Letters
So what does the future hold for psychology?
I was interested to read Marc Smith’s letter (April 2006) in which
he responded to Jon Sutton’s report of the British Psychological
Society/Higher Education Academy seminar to discuss the future of
psychology. As the Chair of the Association for the Teaching of
Psychology (ATP) I have more than a passing interest in the issues
under discussion and I was one of relatively few ‘pre-degree’
psychology teachers present (perhaps that was something to do with the
date and venue, 19 December at the Royal Society in London).
The decision to classify psychology as a science subject, and to
introduce it as early as Key Stage 3, could have significant
implications for staffing in secondary schools. It may lead to an even
greater proportion of teachers of psychology whose first degree is in
another subject, because of the existing difficulties associated with
achieving qualified teacher status (QTS) in this subject. This is an
issue that the ATP has been pursuing for some time, particularly after
we received figures to suggest that there will be even fewer PGCE
places for social sciences graduates in the next two years.
As a biology graduate with 30 years experience of teaching at A-level
(including health and social care, and physical education), I consider
myself to be up to the task of teaching psychology, and I am well aware
that psychology is not the only subject that can be taught extremely
well by non-specialists at this level. Nevertheless,
I agree with Marc that it should be the norm for it to be taught by
psychology graduates who have exactly the same access to QTS as any
other teacher. This inequality of opportunity is something against
which both the ATP and the BPS have been lobbying for years.
The universities appear to vary in their opinions of whether A-level
psychology should be a prerequisite for studying at degree level and,
as Marc pointed out, one of the major problems here lies in the
existence of at least six different specifications in the UK, not
including IB. How can the transition from A-level to undergraduate
courses be ‘seamless’? Who will make the decisions about what should be
taught at A-level in the future and how will specifications ever be
truly comparable?
In my opinion there has been too little consultation with teachers and
it has come too late. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority has
provided an online forum (www.qca.org.uk/science/forum) where teachers
can express their views on the new science criteria, but my feeling is
that teachers have not been made sufficiently aware of the impending
changes. Some are of the opinion that the move is a political one,
increasing the apparent number of students who continue to study
‘science’ beyond Key Stage 4. Perhaps we should follow the lead of
Finland, where it is compulsory for every student to take at least a
short course in psychology.
I am sure that readers of this letter will have strong views on many of
the issues raised here. Is psychology a ‘science’? If so, what will
happen to the humanistic and psychodynamic approaches? Is having an
A-level in psychology an advantage (or a disadvantage) at university,
and in whose opinion? Are universities providing appropriate degree
courses? Should teachers be consulted about potentially massive changes
in what they do?
The ATP is the only professional organisation for teachers of
psychology in schools and colleges. We aim to represent the views of
our members as well as to help them to provide high quality education
for students of psychology. You can have your say by contacting us at
www.theATP.org.
Dorothy Coombs
Prior Pursglove Sixth Form College Guisborough
Cleveland
I strongly agree with Marc Smith’s assertion (Letters,
April 2006) that ‘the current state of A-level psychology is far from
ideal’.
In a department of psychology which still interviews potential
undergraduates, my colleagues and I find that candidates doing A-level
psychology are able to tell us something about eating disorders,
criminal profiling, serial killers and an investigation conducted by
somebody called Milgram; but often have difficulty in answering
questions demanding an appreciation of how the scientific method can be
used to study the simpler aspects of perception, memory, thinking and
individual differences.
The A-level Psychology syllabus must surely include a range of
experimental work if it is ever to become, as Professor Martin A.
Conway suggests, a prerequisite for reading psychology at degree level.
In fact many of us would still view A-level biology and mathematics as
proper foundations for a later study of psychology.
Richard E. Rawles
Department of Psychology
University College London
Planning for emergencies
AS someone who is responsible for emergency planning from an NHS
context, I take a somewhat different view from that of Roger Miles to
the work of Cocking and Drury (Letters, April 2006).
Miles is correct that emergency planners take account of psychological
science in their work, but I think we are in a situation where it is
good to revisit and expand the knowledge of crowd control, and to up
our game. We could do more – both ‘dedicated’ emergency planners and
‘wider’ people engaged in such work – to learn from psychology.
On 7 July many of us in outer London braced ourselves for the order to
evacuate central London, which could have resulted in our borough alone
having to accommodate over 25,000 displaced persons within hours. With
pandemic flu plans being finalised, management of antiviral stocks and
other control measures, including restriction of movement and setting
up of reception centres, will be important. In both of these scenarios
the management
of large, multilingual and multicultural crowds will become crucial. We
need to keep asking questions about crowd behaviour, especially whether
it changes in light of changing demographic, cultural and linguistic
aspects and the increasingly self-oriented cultures we live in. Does
research done in the past transfer to crowds likely to be seen now,
especially in major urban centres?
To this extent, there is much to be learnt from New Orleans about crowd
control but also about social psychological issues, intrapsychological
issues in coping in disasters, organisational success, organisational
design and organisational failure. In this context I welcome the work
of Cocking and Drury.
Those of us responsible for emergency planning get used to developing
plans – and testing them in simulations – which we hope we will never
have to put into action for real. Even the best simulations have limits
because of resource constraints or ethics. Crowd control falls into
this.
There is much emergency planners still have to learn from psychology.
The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 updated a range of obsolete aspects of
civil protection,
but there is a rich field for organisational and occupational
psychologists to study how well this is being implemented, as well as
substantial opportunities for health psychologists to study long-term
adjustment in those caught up in 7/7. But legal systems need to do this
regularly, and recognition from other countries has shown their systems
too need periodic updating in light of social change. In this context
too, we ought to welcome the work of Cocking and Drury.
Roger Miles is right, the emergency planning profession in the UK is
increasingly sophisticated. But our own local chemical release
simulations, the horror that was New Orleans and the lessons from
debriefings and evaluations of 7 July show that there is always room
for improvement, and learning. Psychology must be at the centre of this.
Jim McManus
Barking & Dagenham PCT
Celebrity worship and self-esteem
I READ with great interest the article in February’s issue on
celebrity worship ‘Praying at the altar of the stars’). As a
postgraduate student in 2004, this was my ‘area’ when it came to my
thesis. The research I carried out goes some way to answering the
question raised in the article as to what possible roles celebrities
play in our lives; I sought to investigate what the motivation to
engage in celebrity worship is and what benefit there is from
identifying with celebrities parasocially.
The results indicated four distinct motivations, three of which are
consistent with the findings of John Maltby and his colleagues. For me,
the most interesting result had not previously been directly addressed.
My research supports the hypothesis that for certain individuals,
celebrity worship is a way of increasing their self-esteem. With the
formation of a parasocial identity, these individuals exhibit an
attachment and association with a celebrity to such an extent that
their self-esteem can be increased. I was therefore able to add a
parasocial dimension to the classic social identity theory
of Tajfel and Turner (that, in general, identifying with groups held in
high esteem by others enhances one’s self-esteem) and to propose an
integrated model of parasocial identity.
Research into this area has been gathering pace over recent years, and
I look forward to future developments. Maybe at some point there will
be support for what I have proposed, or it may well be discounted. One
thing is certain, I can’t foresee any decrease of the general public’s
fascination with celebrities, so they must be getting something out of
it!
Christopher Rae
9 Rowley Drive
Broompark
Durham
Making social support research manageable
It was good to read something about social support in The
Psychologist (‘Your best interests at heart’, April 2006), even if
little seems to have changed over the past few decades. Social support
research has always seemed so dry, dull and academic, yet it is clearly
critical to all our lives. As the authors suggest, it is a vague
nebulous concept and consequently hard to pin down, though one could
argue that after decades of inconclusive research we shouldn’t be
trying to. Perhaps like ‘schizophrenia’ it is too complex and varied to
be studied as a single entity. It needs to be broken down into more
manageable questions.
For example, researchers
in the field of personal relationships have long pointed out that
social support occurs in the context of a living, breathing
relationship between one or more people, and it is by studying the
nature of these relationships that we are better able to understand
when social support helps. To me as a clinician, this makes perfect
sense. In that it is tied to the relationship and the attachment
history of the individuals involved it would seem fruitless, even
meaningless, to think of social support as some abstract fix or
prescribed intervention for human problems. Furthermore, the idea of
creating a laboratory analogue of social support seems inherently
problematic. Social support is not something that can be realistically
turned on or off, or plucked out of context.
An equally interesting question is to think about how social support
works its magic in specific contexts. Informational and instrumental
support may be fairly straightforward, but how does emotional support
work? Emotional support seems particularly effective, for example, when
the individual perceives they have little control over the stressor
they face (Cutrona & Russell, 1990); for example, someone adjusting
to a serious illness. The way in which such support is expressed and
received varies from person to person, and there are cultural
expectations regarding caring and the expression of emotion
(Wellenkamp, 1995), and culturally defined gender roles within
families. Nonetheless, emotional support seems to have the effect of
validating a person’s experience. It involves a safe environment in
which people can release, share and clarify their feelings and
thoughts. The very act of trying to put diffuse thoughts and feelings
into words gives them shape and form, which often makes events feel
more controllable, predictable and therefore more manageable. Much
psychological therapy relies upon this process.
Expressing thoughts and emotions has been shown to reduce the
physiological arousal associated with stress (Mendolia & Kleck,
1993).
It helps people consider the problems they face and the options
available to them, and it provides reassurance to people when making
decisions. Finding words to explore the meaning of stressful events
seems to enable people to integrate the events with their core
assumptions about the world, and prevents difficult experiences
becoming dissociated or split off.
Clinicians get to see and use such social support in action, but it is
never a simple unitary thing. Until researchers find a way to ask
smaller, more discrete questions, there is a danger that social support
research will remain dry, abstract and of little practical utility.
James Brennan
Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, and
Bristol Doctorate in Clinical Psychology, University of Bristol
References
Cutrona, C.E. & Russell, D.W. (1990). Type of social support and
specific stress. In B.R. Sarason et al. (Eds.) Social support. New
York: Wiley.
Mendolia, M. & Kleck, R.E. (1993). Effects of talking about a
stressful event on arousal. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 64, 283–292.
Wellenkamp, J. (1995). Cultural similarities and differences regarding
emotional disclosure. In J.W. Pennebaker (Ed.) Emotion, Disclosure and
Health. Washington, DC: APS.
Mary Carey
The sad news of Mary Carey’s untimely death in March 2006 has been
received by service users and her many colIeagues in the NHS, social
services and private sector care providers with shock and disbelief.
Ex-colleagues with whom she worked in the past have sent messages
expressing their sense of loss from across the country. Our condolences
go to her nearest family and friends, with whom we share a deep sense
of grief that Mary is no longer in our midst. Beyond the immediate
feeling of being bereft, we miss her for the many ways she enriched our
lives, both personal and professional.
Mary was a widely-known, admired and loved person, loved for her
personal warmth and admired for her professional skill, knowledge,
integrity and courage, and her devotion to the welfare of some of the
most vulnerable members of our communities. Within our Trust she set
standards of professional practice that many admired. We felt inspired
by her commitment and integrity, we aspired to attain it but rarely
achieved her humane approach. Her hallmark was to be relentless in
championing services that would address the needs and wishes of her
clients, her trainees and her colleagues. She would not be compromised
in her deeply held conviction that the position of privilege she worked
so hard to achieve conferred a special responsibility to share time,
energies and expertise with those less fortunate than herself. For this
and much else she deservedly earned enormous respect and gratitude She
was truly a standard bearer for an NHS that gives priority to service
users’ needs and welfare rights.
Rai Turton
Psychological Services for Adults with Learning Disabilities
Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Trust
Finding the right ethics committee
I AM a PhD student recruiting from a hospital patient population. As
such, I am involved with the NHS and their research ethics committees
(RECs) and multicentre research ethics committees (MRECs). MRECs can
represent an obstacle to all researchers, but especially to non-medical
researchers (e.g. psychologists). The main reason for this is that the
ethics committee members often are unfamiliar with the methods and
materials used in psychological research, thus applications are
rejected or delayed as basic issues need to be explained. However, my
understanding is that when there is a psychologist on an MREC this can
make a very positive difference to applicants for psychological
research. I know that there are some BPS members who sit on MRECs:
would any of them be willing to make themselves known to other members
so that future psychology researchers might approach your committee
first, rather than risk rejection from a less well-informed MREC?
John Barry
Department of Psychology
City University
London
Orwellian psychotherapy
YOUR news report on Lord Layard’s proposals for improving access to
psychological therapies says that he believes ‘it would be extremely
cost-effective to offer psychological therapy to one million people who
are on incapacity benefit due to mental health problems. Eleven
sessions of CBT would likely result in 12 extra months free of
depression and, perhaps more importantly to the exchequer, 1.5 months
in work’.
Am I the only person to recoil at this crass economic justification of
psychological therapy, trading off sessions of therapy for months back
at work? It epitomises everything I see as wrong with the
evidence-based approach to psychotherapy. There is the quasi-medical
view of depression as an ‘illness’ that somehow happens to people. That
psychotherapy is simply about ‘curing’ people returning them to a
‘normal,’ non-depressed state. The pseudo-scientific quantification
implicit in the exact numbers cited (11 sessions, 12 extra months
depression free, 1.5 months back at work). Not to mention the Orwellian
way that psychotherapy is used at the behest of government to keep the
workforce happy and, most importantly, working. I have
no objection to more people getting access to psychological therapies.
But I do object to these simplistic, politically driven justifications
of therapy. Claims such as that made by Lord Layard are likely to
backfire spectacularly. In my long experience of working as a
psychotherapist, I have found it impossible to predict with any
certainty who will improve and who won’t with therapy. This is because
people are complex and therapy a tricky business. The poet Louis
MacNeice put it better: ‘World is crazier and more of it than we think,
incorrigibly plural’. We psychologists should beware of simplistic
claims about how effective our therapies are as they will surely come
back to haunt us.
John Marzillier
24 Norham Road
Oxford
Precursors of genocide
I read with interest the feature in May’s edition about Mike
Hewstone’s talk on the role of intergroup contact in social
integration. An interesting discussion was I felt marred by the
simplistic consideration of events in the former Yugoslavia. To talk of
either ‘segregation’ or ‘desegregation’ as critical determinants of
‘ethnic cleansing’ rather misses the point. To describe ‘an invisible
psychological wall’ (whatever that means) as permeating the entire
region is not only insufficient as an explanation but also untrue.
Areas of the former Yugoslavia, such as Sarajevo, which were subject to
the Serb onslaught, were extremely well integrated. The feature also
ignores the case that many people in the region have mixed backgrounds,
something which does not fit into the black and white picture which
makes for convenient psychological speculation. Dislike, enmity and
segregation never on their own lead to genocide. Not discussed is the
critical role of economic disintegration, corruption and crime with the
undermining of traditional sources of political legitimacy. Whether in
the Balkans, Cambodia, Rwanda or Nazi Germany these have been the
precursors of genocide.
Psychologists have something valuable to contribute to debates on
genocide and ethnic cleansing, but they must remain cognisant of the
broader context in which enmity develops – otherwise they may end up
telling us more about the arrogance of our discipline than about what
is happening out in the world.
Ron Roberts
Kingston University
Restricting the rewards for cruelty
Burr et al. (‘Extreme pornography consultation’, Letters, May 2006)
make clear their dismay that the Society supports government aims to
criminalise the downloading of violent pornography and note the
literature points ‘to no simple causal link between viewing pornography
and committing crimes’. But they fail to mention that payment for
downloading violent pornography finances the criminals who film the
torture and rape of children. The adults depicted in violent
pornography may be the same individuals who were filmed at an earlier
age as victims of violent child sexual abuse. Children caught in the
terrorising web of organised abuse and prostitution do not escape
simply because they have reached adulthood; the nightmare continues
beyond puberty. The Society should support any move that might restrict
the financial rewards for such cruelty.
Michael S. Beattie
Denethorpe
Stockton Road
Ryhope
Sunderland
The 'isms' - Psychology's collective unconscious
RIGGS and Choi’s article (‘Heterosexism, racism and psychology’, May
2006) filled me with a great sense of hopelessness. For at least 30
years now, concerned individuals, within and outside psychology and the
Western world, have consistently stressed the dire need for psychology
to rectify its shameful shortcomings regarding its entrenched ‘isms’
and phobias. They have called on psychology to divest its legacy of
Euro-American-centrism and male chauvinism, in order to reflect the
experiences of the populations it purports to serve, else it will cease
to be a viable professional resource to those who, for reasons of
‘race’/colour, gender, class, sexual orientation, etc., do not fit
neatly into mainstream psychological models. At a BPS centenary
conference in Birmingham, I (and co-presenter) reinforced and stressed
this message to the gathering.
This challenge gathers extra weight each day. Due to Western nations’
plundering and exploitation of the rest of the world (‘globalisation’),
coupled with the USA’s quenchless thirst for global dominance (Chomsky,
2004), modern migratory patterns have ensured that every culture, with
its bag and baggage, is represented in the UK, as elsewhere. Hence,
psychology, wherever it is taught or practised, must reflect this
diversity. Besides migration, all the various isms entail considerable
emotional, economic and social stress and distress. Thus, practice must
reflect also the clientele’s diverse experiences.
How is psychology, as a discipline and practice, meeting this
challenge? Riggs and Choi’s Australian research and experience palpably
indicate that mainstream psychology has not paid the slightest heed to
the concerns expressed by many – mainly members of socially
underprivileged groups. If my very recent experience with final-year
students (white = 100 per cent; females = 87 per cent) on a Doctorate
Clinical Psychology Course is anything to go by, then it seems that
psychology does not intend ever to do so – it is business as usual.
Namely, instead of educating students/trainees
to become agents of social change, we continue to prepare them to be
instruments of social control, guardians of the establishment. We fail
to provide them with the necessary level of awareness and understanding
of the causes and effects of the structural factors that adversely
affect marginalised groups in society, and to appreciate the relevance
to practice of awareness and understanding of these factors, and the
urgent need to dismantle them. In short, training should equip trainees
to be socially, politically and culturally competent practitioners in a
socially, politically and culturally diverse community. Professional
training should seek to equip trainees to address the needs of the
victims of social injustice.
Riggs and Choi rightly recommend a willingness to examine and
appreciate the covert dynamics of institutional isms, how they operate
and are experienced by victims, as a way of meeting this challenge. In
any institution where any kind of ism prevails (psychology being no
exception), the power dynamics, institutional structure, policies and
procedures ensure its pervasiveness and normalcy, such that it becomes
acceptable and unwittingly perpetuated
by even the victims with in it. A majority of the group of students
mentioned above were not prepared or willing to appreciate the
importance of such an exercise.
Clearly, through IQ tests, personality inventories, and other
psychometric tools, psychology serves the interests of dominant groups
in society at the expense of the victims of its endemic isms. If, in my
view, the attitudes of that group of students reflect those of
students/trainees undertaking other courses accredited by the BPS’s
Membership and Professional Training Board, then I hope that I do not
live to require psychological (dis)service.
Kwame Owusu-Bempah
School of Social Work
University of Leicester
Reference
Chomsky, N. (2004). Hegemony or survival: America’s quest for global dominance. London: Penguin.
Smile and be nice
I read with interest Jeremy Swinson’s letter captioned ‘Say cheese’
(May 2006) about sex differences in the facial expressions of authors
pictured in The Psychologist. I too have noticed this phenomenon and
The Psychologist is not the only publication in which I have noticed
it.
I put this phenomenon down to societal expectations of women. Women are
expected to smile and ‘be nice’ to be seen as feminine so it is no
surprise to me that female writers send in pictures of themselves
smiling.
A woman looking stern and serious tends to be regarded as hard-nosed,
unfriendly, or worse. A man looking stern would face no such judgement:
he is seen simply as a man serious about his work, and is, as Jeremy so
rightly says, ‘keen to present a cool image of assumed superiority’.
Jane Reid
Flat 5
Osprey Court
4 Copers Cope Road
Beckenham
Kent
Putting self-harm in context
I WRITE in response to the letter by Jennifer Heath (April). I’m a
psychology graduate and have recently begun a mental health nursing
degree. I read the article in the Nursing Standard which was referred
to (volume 20, no.28) about the introduction of safe self-harming and
my initial reaction was one of shock. As I am on placement in an acute
psychiatric ward I am familiar with self-harm and see the scars almost
daily.
After discussing the article with the sister of the ward that
specialises in self-harm, my way of thinking changed. I now understand
that my initial reaction of shock was due to the belief that we have to
prevent self-harm in order to protect the patients. However,
realistically, self-harm is a possible coping mechanism adopted by the
patient in order to avoid suicide. Therefore, in order to help the
patients we need to change our thinking.
The introduction of education for self-harmers into different ways of
harm, such as using ice cubes or elastic bands instead of blades, is
revolutionary. However, other continuous help must be offered, such as
counselling. It’s just a shame that there are not enough psychologists
in the NHS to be able to offer each patient such help.
Rebecca Lowe
20 Sixth Avenue
Limeside
Oldham
Information
- IS there a graduate
psychologist who would be interested in gaining some voluntary clinical
psychology experience? This would be for a time-limited project
involving clinical data entry and analysis,
and offering experience of tools relevant to adult mental health psychology, within a clinical setting.
Helena Crockford
Department of Psychological Therapies, Fermoy Unit
Queen Elizabeth Hospital
King’s Lynn PE30 4ET
Tel: 01553 613363; e-mail: [email protected]
n I am a senior lecturer in a business school. As numbers of students
have risen, and entry level qualifications have fallen, I have become
aware that assessment is an issue for assessors as well as the
assessed. I am not aware of any studies of the effects of assessing
high quantities of variable quality work on the cognitive or affective
function of assessors. Is anyone else in the Society also interested in
working on this?
Philip Scown
Manchester Metropolitan University
Tel: 0161 247 3794; e-mail: [email protected]
n Birmingham Mencap is looking for volunteers to support young people
between the ages of 16 and 25 years who have a moderate learning
disability and are undertaking voluntary work themselves within their
community. If you are able to offer three or four hours a week and can
travel within the area please contact me.
Lynne Whyley
Birmingham Mencap
Tel: 0121 256 1504; e-mail: [email protected]
n I AM a PhD researcher at Imperial College London. I am looking for
people who have been lied to on something high-stakes (e.g. job loss,
extra-marital relationship), who are willing to confront the person who
has lied and who are willing to arrange an interview with him or her in
front of a video camera. The aim is to produce quality video data for
behaviour analysis research. I will not publish (or make public) the
data itself but only behaviour analysis results. If you would like to
take part, simply e-mail me with details of your case. A short
discussion will follow to evaluate if a valid experiment is possible.
Enrica Dente
Vision Research Group
Imperial College London
[email protected]
n IF you would like to join Counselling Psychologists’ TalkShop, send an e-mail to [email protected]
smartgroups.com. You will then be sent two e-mails – a welcome message
from the TalkShop group and one from smartgroups.com giving you
instructions.
Therese Paterson
Division of Counselling Psychology
n HMP & YOI Bullwood Hall is looking for trainees who can practise
either CBT, brief solution-focused therapy or other therapeutic
approaches for a 12-month voluntary placement one or two days a week.
It is preferable that you are in your second year of training with some
prior experience of counselling practice; although first-year students
with prior experience will also be considered. Supervision and travel
expenses are provided.
Sarah Cresswell
HMP/YOI Bullwood Hall
Hockley, Essex
Tel: 01702 562937; e-mail: [email protected]
n LOOKING for psychologists/therapists who have worked with people with
Asperger’s syndrome to complete a 15-minute quantitative questionnaire
on their experiences. Everyone will go
into a prize draw to win Dermot Bowler’s new book on autism spectrum disorders.
Matty Chalk
E-mail: [email protected]
(Please note that some pictures may have been removed for copyright reasons)
BPS Members can discuss this article
Already a member? Or Create an account
Not a member? Find out about becoming a member or subscriber