get to live with him again is to get out of my insane program.

Professors who show-off

2007-01-11T20:34:00.001-05:00

Today I got a paper back from a class and there were more pages of comments than there were pages in the paper. This is not an exaggeration. As papers go, mine wasn't good or bad, it was so-so. Anyway, every student got pages and pages and pages of comments. (an example of the sort of comments I got is something along the lines of "you should buy a thesaurus and learn about the vast richness of the English language").

My question is - why would anyone do this? Why would a tenured professor make it a point to show-off because he is smarter/knows more than students who write a pass-fail paper for a class. (The professor is clearly extremely brilliant and no one denies this,) I just *really* don't understand it. Is it narcissism? Is it insecurity? Sadism?

Social skills and faculty members

2007-01-01T08:51:00.000-05:00

Faculty members in my department have atrocious social skills - not just being introverted/shy, but in the range of Aspergers (high functioning autistic)/Schizoid Personality Disorder. In essence, the complete inability to interact with others outside a very prescribed social scenario (cannot maintain the simplest of small-talk, awkward eye-contact/body language). But once you get them talking about their work/themselves/their advise on life, the universe, and everything they won't shut up for hours - to the point where it should be incredibly obvious you are dying to get the hell out of their office. (Oh, there is also a lot of pathological Narcissism).
As an angry feminist side note - I get really angry when a male professor meets with a group of female students (as it is almost ALWAYS the case due to gender ratios) and we (the students) are forced to listen and pretend like the BS they are saying is the most interesting thing in the world (well, I'm bad at the pretending part - but you get the point). I always become aware of the gender dynamic/my subservient position. Not to be crude, but sometimes I get the very distinct feeling that male professors get off on having the undivided attention of often-good looking, women in their 20s and early 30s.

Happy 2007 and where is my chi?

2007-01-01T08:30:00.000-05:00

Dear readers - happy new years. I hope you are enjoying your break. I don't have class until mid-January which has lifted a huge burden off my shoulders. I am, however, expected to work for my funding non stop (that is, we don't get holidays off). I went to the US department of labor Occupational Safety & Health Administration Website and essentially if you live in my state (or anywhere) and work as a graduate student you essentially have no rights at your job. For some reason if you work at a shipyard or in construction you get mandatory breaks and don't have to be exposed to asbestos without protection (you also make more money).

Anyway, I don't have any New Years resolutions but I would love to hear YOURS. I'm fighting an uphill battle with my sleep patterns (in previous posts I mentioned my struggle with a sleep disorder). I've been able to get the 10+ hours of sleep/night for the past couple of weeks. I've also been able to sometimes keep my "natural" schedule (essentially sleep from 4am to 2pm) and I just feel so MUCH better. Essentially my mood/anxiety symptoms decrease immensely (especially mood), and I feel so much more alert. People who only need 8 hours of sleep a night are so lucky!

So instead of doing research as I should, I've been practicing Tai Chi from these videos I downloaded off bitorrent. Perhaps I am rather impatient, but I'm supposed to start being aware of my "chi" (a bit over an inch below my belly button) but I don't really feel anything. Also, my problem with any meditation/martial art is that I cannot take the background theory (the ying-the yang, the concept of chi). Maybe one needs to believe in chi before one can find chi. So I'm switching to Yoga for now. I've tried Yoga before, and while it's not particularly religious, I just don't believe in the whole universal energy/energy coursing through your body - I also start laughing when I do poses with ridiculous names. Which is a shame because both Tai Chi and Yoga have been shown to reduce anxiety and stress (and all exercise apparently improves mood unless you are ultra-cranky like me). And it makes sense to me how the work on the parasympathetic nervous system. Sometimes I wish I weren't such a skeptic...but I can't help it!