Crazy in America:  The Hidden Tragedy of OurCriminalized Mentally Ill
Author:  Mary Beth Pfeiffer
ISBN:  978-0-78671-745-3
 
APA Style Citation
Pfeiffer, M. (2007).  Crazy in America:  The Hidden Tragedy of OurCriminalized Mentally Ill.  Carroll and Graf Publishers, N.Y., New York.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Crazy-America-Tragedy-Criminalized-Mentally/dp/0786717459
​

​Summary of Book
Shayne Eggan was a beautiful girl with a charismatic personality who took after her dynamic and free-spirited Greek mother.  She had a normal and happy life until her mid-teens when she began to respond to the overtures of boys and older men and started to express the belief that others could “read her mind.”  Shayne was hospitalizedfor these delusions and her strange Indian themed hallucinations.  She became a ward of the state of Iowa because her parents` minimal means could not pay for her continued hospitalization and she was determined to have paranoid schizophrenic tendencies which could cause her to become violent.  Shayne believed she was an Indian princess.  She became obsessed with an older Indian man and continued to write to him and believe they would be together long after he was married and had children.  Shayne often became violent, first with her family, and then with others.  She expressed that, “I get so scared that people are going to hurt me, that I have to hurt them first.” During one such psychotic episode, the police were called,andshe lunged at a police officer with a knife because she thought he was going to hurt her.  She was arrested and thus began Shayne`s life in the criminal justice system.  Shayne had a baby in prison who was immediately removed from her care because it was claimedthat Shayne expressed a desire to kill him, which she denied.  Shayne would be releasedafter serving a term but within a few days would often wind up back in prison because her delusions caused her to break into someone`s home, or act out violently when she felt she was being threatened.  Because of her record, instead of a warning or probation, she would wind up back in prison. Once in prison, she could not abide by the strict rules of the institution which would result in an extended sentence or time in solitary confinement, which often made her delusions worse.  The local mental health care facility was not an option because the facility which had housed 1,800 people in the 1940s, housed only 95 patients in the 1990s. From 1995 to 2000, Iowa went from having 204 beds for every 100,000 people to having six
 
Shayne needed immediateintervention and could not wait years for treatment.  She attempted to treat her delusions and hallucinations with drugs, which often exacerbated the problems.  In solitary confinement, Shayne`s delusions became so intense that she dug her owneye out, she explained that this made her feel good.  While prison officials panicked, Shayne played with her hanging eye, and was eventually handcuffed to restrict this behavior.  Later, during another stint in solitary, Shayne attempted to chew off her pinky and lost four teeth in the process.  
 
Shayne is not alone in suffering from her mental illness while incarcerated.  Of the 2.2 million people in American jails in 1999, roughly 330,000 were mentally ill. In 2005 estimates were that 34% of those in prisons were mentally ill.  By 2006, Shayne was one of the lucky ones as she was able to procure a bed at the mental health institute in Independence, Iowa.  By that time, Shayne had lost her second eye in much the same way as her first and was completely blind.  While she is not curedtoday, her symptoms seem more under control, although she still has not accepted her diagnosis. 
 
Shayne’s story is typical of hundreds of thousands of Americans dealing with a criminal justice system that does not allow for the different and often “belligerent” behavior of some individuals withmental illness.  These individuals often have no place to go and as a result of their illness wind up in prison where treatment is lacking if there is any treatment at all.  While Shayne eventually received the treatment she so desperately needed, many others are not so lucky.  
 
In another case study described in the book, Luke Ashely who suffered from debilitating anxiety and schizophrenia self-medicated with drugs.  He was initially arrestedfor possession of two pills of ecstasy.  Eventually, after begging his mother to come and get him out of prison somehow, he hanged himself in his cell as the stress and anxiety of prison was simply too much for him to take.  
 
In another tragic case depicted in the book, Alan Houseman wandered the streets of his Tampa neighborhood where he was recognizedas odd but not dangerous.  He lived with his mother, andafter her death,his paranoia became increasingly more intense.  He would eventually lose his life after being shot by a police officer who confronted him as he urinated in a public parking lot.  His paranoia of law enforcement caused him to ignore orders from the officer, andwhile he attempted to flee (because he believed she was there to take him to a mental health care facility),he was shotmultiple times.  In yet another case, Peter Nadir who was extremely autistic got into a physical altercation with his disabledmother.  Concerned neighbors called the police,andin the pursuit of Peter who would not abide by officers` request,Peter died of asphyxiation.  A police officer who was trying to get Peter under control, was kneeling on his back but also cutting off his ability to breathe.
 
Between 2000 and 2006, 24 people were killed by police officers in the Tampa Bay area alone.  Most investigations into the deaths of these individuals resulted in the exoneration of police officers, most of whom have not been trainedin dealing with the mentally ill.  In 2002, in Florida jails, 23 percent of inmates had a mentalillness, which is three times the figure from 1992.  Florida, like many other states, hasessentially replaced state psychiatric hospitals with state and local correctional institutions.  America`s prison system had the world’s highest per capitaincarceration rate in 2005; 714 per 100,000 people.  In the U.S., 60 billion dollars was spent on prisons while a fraction of that was spenton the proactive treatment of the mentally ill.  In 1980, 57% of people incarcerated in New York had gone to prison for violent offenses.  By 2002, that number was down to 29%.  Many mentally ill individuals attempt to self-medicate by using illicit drugs and because of “get tough”laws on drug crimes many of these individuals find themselves in prison and unable to manage day-to-day prison life because their illness makes it difficult to abide by the strict rules of the system.  Thisoften results in increased sentences because of misbehavior or time in solitary, which often makes the psychotic symptoms worse. While the history of treatment for the mentally ill in America has certainly been far from perfect, we appear to have moved away from a structured and helpful treatment.  
 
Proactive efforts to treat the mentally ill would allow many to lead healthy and productive lives before the symptoms get out of control.  Law enforcement agents need to be trainedon how to deal with mentally ill individuals who may feel threatened or act violently because of their illness.  Community programs are necessary to reintegrate or keep those suffering from mental illness in the community that may mean helping with simple tasks such as paying bills and supporting the individualswith empathy and understanding.  Despite some progress, mental illness still carries a stigma, andmany of those suffering are forced to live on the fringes of society.  America has done little to assist this population, andthe impact has been profound.
 
Other Related Resources
 
Stigma in a Global Context:  Mental Health Study Indiana University 
http://www.indiana.edu/~sgcmhs/
 
The Atlantic: Should the United States Bring Back Psychiatric Asylums?  
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/01/should-the-us-bring-back-psychiatric-asylums/384838/  
 
John Oliver Last Week Tonight on Mental Health 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGY6DqB1HX8  
 
National Bureau of Economic Research:  Mental Health Treatment and Criminal Justice Outcomes by Richard Frank and Thomas G. McGuire April 2010 
http://www.nber.org/papers/w15858.pdf
 
PEW Charitable Trusts:  Prison Health Care:  Costs and Quality:  How and Why States strive for high-performing systems October 2017
https://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2017/10/sfh_prison_health_care_costs_and_quality_final.pdf
 
National Public Radio:  How the Loss of U.S. Psychiatric Hospitals led to a Mental Health Crisis
https://www.npr.org/2017/11/30/567477160/how-the-loss-of-u-s-psychiatric-hospitals-led-to-a-mental-health-crisis?t=1537124105158
 
Technology and the Future of Mental Health Treatment:  National Institute of Mental Health
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/technology-and-the-future-of-mental-health-treatment/index.shtml  
 
Five-point Plan to Improve the Nations Mental Health
https://blog.samhsa.gov/2015/02/18/five-point-plan-to-improve-the-nations-mental-health/#.W56kTS2B36A  
 
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts 
Anxiety Disorder
Autism
Delusion
Haldol
Paranoid Schizophrenia
Prolixin
Schizoaffective Disorder
 
 

If I Understood You, Would I Have This Look on My Face? My Adventures in the Art and Science of Relating and Communicating
Author: Alan Alda
ISBN-10: 1524781924
ISBN-13: 978-1524781927
 
APA Style Citation
Alda, A. (2017). If I understood you, would I have this look on my face? My adventures in the art and science of relating and communicating. New York, NY: Random House LLC.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Understood-Would-Have-This-Look/dp/1524781924
​

​Book Description
What is the key to communication? Alan Alda, author of the book If I Understood You, Would I Have This Look on My Face? My Adventures in the Art and Science of Relating and Communicating, believes it is empathy and recognizing what the other person is thinking. He is an actor, writer, and director. Some may know him from his role on the TV show M*A*S*H and various movie appearances. Others know him within the scientific community as host of the PBS show Scientific American Frontiers and founder of the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University.  Recently, he has also been thrust into the spotlight by sharing his diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. His varied history within the fields of science and media provides him an interesting perspective when answering the question of how to enhance communication. He started with wanting to teach scientists how to communicate better, but now wants to share what he learned with you so you can become a better communicator.
 
As he ventured into the world of interviewing scientists, he recognized the need to listen with his eyes, ears, and feelings. He believes his training in improvisation helped him do just that and can help you too. Through games and exercises, your communication can be transformed. These theater games include sharing something in space, using mirroring exercises, guessing the relationship, and playing imaginary games, such as volleyball or tug-of-war. He also explored the fundamental rule of improv known as “Yes, and…” in the context of communication. If one can start with where the listener is in their knowledge and build, they will have more successful communication.  According to Alda, the person delivering the message is responsible for good communication, not the person receiving it. You need to listen to what the audience needs and is feeling. This advice works in all areas of life, including business and personal relationships. 
 
Not all empathy is created equal. Empathy is never good if it traps you in quicksand and encompasses your life. It can also be bad if it is being used to keep others submissive, what Alda refers to as dark empathy. This topic is further addressed in a blog entry for Against Empathy under the category Motivation/Emotion. Alda uses examples of bullies, torture sessions, and dishonorable sales techniques to point out how empathy can be used in a negative way. But then he quickly emphasizes that empathy is not the basis of good behavior, but rather a tool for communication.  A little acting training that involves empathy, can lead to a positive doctor-patient relationship and improve communication in those on the autism spectrum. It can also enhance writing and teaching.
 
On Scientific American Frontiers, Alda was always willing to volunteer and throw himself into the research. So when he was curious about the power of empathy on communication, he began a personal journey. He started to practice reading the faces of strangers, listening to people, and mentally attaching a word to what he thought was the emotion they were experiencing. He believed that naming emotions would help increase empathy. He was able to test this hypothesis with the help of a colleague and a cellphone application that allowed one to record every time you read someone’s emotion and labeled it. After one week with daily practice of paying attention to emotions and faces, his empathy did improve.
 
Along the journey to enhance communication, Alda explores what both helps and hurts communication. He shares how emotions make experiences memorable. In particular, laughter not only aids in memory but helps people connect. Stories provide the perfect vehicle to build a personal connection. A little dramatic action in the story is sure to catch the listener. People also become better communicators when they recognize what they have in common with each other. On the flip side, there are some aspects to avoid. Jargon and the curse of knowledge prevent people from communicating.  One of the most challenging roadblocks to communication is when you can’t imagine what it is like to not have that knowledge. It prevents you from being able to truly listen to the other person.  
 
Daily life offers you a continuous chance at improvisation. While there are no specific tips necessary to increase empathy, Alda encourages you to make personal connections and experience improvisation if you can. To get better at communication, it takes practice and being able to read another person. It is an art, not a formula. So keep practicing!
 
Other Related Resources
Author Website
http://alanalda.com/
 
Clear + Vivid Podcast
http://www.aldacommunicationtraining.com/podcasts/
 
Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science
https://www.aldacenter.org/
 
Alan Alda Twitter
https://twitter.com/search?q=alan+alda&ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Esearch
 
Life’s Work: Interview with Alan Alda
https://hbr.org/2017/07/alan-alda
 
NPR: Learning Life’s Lessons from Alan Alda
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4856461
 
Alan Alda has Parkinson’s disease
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/31/entertainment/alan-alda-parkinsons/index.html
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/31/634346984/i-m-not-angry-alan-alda-says-he-s-living-with-parkinson-s
 
Mirror Neurons
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-social-brain/
 
TED Talk- Helen Riess and Doctor-Patient Empathy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baHrcC8B4WM
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Albert Bandura
Carl Rogers
Daniel Goleman
Edward Thorndike
Michael Gazzaniga
Sigmund Freud
 
Active listening
Affective resonance
Altruism
Amygdala
Attention
Autism spectrum
Body language
Cognitive empathy
Communication
Corpus callosum
Dreams
EEG
Emotional intelligence
Empathy
Epilepsy
Facial expressions
Fear
fMRI
Humor
Learned helplessness
Lie detectors
Meditation
Memory
Meta-analysis
Mirror neurons
MRI
Neuroscientists
Oxytocin
Self-regulation
Similarity
Social awareness
Split brain
Stress-hormone response
Theory of mind

​Patient H.M.:  A Story of Memory, Madness, and Family Secrets
Author:  Luke Dittrich
ISBN:  978-0-8129-8252-7
 
APA Style Citation
Dittrich, L. (2017).  Patient H.M.:  A Story of Memory, Madness, and Family Secrets
Penguin, Random House, New York, N.Y.
 
Buy the Book
https://www.amazon.com/Patient-H-M-Memory-Madness-Secrets/dp/0812982525

Book Description
Luke Dittrich spent sixyears conducting impeccable research on perhaps the most famous patient in the history of neuroscience, Henry Gustav Molaison.  During his life,he was knownasH.M.;,Henryis often citedas the original case study to help neuroscientists understand the role of the hippocampus in encoding short-term to long-term memories.  Henry had dealt with increasingly alarmingand dangerous seizures since he was hit by a bicycle at age eight.  Nearly 20 years later, Dr. William Beecher Scoville, a dashing, daring surgeon burrowed deep into Henry`s temporal lobe and into the hippocampus in an effort toease the occurrence of the seizures. Dittrich had a motivating force driving his long-term research on this project, Dr. Scoville was his grandfather.
 
While Henry Molaison is the central figure of the book, the story is set against a backdrop of the debate about the proper way toconduct a lobotomy, treatment of the mentally ill in the 1950s and the very real possibility that Dr. Scoville carried out a lobotomy on his own wife who suffered a psychotic break and was sent to the Instituteof the Living in Hartford,Connecticut.  Dittrich describes heating and cooling treatments, which were an essential component of treating psychosis prior tothe availability of antipsychotic medication.
Dittrich remembers his grandmother as quiet and reserved but never knew about her history with mental illness prior tohis research for the book.  Dittrich describes some of his grandfather`s risky surgical practices such as scheduling lobotomies on Saturdays or after hours even after most of the medical community had rejected their use.  He compares his grandfather to the even more reckless Walter Freeman who wanted to allow psychologists rather than only neurosurgeonsto conduct lobotomies.  Freeman used the barbaric “ice pick” lobotomy while Scoville used specially designed instruments to limit the depth and breadth of the damage to the cerebrum.  Freeman operated on patients as young as 7 and as old as 72.  Both men conducted thevast majority of lobotomies on women, most of whom were psychotic, but some with depressive disorders or even others who were simply considered to be “rebellious.”
 
For 20 years Henry lived with his seizures,andwhile this eventually prevented him from working, he was able to attend high school and had many recollections of his childhood. He recalled a girl in junior high whomhe had a crush on (she did not remember him), he recalled details about his parents and the homes in which they lived when he was a child,but had virtually no personal memories after his surgery.  Because of the notoriety of H.M. (as he was knownin the research during his life), many individuals wanted to work with Henry to make their mark on the history of neuroscience.  While Scoville conducted the surgery, he did not play a large role in Henry`s treatment or care post-surgery.  Brenda Milner, a young female psychologist in a time when there were very few in the field, completed the psychological testing on Henry.  While she tested him for many years, he never recognized her from one visit to the next.  Henry met her for a series of tests both at McGill University where she worked and in his hometown.  Henry`s episodic and semantic memories were essentially destroyed,butMilner found that he improved on the procedural task of outlining a star in the mirror.  Henry claimed to have never seen the task before,,but improved on the task each time it was presented.  He acknowledged that he found it quite easy, he could not identify whyhis performance was so quick.  Milner concluded that procedural memories are heldin a location of the brain (cerebellum) distinct from those areas that held episodic and semantic memories.  Thismay help to explain why other amnesiac patients like Clive Wearing have retained the procedural skills such as playing the organ they held before the hippocampal damage such as playing the organ.  
 
When Henry`s parents passed away, adistant cousin became Henry`s guardian but gave the authority of all medicaland research decisions to Susan Corkinof MIT.  Susan Corkin by coincidence was a friend of Scoville`s daughter (Dittrich`s mother) who was a neurologist and oversaw who had contact with Henry.  She strictly regulated who came into contact with Henry and rejected most requests to work with himwithout giving them serious consideration.  Some believe she was fiercely protective in order tosave H.M.`s anonymity, others like Dittrich believe that she did this out of self-interest in order tohave sole access to the most famous patient in neurological history. Even with his family connection, Corkin refused to let Dittrich meet H.M. or even share his location.  She eventually sent a detailed list of restrictions written up by MIT lawyers regarding what Dittrich could and could not do, which he rejected, but eventually,he found out who H.M. was on his own.  
 
After Henry`s death, the world was allowed to know his real name and Corkin realized she needed help if she were to continue to study Henry`s brain after his death.  She employed the help of Jacopo Annese of the Brain Observatory in San Diego, California.  He carried Henry`s brain from Boston back to his lab where it was encased in silicone and live-streamedin 2010 as it was cutinto 2,401 slices.  These slices could be studied in detail to better understand the extent of the damage to Henry`s brain.  Annese found that the hippocampus had not been entirely destroyedas previously believed.  After over a year with the brain, Annese wanted to continue the investigation with Henry`s brain and intended to publish papers based on his findings.  He was sued by MITfor the return of the brain which Corkin wanted to reside permanently at the Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging at Massachusetts General Hospital.  After a prolonged fight, the brain was returnedto Massachusetts.  
 
The contributions of Henry Molaison to science are significant in part because of the trauma he suffered as a child.  However so are the nameless others who underwent leucotomies, lobotomies, insulin shock treatment, extreme heat or cold or other experimental procedures in which the results and impacts were unknown.  
 
Other Related Resources
Interview with Author Luke Dittrich
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7akPs8ptg4
 
H.M. Brain Slicing with Dr. Ramachandran and Roger Bingham
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKzOQ1uezYc
 
PBS: Interview with Susan Corkin about H.M.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/corkin-hm-memory.html
 
Luke Dittrich interview with Susan Corkin
https://medium.com/@lukedittrich/questions-answers-about-patient-h-m-ae4ddd33ed9c
 
Famous Amnesia Patient`s Brain Cut into 2,401 pieces
https://www.livescience.com/42898-patient-hm-postmortem-brain.html
 
BRAIN:  A Journal of Neurology
Brenda Milner Biographyon her 100thbirthday:  a lifetime of “good ideas”[JF1] 
https://www.psych.ualberta.ca/GCPWS/Milner/Biography/Milner_bio1.html
 
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation :  Brenda Milner turns 100
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/trailblazing-montreal-neuroscientist-brenda-milner-turns-100-1.4743054
 
Brenda Milner: Neuroscientist (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JliczINA__Y&t=426s
 
The Society of Neurological Surgeons:  Profile of William Beecher Scoville
https://www.societyns.org/society/bio.aspx?MemberID=7664
 
Wired:  The Untold Story about Neuroscience`s Most Famous Brain
https://www.wired.com/2016/08/untold-story-neurosciences-famous-brain/
https://academic.oup.com/brain/article-abstract/141/8/2527/5050904?redirectedFrom=fulltext
 
https://bigpictureeducation.com/brain-case-study-patient-hm
 
https://www.npr.org/2016/08/14/489997276/how-patient-h-m-and-his-lobotomy-contributed-to-understanding-memories
 
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/corkin-hm-memory.html
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/07/magazine/the-brain-that-couldnt-remember.html
 ​
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Jacopo Annese
Gotlieb Burckhardt
Susan Corkin
Walter Freeman
Sigmund Freud
Phineas Gage
Karl Lashley
Anton Mesmer
Brenda Milner
Egaz Moniz
Wilder Penfield
Hermann Rorschach
William Scoville
James Watts
David Wechsler
 
Antipsychotic medication
Amygdala
Anterograde Amnesia
Arachnoid Mater
Auditory Cortex
Broca`s Area
Cerebrum
Cerebellum
Cerebral Cortex
Cerebrospinal Fluid
Corpus Callosum
Electroencephaologram(EEG)
Endocrinology
Epilepsy
Free Association
Frontal Lobes
Homunculus
Hypothalamus
Informed Consent
Insulin Shock Treatment
Leucotomy
Limbic System
Lobotomy
Localization of Function
Meninges
Motor Cortex
MRI
Neuroanatomist
Neurologist
Olfactory Cortex
Phrenology
Psychoanalysis
Psychosurgery
Repressed Memories
Retrograde Amnesia
Short-term Memory
Temporal Lobe
Thorazine
Unconsciousness
 
 
 
 


 

​The Worth Expert Guide to Scientific Literacy: Thinking Like a Psychological Scientist
Authors: Kenneth Keith and Bernard Beins
ISBN-13: 978-1319021429
ISBN-10: 1319021425

APA Style Citation
Keith, K. D., & Beins, B. C. (2017). The worth expert guide to scientific literacy: Thinking like a psychological scientist. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.macmillanlearning.com/Catalog/product/worthexpertguidetoscientificliteracythinkinglikeapsychologicalscientist-firstedition-keith
​

​Book Description
What comes to mind when you think of science? Are you picturing a large textbook and scientists lecturing facts or are you picturing beakers, microscopes, and lab coats? Do you think of science as a body of knowledge, as a process, or both? According to the authors of The Worth Expert Guide to Scientific Literacy: Thinking Like a Psychological Scientist, “For scientific literacy is not just about what we know; it is about how we know it, and how we conduct our lives.” Kenneth D. Keith, Ph.D. is professor emeritus of psychological sciences at the University of San Diego, and Bernard C. Beins Ph.D. is a professor of psychology at Ithaca College. Both authors are well-published and focus on the teaching of psychology. In addition, both have held leadership roles for the AP Psychology Reading.  The focus of this text is on why scientific literacy is important and how to increase it through psychology.  Teachers in psychology have the ability to enhance their students’ critical thinking and help their students go beyond what they know and start to question how they know it is true.
 
It is said that over a quarter of the American population could be considered scientifically literate. While this dismal statistic is alarming, at least it has been on the rise in the past few decades. Where does the discipline of psychology stand in the world of scientific literacy? Some believe the recent Reproducibility Project has challenged psychology`s standing as a science. The project began in 2011 and was led by the Center for Open Science’s co-founder Brian Nosek, who set out to replicate the findings of original studies published in 2008. Of the 100 published studies that were repeated by independent researchers, 39 had the same outcome, 24 had moderately similar results, and a little over one third had patterns noticeably discrepant from the original. However, this replication crisis is not confined to the field of psychology. The replication crisis is across all sciences but is most commonly discussed in psychology, especially social psychology, and medicine.
 
The authors argue that psychology helps to develop scientific literacy. Our discipline focuses on empirical questions and devotes more space to scientific literacy than the natural sciences. Psychology also has more complex explanations that require we control extraneous factors and utilize random samples. We are considered one of the seven hub sciences, along with chemistry and medicine, and it has been demonstrated that psychology students become more scientifically literate as they take more classes in the discipline. Introduction to psychology books devote much attention to the scientific process and overall the discipline helps prepare individuals to think about questions related to psychology in complex ways.
 
What are the characteristics of scientific literacy? A small quiz is provided to check the reader’s scientific literacy. In addition, the authors help break down the types of reasoning and the knowledge of facts. It is important to note that psychology has a rather short half-life of facts, only seven years. After that time, half the facts would be considered wrong or irrelevant. In physics, the half-life of facts is 13 years and in some areas of medicine, it is up to 45 years. Knowing this, it is important to check facts to see if they are valid and credible.  As teachers of science, we should encourage our students to think like scientists and continue to question the content as our discipline and other scientific disciplines progress. While the base of knowledge is continuously growing, we should not be scared to question what we learn and look for new evidence to either refute or support earlier findings.  As the authors explain the questions necessary for scientific literacy, they provide multiple examples and offer readers an antidote to fix their thinking. Psychology is ripe with examples and is useful in helping to increase scientific literacy. 
 
A large portion of the text is dedicated to evaluating evidence and interpreting numbers. Once again lots of examples and antidotes are provided to guide the reader as they question what they believe to be true.  Readers learn to decide what appropriate evidence is and how knowing about probability helps make better decisions.  As we look at the evidence we must learn to call into question what is involved, such as personal experiences, authority, and anecdotes. While interpreting statistics we need to understand the numbers and check for deception. Numbers are a tool to help us make the best conclusion possible, but statistics are not infallible. Problems arise when people don’t understand or misinterpret statistics. We need to learn to understand numbers and recognize appropriate evidence and relevant facts, all while learning to avoid potential traps.  Not necessarily an easy task, but psychology students are ready!
 
The authors return to myths and misconceptions. This time they take the approach of why we believe them. They explore culture, self-deception, intuition, authority, faith, personal experience, sources, and evidence. The fallacies underlying common misconceptions are identified and strategies to recognize and overcome these myths are provided.
 
Another large portion of the text is assigned to scientific literacy within specific fields of psychology. Many terms within the introduction to psychology course are addressed. First, the authors look at psychological beliefs and values. A variety of examples in the fields of sensation and perception and cognition are explored. Second, the authors look at social behavior. Specific attributional errors are addressed. Third, they focus on explanatory style and health-related behaviors. These three chapters are filled to the brim with connections to the psychology classroom.
 
Finally, psychological science is discussed in the frame of everyday life beyond the lab and classroom.  Pioneers in science have not always been received fondly, but we utilize the fruits of the field on a regular basis as we search the Internet, use a cellphone, watch TV, or take a medication. According to the authors, the need for scientific literacy is important as we tackle important topics, such as the anti-vaccine movement, recovered memory therapy, and global climate control. Each of these topics can have dire consequences if the truth is not addressed. Some may question the field of psychology as a science. They use arguments, such as research having to be politically correct, intuition and common sense encompassing an individual’s truths, the pervasiveness of pseudoscientific claims, and the belief that everyday life equals training in psychology. Furthermore, our discipline is faced with the common belief that theories are mere speculation when really they constitute an explanatory framework. Thinking like a scientist can help us overcome misconceptions and make us better problem solvers, decision makers, and partners in relationships. We can better understand motives and avoid being misled with self-deception and selective use of data. Science has a significant role in our everyday lives. On a final note from the authors, “Psychology offers a strong foundation in scientific literacy and it is not just for psychologists.”  
 
Other Related Resources
NOBA Thinking Like a Psychological Scientist
http://nobaproject.com/modules/thinking-like-a-psychological-scientist
 
Lumen Introduction to Psychology
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/ivytech-psychology1/chapter/the-replication-crisis-in-psychology/
 
Retraction Watch
https://retractionwatch.com/
 
Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science
https://osf.io/jtcu9/
 
Articles
What psychology’s crisis means for the future of science- Vox article
https://www.vox.com/2016/3/14/11219446/psychology-replication-crisis
 
Stanford Prison Experiment: Why famous psychology experiments- Vox article
The Stanford Prison Experiment was massively influential. We just learned it was a fraud.
https://www.vox.com/2018/6/13/17449118/stanford-prison-experiment-fraud-psychology-replication
 
Philip Zimbardo’s response to recent criticisms on Stanford Prison Experiment
http://www.prisonexp.org/response/
 
The “marshmallow test” said patience was a key to success. A new replication tells us s’more. - Vox article
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/6/6/17413000/marshmallow-test-replication-mischel-psychology
 
Cancer scientists are having trouble replicating groundbreaking research- Vox article
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/1/23/14324326/replication-science-is-hard
 
The 7 biggest problems facing science, according to 270 scientists
https://www.vox.com/2016/7/14/12016710/science-challeges-research-funding-peer-review-process
 
What a nerdy debate about p-values shows about science — and how to fix it- Vox article
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/7/31/16021654/p-values-statistical-significance-redefine-0005
 
Science is often flawed. It's time we embraced that- Vox article
https://www.vox.com/2015/5/13/8591837/how-science-is-broken
 
The replication crisis in science
https://thewire.in/science/replication-crisis-science
 
Students are the answer to psychology’s replication crisis
http://theconversation.com/why-students-are-the-answer-to-psychologys-replication-crisis-90286
 
Why is the replication crisis focused on social psychology?
http://andrewgelman.com/2018/05/07/replication-crisis-centered-social-psychology/
 
Neuroscientist explains psychology’s replication crisis
https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2018/mar/19/a-neuroscientist-explains-psychologys-replication-crisis-podcast
 
What Do Talking Apes Really Tell Us? Koko, Kanzi, and ape language
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/08/koko_kanzi_and_ape_language_research_criticism_of_working_conditions_and.html
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
B.F. Skinner
Daryl Bem
Franz Anton Mesmer
Fritz Heider
George Miller
Henry H. Goddard
Jean Piaget
John B. Watson
Kitty Genovese
Martin Seligman
Sigmund Freud
Sir Cyril Burt- educational psychology
 
ABC cognitive approach
Aggression
Algorithm
Analytic thought
Anecdotes
Attraction
Attribution theory
Authority
Availability heuristic
Base rate
Belief perseverance
Binocular disparity
Black swan hypothesis
Change blindness
Cognitive dissonance
Confirmation bias
Control group
Correlations
Culture
Cyberbullying
Deductive reasoning
Descriptive statistics
Disposition attribution
Double-blind
Effect sizes
Empirical approach
Ethnocentric
Experimental control
Explanatory style
External validity
Extraneous variables
Extrasensory perception (ESP)
Eyewitness identification
Face validity
False consensus effect
File drawer problem
First instinct fallacy
Formal operations
Framing effect
Fundamental attribution error
Gambler’s fallacy
Happiness
Hedonic adaptation
Heuristic
Hindsight bias
Homeopathic medicine
Hyperactivity
Hypnosis
Hypothesis
Illusory correlation
Immunotherapy
Inattentional blindness
Inductive reasoning
Inferential statistics
In-group
Intuition
Law of small numbers
Marijuana
Mean (arithmetic mean)
Median
Mesmerism
Meta-analysis
Modeling
Moon-illusion
Myside bias
Narcolepsy
Near-death experience
Operational definitions
Optimistic
Outgroup homogeneity bias
Outliers
Oxytocin
Pessimistic
Placebo effects
Pollyanna Principle
Priming
Probability
Pseudoscience
Psychokinesis
Random assignment
Reaction time
Recency effect
Regression to the mean
Replication
Representative heuristic
Repression
Reproducibility Project
Sample size
Science literacy
Scientific literacy
Self-deception
Self-effacement
Self-justification
Self-serving bias
Short-term memory capacity
Situational attribution
Standard deviation
Statistically significant
Statistics
Subjective well-being
Subliminal messages
Theory
Thermal grill illusion
Type I error
Type II error
Unrealistic optimism
Validity
Warrior gene

The Lost Boys:  Inside Muzafer Sherif`s Robbers Cave Experiment
Author: Gina Perry
ISBN:  e-book 9781925548303; hard copy book in the U.S.is not yet available
 
APA Style Citation
Perry, G. (2018). The Lost Boys:  Inside Muzafer Sherif`s Robbers Cave Experiment.  Scribe Publications, London.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Lost-Boys-Muzafer-Sherifs-experiment-ebook/dp/B07BL7DZ3M

​Book Description
The validity of many social psychology studies hasrecentlybeen questioned.  The highly staged and deceptive practices of Milgram and the personal involvement, as well as the potential emotional harm, of Zimbardo’s prison studyhave garnered much attention and called into question the degree of manipulation in these studies.  Thus far, Muzafer Sherif`s study at Robbers Cave, which investigated superordinate goals to overcome out-group bias and stereotypes, has avoided the spotlight for unethical and questionable practices. Gina Perry`s new book will likely change this.  Fresh off of her book Behind the Shock Machine,which exposed some of the misperceptions and deception involved in the Milgram studies, Perry delves into the archives of Psychology in Akron, Ohio to examine Muzafer Sherif`s personal history and his infamous study of in-group and out-groups at Robbers Cave in Oklahoma.
 
Perry devotes the first third of the book to a study that was conducted in 1953 in Middle Grove, New York one year prior tothe Robbers Cave study.  This nameless study seemed to be one Sherif wanted to disappear, as he did not publish or write about the results despite receiving a large grant from the Rockefeller Foundation.  In a similar circumstance to the Robbers Cave study, 24 underprivileged boys were gathered to study group dynamics and the development of in-group and out-groups.  The letter provided to parents to gain consent included not outright deception,but was interesting for what it did not say.  The letter indicated that the 10 and 11-year-old boys would be participating in a study of child relations and social organization among children. A condition of this agreement was that parents not visit as it might “distract” the boys.  As we now know from Milgram`s infamous study, the affiliation with Yale University would have provided a sense of legitimacy for the study and parents may have wanted their sons associated with a study from a highly esteemed university without asking too many questions.  
In this Middle Grove study, the boys initially made friends with one another; and when divided into groups, they expressed a desire to be with their friends who were purposely placed in the opposing group (Panthers and Pythons). Sherif would remedy this in the Robbers Cave study by not allowing the two groups to get to know one another before the division into groups occurred.  The camp counselors were part of Sherif`s research team, andSherif himself acted as the camp custodian.  The researchers were told not to interfere with the boys and provided little guidance even when the boys clearlyneeded some direction from an adult.  When the boys did not act according to what Sherif expected, he broke his own rules by ordering the counselors to raid one group`s tent to make it look like the other team had done this, even going so far as to break a young man`s ukulele.  The boys did not take the bait, they suspected the camp staff rather than the other boys, andinstead of becoming divided, they encouraged the other team when they lost and wanted to share their winnings (pocket knives).  When they believed they were treated unfairly in a competition, they looked to the counselors to sort things out; and when they did not intervene, the boys took that as a betrayal from the adults who they believed should reconcile the situation, this made them align with the other boys in camp against the counselors. As the study unraveled, Sherif began drinking excessively and threatened one of his research assistants. By the end of the three-week study, the boys were essentially lefton their own.  When they destroyed the camp piano, there were no repercussions andthe boys seemed to sense that ahead of time. It is clear from Perry`s research that this study was not discussedbecause the outcome Sherif believed he would find never surfaced.  The Robbers Cave study would be his opportunity to make certain he created the right dynamics to create divisions between the groups.  
 
The second portion of the book is devoted to Sherif`s interesting background as a Turkish psychologist who was essentially bannedfrom returning to Turkey because of his liberal beliefs.  Perry addresses the discrimination Sherif faced upon his arrival in America, as people seemed bewildered that a Turk could be a prominent academic.  Perry argues that Sherif`s experience during the Turkish Revolution may be reflectedin the Robbers Cave study.  When Sherif was a student, people aligned themselves either with the Nationalistic Ataturk or the Greeks and Armenians. Former friends became bitter enemies and long-time neighbors no longer trusted one another.  Sherif would have seen first-hand the deep divisions that group affiliations can create.
 
Sherif often bristled that he was not given much attention for his Robbers Cave study, which he considered to be groundbreaking research in the field of social psychology.  He often felt overshadowed by Solomon Asch. Sherif believed he was responsible for convincing Asch to pursue social psychology while the two studied together at Columbia University.  Because Milgram then studied under Asch, Sherif saw himself as a "defacto" father of social psychology who was not given the credit he deserved, as he was relegatedto the outpost of Oklahoma rather than one of the eliteIvy League East Coast universities.  Much correspondence at the time refers to Sherif`s incredible intellect, but also to his challenging temperament.  His wife Carolyn, also a social psychologist, seemed to be able to reign in some of his difficult personality, but he was often a challenge to work with or to have on staff.  Sherif was eventually diagnosedwith bipolar disorder, andafter moving to Penn State, Carolyn`s career accelerated while Muzafer`s faded.  
 
Finally, the last portion of the book is devoted to the most famous work Sherif conducted, which examined in-group and out-group bias between the Rattlers and Eagles at Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma.  The 22 boys in this study were 10 and 11 years-old, from lower-middle class and working-class families in the area. The two groups of boys were located about a mile away from one another, andSherif`s team was careful to facilitate the creation of strong group alliances from the start by allowing the boys to create team identities (Rattlers and Eagles).  The groups were kept separate for three days tohelp facilitate the creation of strong group affiliations. Some of the aggressive behaviors the boys exhibited may have been due to a single individual who became the leader of the Rattlers early in the study.  Red was bigger than most of the boys and swore, berated, and mocked even the boys on his ownteam.   He created an aggressive dynamic within the Rattlers and this inevitably transferred to the behavior between the groups as well.  He would later be castinto the woods for stealing from his ownteam until he improved his behavior.  
 
Sixteen events were scheduled over four days to pit the teams against one another. 
Perry was able to track down a few of the men who had participated in the study, none of whom knew that the camp had been a testing ground for research on group dynamics.  The men were interested although tentative regarding what the researchers could have been studying but remembered some events from the camp vividly.  As in the earlier study, the researchers did little to intervene in the boy’s treatment of one another even when they began swearing and making fun of the boys in the camp.  While interference from the researchers was not strictly forbidden as it was in the first study, the suggestion to get revenge on the other team may have been more the camp counselors’ (researchers’) idea thanthe boys.  At first,the losses were blamedon other group members, rather than the opposing team.  Afterwinninga baseball game, the Eagles made three cheers for the Rattlers, which differs greatly from what has originally been reported. After raids on each other’s cabins and the theft of knives used as a reward for winning the tournament, some of the boys started to break down, andSherif worried he mayhave gone too far.  
 
During the final stage of the study, the boys were toldthat there was a water shortage and they had to work together to find the problem (this event was purposely orchestrated). Sherif believed this would begin to heal the rift between the groups. During the last event, the boys went to Arkansas for a trip to a nearby town, when one of the trucks broke down. The boys piled into one truck and seemed to overcome theirprior disdainfor one another.  Thismight have been as much due to the Rattlers banning Red from the group until he behaved, as it did with the superordinate goals on which Sherif focused.  
 
Perry argues that one cannot examine the Robbers Cave study without taking into consideration the extraordinary role of the researchers disguised as counselors.  This seemingly naturalistic study was more highly manipulatedthan ever reported and the results may be due to confirmation bias, rather than a legitimate difference between groups.  Sherif failed to take into account his own experiences in Turkey and how that may have impacted his perspective of the harshness that can exist between groups.  Sherif did not seem to take into consideration the potential emotional suffering the boys experienced, either during or after the conclusion of the study.  Sadly, Perry`s book is another hit to the credibility ofsocial psychology studies, but perhaps knowing the truth about what actuallyoccurred helps us understand human nature after all.
 
Resources
The British Psychological Society:  The Unknown Muzafer Sherif
https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-27/edition-11/unknown-muzafer-sherif
 
Simply Psychology:  Robbers Cave, Realistic Conflict Theory
https://www.simplypsychology.org/robbers-cave.html
 
The Guardian:  A Real-Life Lord of the Flies: The troubling legacy of the Robbers Cave experiment.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/apr/16/a-real-life-lord-of-the-flies-the-troubling-legacy-of-the-robbers-cave-experiment
 
The Guardian: “Come out and Fight!” an extract from The Lost Boysby Gina Perry
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/apr/16/come-on-out-and-fight-an-extract-from-the-lost-boys-by-gina-perry
 
Author Gina Perry’s Website
http://www.gina-perry.com/the-lost-boys/
 
New York Times Obituary for social psychologist Muzafer Sherif
https://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/27/obituaries/muzafer-sherif-82-psychologist-who-studied-hostility-of-groups.html
 
Video
You Tube:  Robber`s Cave
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PRuxMprSDQ
 
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Allport, Gordon
Asch, Solomon
Clark, Kenneth,andMamie 
Dewey, John
Hall, G. Stanley
James, William 
Lewin, Kurt
Mead, Margaret 
Milgram, Stanley
Sherif, Muzafer
Watson, John
 
Confirmation bias
Conflict
Cooperation
Debriefing
Deception
Discrimination
Group dynamics
Group norm
In-Group bias
Intragroup relations
Little Albert
Out-Group bias
Persuasion
Prejudice
 

The Neuroscientist Who Lost Her Mind: My Tale of Madness and Recovery
​Authors:  Barbara K. Lipska and Elaine McArdle
ISBN-10: 1328787303
ISBN-13: 978-1328787309

APA Style Citation
Lipska, B. K. & McArdle, E. (2018).  The Neuroscientist Who Lost Her Mind: My Tale of Madness and Recovery. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Neuroscientist-Who-Lost-Her-Mind/dp/1328787303

​Book Description
Dr. Barbara Lipska dedicated her life to neuroscience and ended up raging a personal battle with her own brain. As a neuroscientist her specialty was schizophrenia, but soon she experienced the very symptoms she studied. The Neuroscientist Who Lost Her Mind: My Tale of Madness and Recovery follows her personal story of overcoming melanoma that metastasized to the brain. She reminds us that mental illness is a brain disease and provides a blend of brain awareness and personal anecdotes to educate the reader. According to Dr. Thomas R. Insel, former National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) director, when speaking of Lipska, “You have done something so important for people with serious mental illness who do not have an observable lesion. Not only have you reminded us all that mental illnesses are brain illnesses, you have reminded us to be hopeful. People recover.” It is her expertise, desire to help reduce stigma, and optimism that leaves a lasting mark on the reader.
 
Throughout the book, Dr. Lipska divulges personal stories to build together the timeline of her amazing strength and battle with various cancers.  She began her journey in communist Poland in the 1980s where she worked on clinical trials for drugs to treat schizophrenia. Her first marriage quickly fell apart after she learned her husband had melanoma that ended up metastasizing to the brain, the very disorder she later faced. She found comfort in another man, Mirek and went on to marry him and raise her two children from her first marriage. In 1989, she was offered employment at the National Institute of Health in Maryland. Her research quickly took off and, in 1993, she published findings for the Lipska model. Then, in 2009, she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a mastectomy on her left breast. Again in 2011, she received the unimaginable news and learned that she had the deadliest form of skin cancer, melanoma. She went on to beat cancer for a second time. In 2013, she was named Director of the Human Brain Collection Core at the NIMH. Life seemed to be taking a turn for the better, and she started to train for a half Ironman.
 
In January 2015, her story changed once again for the worse. She was working on her computer when her right hand vanished from her lower right visual field. She did not want to admit that something was wrong, but she was well-versed in the symptoms of cancer. An MRI confirmed she had three tumors and that one was bleeding and appeared to be melanoma. She was going to battle this cancer with the “kitchen sink”, including surgery, radiation, and immunotherapy. She was given steroids to prevent swelling and needed brain surgery to remove the bleeding tumor from her occipital lobe. Fortunately, the raisin-sized tumor was in a non-life-threatening location. Next, she decided to use stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to focus high doses of radiation onto individual tumors. Within one month of the brain surgery she was skiing, and within two months, training for a triathlon again. The family vacationed in Hawaii and spirits were high. After she returned, she received the news that she had been accepted into an immunotherapy clinical trial. Immunotherapy uses the body’s own defenses to fight the disease and has been touted as one of the most encouraging cancer treatments in decades.  Over 12 weeks, Dr. Lipska received four injections, consisting of a combination of two monoclonal antibody drugs that boosted the immune system. The drugs teach the dysfunctional T cells to recognize, attack, and kill off the cancerous cells.  She was not supposed to have any active tumors to complete the trial because the consequences were unknown. However, she learned from a second opinion that she had three new tumors.  Dr. Lipska decided to keep the news a secret and she proceeded with the trial. After the second injection, her body took a turn for the worse. She had an autoimmune reaction and suffered lymphedema from her previous mastectomy. When her lymph nodes were removed, her lymphatic system was blocked and her lymph fluid could not properly drain. This fluid buildup led to swelling in Dr. Lipska’s arm. It was at this time that her personality started to change. She became aggressive, acting like a 2-year-old having a tantrum, but did not have insight into her own behavior. She lashed out at her family, a physical therapist, and termite inspection man. She was angry, paranoid, impatient, and lacked empathy. Her frontal lobe was changing, but everyone wrote it off as stress. In June 2015, a variety of odd behaviors started to occur. She went for a run in her neighborhood with hair dye dripping everywhere and missing her prosthetic breast. She lost her car and, after finding it, damaged it as she frantically tried to escape the parking structure. After her final injection, she got sick on pizza and believed she had been poisoned by plastic hidden in the pizza. Upon her family’s advice she returned to the doctor for her first MRI since joining the immunotherapy trial. She learned that she had new tumors and the immunotherapy did not work. There was a total of 18 tumors, the largest in her frontal and parietal lobe.  She also had significant swelling and inflammation of brain tissue. Once again, she was given high amounts of steroids. This time her therapy included CyberKnife Robotic Radiosurgery, which used a robotic arm to shoot high-dose radiation into the tumors.
 
Dr. Lipska continued to battle her symptoms for the next two months.  She was argumentative and lost her ability to plan. She became obsessed with food and gained ten pounds. She was told to get her affairs in order, and her family began a rotation of visits. As her symptoms continued to advance, she forgot her husband’s birthday and how to do simple math, but her writing and creativity remained strong.  Dr. Lipska continued to work out, but did not understand the physical strain on her body. One specific incident included a seven-mile hike where she found chanterelle mushrooms that she wanted her husband to gather for breakfast.  After her 2.5 hour walk, she was exhausted and became overwhelmed. Her brain entered survival mode, and she blew up at her husband and family. Soon after this incident, her family noticed her short-term memory was disappearing. In addition, she would lose her balance and not be able to judge distance. One afternoon after demanding to walk home, she got lost and had her first incident of incontinence. When attending the grand opening of a local supermarket, she experienced a sensory overload from the music that sent her into panic mode. She was living a strange irony of the symptoms she once studied. 
 
Her mind finally started to return. She described it like crawling out of a black hole. Dr. Lipska wanted to keep fighting, but the two new drugs that showed promise for her genetic variation were not approved by the FDA and were not covered by insurance. The drug company gave her the drugs for “compassionate use” and she began both types. Her body exploded in a rash, but eventually she had promising results. In July 2015, she had a scan that showed the tumors shrank considerably or disappeared.  There was no way to know exactly which treatment worked, but she was grateful (even though the scientist in her was annoyed). She continued to have brain scans every six weeks. Small tumors have appeared and were treated with CyberKnife.
 
Dr. Lipska has tried to put all the pieces together and figure out how to move forward. Her family doesn’t talk much about those two summer months. She was scared about how her mind failed and has since regularly tested herself to see if her symptoms are returning. She publicly shared her story through The New York Times for the first time and received a positive response. But her story took another twist in August 2016. At the site of her biggest tumor she experienced brain tissue necrosis. This is a delayed and sometimes fatal effect of radiation, where the surrounding tissue of the brain tumor does not heal after the radiation.  Dr. Lipska noticed a blind spot at the top of her visual field in her left eye. She was diagnosed with irreversible optic neuropathy- total blindness in her left eye due to the radiation she received. Lipska refused to give up, retrained her body to deal with the blindness, and even trained for a family triathlon. Two weeks before the race she experienced a leg twitch. She was having seizures due to necrotic tissue in her right motor cortex.  Despite her complications she continued to compete in the triathlon, taking the swimming leg of the race. When she passed the timing piece to her husband, he said, “Life is a team sport! And remember, my love, we’ll conquer this beast!”
 
The prognosis for Dr. Lipska is good, but she is cautious. She is worried it could all happen again with old age. But she knows it is through the support of her family that she got through her journey to madness and back.
 
Other Related Resources
Barbara K. Lipska Webpage
https://www.barbaralipska.com/bio/
 
The New York Times Article written by Dr. Lipska
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/opinion/sunday/the-neuroscientist-who-lost-her-mind.html
Possible questions include:

1. What symptoms did Dr. Lipska experience that mimic mental illness?
2. What role did her family play in her story with melanoma?
3. How does this story fight the stigma of mental illness?
4. How is this story a testament to optimism?

 
NPR Interview with Dr. Lipska
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/03/31/598236622/the-neuroscientist-who-lost-her-mind-returns-from-madness
 
Megyn Kelly TODAY interview with Dr. Lipska
https://www.today.com/video/meet-the-neuroscientist-who-lost-her-mind-then-got-it-back-again-1209150019548
 
2018 Gaithersburg Book Festival in Maryland book talk with Dr. Lipska
https://www.c-span.org/video/?445042-12/the-neuroscientist-lost-mind
 
WGBH News interview with Dr. Lipska
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abWumGocVoU
 
WBUR- Radio Boston interview with Dr. Lipska
http://www.wbur.org/radioboston/2018/04/23/neuroscientist-new-book
 
Psychology Today posts from authors
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/experts/barbara-k-lipska-phd-elaine-mcardle
 
The Guardian Article
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/mar/30/i-was-a-caricature-of-my-worst-traits-how-brain-cancer-can-affect-the-mind
 
Wall Street Journal article written by James (son-in-law) about the family triathlon
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-triathlon-is-easy-next-to-soviets-and-polio-1495492959
 
Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor- Harvard trained brain scientist who suffers from a stroke and then writes about it
http://mystrokeofinsight.com/
http://drjilltaylor.com/book.html
https://www.amazon.com/My-Stroke-Insight-Scientists-Personal/dp/0452295548
https://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104154403
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts 
Phineas Gage
 
Adrenal glands
Anosognosia- lack of insight
Antipsychotic drugs in the 1950s
Blood-brain-barrier (BBB)
Brain
Brain bank
Cerebellum
Confidentiality
Consciousness
Creativity
CT scan
Dementia
DSM-5
Dyspraxia
Empathy
Frontal cortex
Frontal lobotomy
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD)
Gray vs. white matter
Hippocampus
Id vs. superego
Immunotherapy
Language
Lipska model- neonatal hippocampal lesion model of schizophrenia
Lobes- frontal, parietal, temporal, occipital
Localization
Mental illness statistics
MRI
Nature vs. nurture
Neuroscientist
Paranoia
PET scan
Pituitary glands
Prefrontal cortex
Psychosis
Schizophrenagenic mother myth
Schizophrenia
Sensory overload
Short vs. long-term memory
Spatial memory
Stigma of mental illness
Thyroid glands
Visual field

Against Empathy:  The Case for Rational Compassion
Author:  Paul Bloom
ISBN:  978-0-06-233933-1
 
APA Style Citation
Bloom, P.  (2016). Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion, Harper Collins, New York, New York.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Against-Empathy-Case-Rational-Compassion/dp/0062339338
​

​Book Description
Paul Bloom knows that many people will read this book out of anger, with the intention and hope of refuting the argument that empathy is bad for the world.  I did. I wanted to find fault with the reasoning that placing ourselves in the shoes of someone else was somehow a danger to both ourselves and others.  While Bloom has not convinced me that empathetic behaviors cause more harm than good, I can acknowledge that sometimes his argument is strong.  He concedes that not all empathy is negative, but rather argues that on the whole, it is not beneficial.  He opens with an example of an adorable young girl who needs a kidney transplant.  Once we get to know this girl and understand that she will likely die without the transplant, we often demonstrate empathy by imagining what it might feel like if this was happening in our own family.  When given the opportunity to move this girl up the list of those waiting for the transplant, we may jump at the opportunity to save her and her family from their continued suffering.  Bloom argues that this would be a case of empathy leading to injustice.  The feelings of empathy for this young girl have prioritized her life over the lives of others also waiting for a kidney who were rightfully in line ahead of the girl with whom we empathize.
 
Bloom argues that one of the reasons most people are so deeply in favor of the concept of empathy is that is has been associated with many concepts such as compassion, sympathy, and kindness which are related to but not actually empathy.  Bloom makes it clear that he is in favor of kindness and compassion.  He believes that empathy causes us to make decisions that seem kind and compassionate but that can actually hurt more people than help. He argues that empathy is like cholesterol and has both good and bad types.  The first, cognitive empathy is the type of empathy in which a person can understand another person`s suffering but does not feel what they feel.  We can feel compassion or sympathy without feeling what the person themselves feel, Bloom argues that this is often the case when we help others.  If a child falls from a high jungle gym and breaks his nose, we will immediately try to help, but it is unreasonable to argue that we feel what he/she feels. Similarly, we can buy a gift that we think someone else will enjoy, without necessarily liking it ourselves; this is kindness but not empathy.  These concepts are often presented as interchangeable and interwoven, but Bloom argues that can exist as distinct entities.
 
The second type of empathy is emotional empathy; this occurs when we feel the pain of others, this is the emphasis of the book and the type of empathy that Bloom believes can blur the lines of morality, balanced reasoning and fairness and that which he argues against.  Bloom argues that empathy can be learned and socialized and is often employed to encourage people to “do the right thing.”  Children are often scolded by asking, “How would you like it if someone did that to you?”  Bloom argues that there needs to be more to morality than empathy and that in fact, they are distinct because they need not occur simultaneously.  If you see someone throw garbage out of his or her car window, this may upset you morally, but there is no empathetic element, you do not feel what the person does or for that matter what the garbage feels. 
 
Bloom uses the very emotionally sensitive topic of the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting in Newtown Connecticut as an example of how empathy can result in an unseen negative outcome.  While it is impossible to overestimate the tragedy that occurred in Newtown, More children were killed in the city of Chicago in a single year than those killed in Newtown.  However, the vividness of hearing the news of the Newtown victims and the painful emotions associated with this single event, makes the Newtown shootings stand out in our minds.  While the Chicago shootings may be covered daily in the paper they are not a single event, but rather multiple less salient events that are easier to forget. This availability heuristic created an outpouring of emotional empathy and gifts flooded into Newtown from all over the country.  Unfortunately, the gifts far exceeded what could be distributed in Newton a relatively affluent community, but many volunteers were needed to help store the gifts and toys even after Newtown officials asked that nothing else be sent. Bloom argues that this money could have been better spent saving lives by buying mosquito netting for children in Sudan and providing clean drinking water for those who have no access or meals to the elderly who do not have enough food.  In this way, people would be saving lives, but instead, their emotional empathy created a glut of teddy bears in a community that needed emotional support, but not tangible items and diverted resources from other potentially deadly situations.  
 
Bloom argues that this and other similar examples demonstrate that compassion is biased and often results in a cost-benefit net loss. Therapists who are too empathetic with their client’s problems face burn out and need to learn how to help their clients through the healing process without taking on the pain and suffering of their clients at the same time.  Bloom provides an example of a worker at the 9-11 sight looking for bodies when it was clear that they would find no more survivors, this person needed to try to dial back their empathy as they would otherwise have become overwhelmed and unable to help in the recovery efforts.  Surgeons may also need to practice this skill as too much empathy may inhibit their ability to do their job well.  The key here may to be employ understanding and caring rather than empathy. 
 
Empathy can also be counterintuitive; when we perceive that individuals play a role for creating a negative situation in their own life, we are likely to employ the just world phenomenon and demonstrate very little empathy even if it would be the kind and moral thing to do.  For example, if you found that someone was infected through HIV because they were an intravenous drug user who had used and infected needle, we might be likely to say that “it was their own fault.” Psychopaths are often said to lack empathy, but Bloom argues that criminal psychopaths have normal empathetic abilities, but they can dial it up to ingratiate themselves with people and then turn it down if they violate trust or engage in a criminal activity that may result in hurting others. Those with autism, unlike the criminal psychopaths, have little ability to empathize but do not have questionable moral behavior. Demonstrating Bloom`s argument that empathy and morality and not inevitable linked to one another. 
 
Bloom also discusses that the development of an in-group to whom we are likely to empathize and find similarities often creates and out-group may lead to stereotyping, dehumanization and unfair negative attributes.  While we can empathize with the victim of a crime or a family member who is suffering, Bloom argues that there are limits in empathy.  For example, if you heard that 30 people were killed in a flood in Indonesia, you would likely feel badly and perhaps empathize with the families of those killed or injured.  However, if you heard that 3000 people were killed in the flooding, would you feel 300 times worse?  We might go to herculean efforts to remove child trapped in a well, but do very little to try and change the climate which may over time results in the deaths of thousands more people.  Bloom uses quotes by both Stalin and Mother Teresa to demonstrate this point.  Stalin said, “One death is a tragedy, one million is a statistic.  Mother Teresa, “If I look at the mass, I will never act, if I look at the one, I will. Both understood the limits of empathy, but one in demonstrating Bloom`s thesis, the morality of this understanding is neutral, empathy need not only be used for good.  
Bloom does recognize that some good can come out of empathy and organizations such as effective Altruism advocate doing good deeds that combines the efforts of the head and the heart.  
 
Other Related Resources
The Atlantic:  Short video of psychologist Paul Bloom making the argument that empathy is a bad thing
https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/474588/why-empathy-is-a-bad-thing/. Bloom maintains that he is against empathy but for compassion.  He poses that empathy should not override rational deliberation; it should be a reliable servant-but never a master.
 
Big Think:  Why Empathy is not the Best Way to Care:  Video in which Paul Bloom describes why empathy can backfire and lead to negative effects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhCGmDJQRpc
 
Psychology Today:  Why Paul Boom is Wrong about Empathy and Morality
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/good-thinking/201310/why-paul-bloom-is-wrong-about-empathy-and-morality
 
Quartz: Empathy Makes us Immoral
https://qz.com/1250764/work-japan-app-aims-to-help-foreigners-find-blue-collar-jobs-despite-japans-resistance-to-immigrants/
 
Oxford Education Blog:  Against Empathy?  Really
https://educationblog.oup.com/theory-of-knowledge/against-empathy-really
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Amygdala
Anterior Insula
Autism
Availability Heuristic
Base Rate
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Empathy
Cognitive Neuroscience
Dualism
Emotional Contagion
Emotional Empathy
Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis
File Drawer Problem
fMRI
Incentive
Just World Phenomenon
Localization
Medial Prefrontal Cortex
Mindfulness
Mirror Neuron
Neuroanatomist
Neuroimaging
Posterior Cingulate Gyrus
Psychopaths
Statistical Significance
Theory of Mind
 
Psychological Figures
Charles Darwin
David Eagelman
Sigmund Freud
Michael Gazzaniga
Marc Iacobini
Steven Pinker

Intelligence: All That Matters
Author:  Stuart Ritchie
ISBN: 9781444791877
 
APA Style Citation
Ritchie, S. (2016). Intelligence:  All That Matters. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Intelligence-That-Matters-Stuart-Ritchie/dp/1444791877
​

Book Description
The fast-paced book Intelligence, from the All That Matters series, is an excellent resource relating to teaching intelligence and testing units as well as a review of research and statistics in psychology. The book begins with a study the history of intelligence testing and includes sections on how modern intelligence tests work, why studying intelligence is important, the nature and nurture of intelligence, methods for increasing IQ, individual differences in intelligence, and a discussion of the controversies surrounding intelligence research.  Author Stuart Ritchie makes a strong case for the importance of intelligence research and presents the facts supported by research that intelligence tests indicate intelligence has a high rate of heritability, is generally stable throughout an individual’s life, and is correlated to numerous other lifestyle factors such as health, wealth, and educational and career success. Ritchie also discusses how IQ tests are connected to socio-economic status.
 
Additionally, the book provides a great opportunity to use the intelligence unit to practice analyzing research and critically examine data sets through the use of graphs and charts. Despite the controversy about the value of intelligence testing, the book makes a compelling research-based case for the usefulness of IQ testing.  For example, IQ scores are shown to be related to a variety of important variables including income, life expectancy, and educational performance. The author, Stuart Ritchie, directly confronts the major criticisms of IQ testing and highlights the benefits that can be gained by examining the research on human intelligence.
 
Throughout the book, the author provides interesting sections that highlight topics related to intelligence theory which are difficult for students to understand such as the concept of heritability.
 
What Heritability Does NOT Tell Us about intelligence.

1. Heritability does not indicate that 50% of an individual’s intelligence is the result of genetics.  Heritability is group figure that describes variance in a specific population of individuals.
2. Heritability does not indicate anything about average intelligence.  Intelligence may be 5- percent heritable in a group where the average IQ could be 85, 100, 118, 150, or any other number.
3. The term “heritable” does not mean the same thing as hereditary.  A hereditary trait is anything passed from parent to child, but heritability is about genetic variation of a particular trait. To understand this, it is essential to understand that traits can be influenced by environmental factors.
4. Heritability does not only apply to intelligence. Most human traits that vary between individuals (e.g., height, personality, political attitude, resistance to disease) is heritable (genes explain at least some of the variation).

The book has an excellent section on the Flynn Effect.  Evidence shows that better access to education and improved nutrition and health care are helpful in raising intelligence and that in many parts of the world access to these benefits has greatly increased over the last 100 years.  As a result, intelligence test scores have been increasing by around 3 points per decade since IQ testing began.  The average score on an intelligence test is 100, but researchers began to see that individuals who were born later typically earned average scores above 100 – in other words, they were scoring higher than the norm of the prior generation.  As a result, intelligence tests must be periodically re-normed with the score of 100 set to match up to an average of a sample of individuals for the current generation.  Flynn and other IQ researchers argue that improvements in education and nutrition are only a part of the picture when it comes to explaining generational increases in IQ scores.  The argument is that the way the average human thinks has undergone a dramatic shift over the last 100 years moving away from focusing on real-world applications of concrete concepts toward a more abstract and scientific way of thinking.  According to Flynn, “we all now wear scientific spectacles.”
 
The final part of the book is titled100 ideas is a wealth of resources about intelligence research including: fifteen recommended books about intelligence, five websites for the latest on intelligence research, five commonly used intelligence tests, twenty intelligence researchers working today and their areas of interest, ten review papers you should read, five (perhaps) surprising things that correlate with higher intelligence, five historical intelligence researchers not featured in the chapter on history, five anti-IQ books, ten common myths (debunked in the book) about intelligence, five fictional characters known for high intelligence, five fictional characters known for low intelligence, and ten ‘big questions’ for future intelligence research. 
 
Other Related Resources
 
TED Talk by James Flynn - Why our IQ levels are higher than our grandparents'
James Flynn’s 2013 TED talk discussing how the changes in how individuals think and reason that have occurred over the last 100 years explains the Flynn Effect.
https://www.ted.com/talks/james_flynn_why_our_iq_levels_are_higher_than_our_grandparents
 
Battle of the Brains
BBC Horizon’s documentary in which seven individuals who are all very successful in their respective fields are tested in a variety of ways to measure intelligence.  The documentary covers many of the main concepts and theories discussed in the curriculum for psychology units related to testing and individual’s differences. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/intelligence/highlights/
 
Current Intelligence Research Websites (from the 100 ideas section of the book)
International Society for Intelligence Research website
http://www.isironline.org/
 
Duke psychologist Jonathan Wai’s blog, Finding the Next Einstein:  discussing research findings and ideas that touch upon multiple issues surrounding the identification and development of talent and explores how these issues might be relevant to what's going on in the world.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/finding-the-next-einstein
 
Temple University psychologist Joel Schneider’s blog:  Assessing Psyche on psychological assessment and psychometrics.
https://assessingpsyche.wordpress.com/
 
Kevin McGrew’s blog, IQ’s Corner Intelligent Insights on Intelligence Theories and Tests.  Educational psychologist Dr. Kevin McGrew is Director of the Institute for Applied Psychometrics 
http://www.iqscorner.com/
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Alfred Binet
Thomas J. Bouchard
Raymond Cattell
James Flynn
Hans J. Eysenck
Francis Galton
Howard Gardner
Stephen Pinker
Theodore Simon
Charles Spearman
William Stern
Robert Sternberg
Louis L. Thurstone
David Wechsler
Robert Yerkes
 
Bell (normal) curve
Binet Simon Test
Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test
Correlation
Crystalized intelligence
Emotional intelligence
Eugenics
Factor analysis
Fluid intelligence
Flynn effect
fMRI
g-factor
Genetics of intelligence
Heritability
IQ
Learning disability (e.g. dyslexia, dyscalculia, specific language impairment)
Mental age
Multiple intelligence theory
Nature and nurture of intelligence
Power test
Processing speed
Race and sex differences in intelligence
Raven’s Progressive Matrices
Regression
Reliability
Speed test
Standardized test
Triarchic theory of intelligence
Twin studies
Validity
Wechsler Intelligence Scales
Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability
​

​Who’s In Charge:  Free Will and the Science of the Brain
Author:  Michael S. Gazzaniga
ISBN:  978-06-190610-7
 
APA Style Citation
Gazzaniga, M.S. (2011).  Who`s In Charge:  Free Will and the Science of the Brain, Harper Collins, New York, New York.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Whos-Charge-Free-Science-Brain/dp/0061906107
 

Book Description
The origin of this book is derived from the Gifford lecture series named after Scottish advocate and judge Adam Lord Gifford.  These academic lectures have covered a wide variety of topics over the years from acclaimed academics in all areas, including famed psychologist William James.  This book is the result of Gazzaniga's own Gifford Lecture.
 
Gazzaniga opens with an explanation of the unbelievable capacity of the human brain to adapt, process information, and to adjust to trauma or external factors. Gazzaniga discusses the similarities and differences in the brain of human and the brains of other animals.  While humans share many similarities with the brains of other animals, the extremely large cerebral cortex (82 percent of the human brain) and forebrain allows for incredibly complex thought and higher-order thinking that significantly exceeds that of all other species.
 
Gazzaniga then lays out the difference in how psychologists historically believed humans gained information.  Those like John Watson believed humans were born a blank slate and experience shaped the individual one was to become through the person`s experience with rewards, punishments and observations.  Others believed that genes alone determined one`s intelligence, personality, and other characteristics.  Eventually, researchers began the study of individual neurons and brain areas, many of which demonstrated localization of brain function and a more interactionist approach was born.
 
Gazzaniga provides an example regarding how these interactions help us evaluate stimuli in our environment such as how one determines the brightness of an object.  Brightness is in part determined by the amount of light that enters the eye which can in large part be explained by biological factors.  However, our experience in the world helps identify a particular color, as well as the other surrounding colors, interact to create our experience of color in the world.  Beau Lotto discusses how easily we can be fooled by manipulating environmental factors (see resources for Beau Lotto TED talk).  This current interactionist view of how the brain functions is that the large-scale plan is genetic, but the specific connections and functions are a result of both epigenetic functions and experience. Genetics can set boundaries, for example, the process of neurogenesis is highly controlled by DNA and gradually decreases as one ages.  Asymmetries such as the localization of language in the left hemisphere and specifically in the language productions area of the left frontal lobe where Broca`s area is located are determined primarily by genetics.  However, young children with damage to the left frontal lobe or with hemispherectomies can “rewire” their brain so that language is redirected to the right hemisphere. 
 
Some of our behaviors may not be unique to the genes passed along directly from our parents, but rather from multiple generations as humans have adapted to changing environments.  Gazzaniga suggests humans and animals may be born ready to fear animals such as tigers and snakes with front facing eyes and sharp teeth.  Even squirrels who are raised in isolation and have never seen a snake before, avoid them when they are presented.  Other fears may be learned through negative life experiences, and others still may develop from an interaction between these two factors.  These interactionist occurrences even span to moral dilemmas, for example, in the infamous trolley problem, one must decide if they should flip a switch to have the trolley kill one person on the track or leave the switch as is and kill five people working on the tracks.  Most people (89%) will choose to flip the switch, but when the situation is changed slightly, and they are asked if they would push a person onto the tracks to save five people 89% of people say “no.”  Gazzaniga believes that the altruistic helping behavior may be inborn, the social construct of making the moral dilemma personal or impersonal is likely to be influenced by learning what behaviors are acceptable and which are unacceptable as determining by what we have learned through our experiences.  Similarly, we are born with a predisposition to learn language, but our surroundings will determine which language(s) we ultimately master. 
 
Gazzaniga is perhaps most well-known for his research with split-brained patients, having taken the reigns in this area from Nobel prize-winning researcher Roger Sperry who split the brains of severely epileptic patients to save at least one hemisphere from the debilitating epileptic seizures.  While some see this treatment as inhumane and unethical, Gazzaniga cites that these patients on average experience a 60-70 percent reduction in the number of seizures they are experiencing and others experienced no further seizures.  The corpus callosum is not completely split; but is still connected at the brainstem allowing for basic life functions to reach both hemispheres.  There is also some communication that remains between hemispheres because it has been shown that emotional stimuli presented to one hemisphere still impacts the judgment in the other hemisphere.  While split-brained patients appear completely normal in most ways, Gazzaniga has designed a unique method to test the experiences of split-brained patients.  By presenting a visual stimulus very briefly at the center of a screen, Gazzaniga can control images presented to the patients right or left visual field.  Half of all visual information will be directed to the opposite hemisphere of the brain by way of the optic chiasm.  The medial (inside) track crosses the optic chiasm to the opposite side of the brain while the lateral (outside) stays on the same side as the incoming message.  Since the left hemisphere is superior at language and the right at spatial tasks, it is then possible in split-brained patients to isolate the hemisphere receiving each message.  A spoon displayed to the right visual field will be verbally identified but cannot be selected properly from a ruler a pencil or a teacup.  Conversely, if the object were displayed to the left visual field, it could be identified spatially but not verbally.  These studies are not possible with “normal” individuals because the corpus callosum serves as a conduit between hemispheres.
 
When applying moral situations to split-brained patients, Gazzaniga poses questions first to a control group with intact brains and then to split-brained patients.  When asked about a secretary who accidentally puts poison in her boss`s coffee while intending to put sugar in and another she wants to poison her boss but accidentally puts sugar in his coffee, those with intact brains say the intention is what determines if the action is right or wrong.  Those with split-brains, however, indicate that the outcome is what matters, this is likely because likely because belief attribution is located in the right hemisphere of the brain and this cannot be easily integrated moral reasoning components of the brain, 
 
Ultimately, the mind constrains the brain, and social processes constrain individual`s minds.  These interactions between organisms and their environments are bidirectional.  The organism can change the environment and vice versa. Complete dependency on localization of function in the brain would mean that we are completely beholden to a single malfunction while total reliance on the environment would create a lack of consistency with personality or socialization, this interaction is necessary, it is what makes us human.
 
Other Related Resources
Diane Rehm Show:  Interview with Michael Gazzaniga discussing the book “Who`s in Charge?”
https://dianerehm.org/shows/2011-11-28/michael-gazzaniga-whos-charge-free-will-and-science-brain
 
Michel Gazzaniga Website University of California Santa Barbara
https://www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/gazzaniga
 
The Information Philosopher:  Interview with Michael Gazzaniga
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/gazzaniga/
 
Videos on Gazzaniga`s work with Split-brained patients
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfGwsAdS9Dc&t=13s
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCv4K5aStdU&t=48s
 
Beau Lotto:  Ted talk on Sensory Perceptions
https://www.ted.com/talks/beau_lotto_optical_illusions_show_how_we_see
 
René Balligeron :  Object Permanence
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010027785900083
 
Morality in Chimps:  TED talk with Frans de Waal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meiU6TxysC
 
Law and Neuroscience:  Vanderbilt University
http://www.lawneuro.org/history.php
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Adrenal Gland
Agnosia
Algorithm
Amygdala
Anterior Cingulate Cortex
Aphasia
Associative Learning
Axon
Broca’s Area
Cerebellum
Corpus Callosum
Defense Mechanism
Denial
Determinism
Dualism
Egocentrism
Epigenetics
Epinephrine
False Belief Test
Free Will
Functional Plasticity
Genotype
Hippocampus
Homunculus
Lateralization
Lesioning
Mirror Neuron
Motor Neuron
Muller-Lyer Illusion
Nature versus Nurture Debate
Neocortex
Neurogenesis
Neural Network
Occipital Lobe
Optic Nerve
Optic Chiasm
Parietal Lobe
Phenotype
Phrenology
Prefrontal Cortex
Rationalization
Reciprocity
Retina
Schizophrenia
Sensitive Period (Critical Period)
Serotonin
Somatosensory System
Split-Brained Patient
Stream of Consciousness
Sympathetic Nervous System
Thalamus
Theory of Mind
Top-Down Processing
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)
Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex
Visual Cortex
Wernicke’s Area
 
Researchers
Rene Ballageon (Video of preference of babies for puppets who divide things equally)
Paul Broca
John Darley
Charles Darwin
Robin Dunbar
Leon Festinger
Sigmund Freud
Franz Joseph Gall
Jonathan Haidt
Hermann von Helmholtz
William James
Karl Lashley
Beau Lotto
George Miller
Richard Nisbett
Ivan Pavlov
David Premack
V.S. Ramachandran
Robert Sapolsky
Stanley Schachter
Roger Sperry
Lev Vygotsky
John Watson

The Memory Illusion: Remembering, Forgetting, and the Science of False Memory
Author:  Julia Shaw
ISBN: 9781847947628

APA Style Citation
Shaw, J. (2016). The Memory Illusion: Remembering, Forgetting, and the science of False Memory. London: Random House Books.
 
Buy This Book
https://www.amazon.com/Memory-Illusion-Remembering-Forgetting-Science-ebook/dp/B019CGXQA8
​

Book Description
The author of The Memory Illusion, Dr. Julia Shaw, a forensic psychologist in the Department of Law and Social Sciences at London South Bank University, studies the creation of false memories and is a consultant on memory issues for the legal system, the military, and businesses. Dr. Shaw demonstrates how important memory is in a variety of contexts including the law, interpersonal communication, social media, personality and identity and the many ways in which our memory can be deceptive. By highlighting the latest research, the book demonstrates how understanding problems with memory can provide insight into ways in which memory can be improved. 
 
Dr. Shaw is a leading expert in the area of autobiographical false memory, and her research involves creating false memories in her research participants.  In one such study, Dr. Shae wanted to see if it was possible to create a false memory of committing a crime. The 100 participants in the study were told that they would be taking part in a study on actual memory and they are all aware that Dr. Shaw had spoken in advance with their parents to gain personal information about them.  During the first visit, Dr. Shaw began by discussing an actual event in the life of the participant that was shared by his or her parents.  Next, Dr. Shaw introduced the false memory of an event that resulted in police involvement, e.g., “your parents talked about a fight you had when you were in your early teens that was so severe that the police called your parents.”  The false memory included a few details that were true as well such as the location of where the person lived at that age and the name of a friend from the time.  The participants often reported that they did not recall this happening
 
Dr. Shaw then introduced some methods that are known to induce false memories such as visualization exercises. Dr. Shaw also introduced subtle social pressure by explaining that these methods work for most people if the subject tried had enough.  On the second visit, one week later, it was found that over 70% of participants accepted the false memory that they had committed a crime. The participants typically began to add details by filling in details such as background information and what the scene looked and felt like. Participants, of course, were fully debriefed at the conclusion of the study.  According to Shaw, “In essence, what I do is I get people to confuse their imagination with their memory.”  Shaw’s research has numerous connections to the psychology curriculum, including the work of Elizabeth Loftus on the misinformation effect and the fallibility of memory as well as source amnesia and reality monitoring errors.  
 
The book covers a wide range of memory research and memory phenomena including the problem of recalling childhood memories, the influence of perception on memory, the influence of memory on identity and sense of self, extremes of memory (e.g., individuals with highly superior autobiographical memory, savants), arousal and memory (Yerkes-Dodson law), memory and the legal system, the biology of memory, flashbulb memory, memory hacking, social media influences, and memory improvement.  In one section, the author discusses the 2015 social media sensation of the dress (blue/black or white/gold) regarding memory and how it relates to perception. A video describing the dress controversy is listed in the other related resources section of the post.

​What color do you perceive the dress in the image above to be?
 
Three scientific papers were published on this Internet phenomenon which is seen as one of the first clear examples of individuals looking at an identical physical stimulus, yet seeing it differently.  The answer seems to relate to the perceptual idea of color constancy in which the visual system compensates for differences in lighting to have an understanding of color.  The author illustrates how color constancy is informed by memory.  Team white/gold saw the dress using color constancy based on a memory of items being dimly lit, and team blue/black saw the dress using color constancy based on a memory of items being better lit.  Both teams of viewers combined perceptual visual information with memories of how objects appear in different types of lighting.  The book also explains how the dress controversy and other examples illustrate the interaction of bottom-up and top-down (including memory) processing influence our implicit expectations about the world. 
 
Shaw discusses a study she conducted in which participants were shown a picture of a “suspect” along with a short story about the crime they were accused of committing and then were asked to serve as jurors to decide if the person was innocent or guilty.  The only evidence they had to make their decision was the photo, the short story and a written sheet of evidence.  The stories and evidence were matched with photos by chance so that the researchers could determine if the jurors were impartially deciding on the evidence alone and not the photo. The photos were all previously rated on a scale of trustworthiness.  The results showed that participants were more likely to be harsher when the face associated with the evidence was previously rated as low in trustworthiness.  For a low trustworthiness face participant needed fewer pieces of evidence to assign guilt and less likely to change their mind after viewing exonerating information.  Despite using the same evidence, the face of the suspect led to drastically different conclusions even with the same evidence indicating bias. If someone is completely innocent, they may still be convicted simply because they “look” guiltier.
 
The Memory Illusion includes interesting and surprising connections between memory and other areas of the psychology curriculum.  In addition to a fascinating discussion of the topics in memory, the book also covers concepts from units including social psychology, research, biological bases, sensation and perception, learning, states of consciousness, personality, and motivation and emotion are included illustrating how the various fields of psychology are connected to the cognitive perspective.  Students will also see through this book how psychology relates to a wide range of other fields including medicine, law, economics, business, politics, and the military. 
 
Other Related Resources
National Geographic Episode – Interactive video to examine a variety of memory problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWO2UQ4MW7U
 
What Color is the Dress?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AskAQwOBvhc
 
The Dresser: Color Constancy
http://uk.businessinsider.com/dresser-has-the-internet-arguing-over-its-color-2017-12?r=US&IR=T
 
Julia Shaw’s TEDx talk on How False Memories Corrupt Our Identities, Politics, and Justice System.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8j3FQOz310
 
Julia Shaw on “Memory Hackers” NOVA PBS documentary demonstrates her research on how it is possible to create false memories.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfPLTtlo2oY
 
Julia Shaw – Memory Hacking:  The science of learning in the 21st Century at the Learning Technologies Conference on February 28th, 2017.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZU4suR_uXbg
 
Julia Shaw – Embrace Your Imperfect Memory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L71f71b1CL0
 
"Making Evil: The Science Behind Humanity's Dark Side." The new book by Dr. Shaw due out in 2019.  A new book by the author of “The Memory Illusion.”
 
Julia Shaw’s 2015 paper titled, Constructing Rich False Memories of Committing a Crime published by the Association for Psychological Science.
http://nebula.wsimg.com/ce2babe46721a32c861f1a646c2836aa?AccessKeyId=AF62ECFBCD8F6D95BACE&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
 
Elizabeth Loftus’s TED Talk – How Reliable is Your Memory?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB2OegI6wvI
 
Elizabeth Loftus:  Lost at a Shopping Mall
https://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/sciam.htm
 
Beau Lotto’s TED Talk – Optical Illusions Show How We See
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf5otGNbkuc
 
Picking Cotton:  60 Minutes episode on the wrongful conviction of Ronald Cotton and the fallibility of eyewitness testimony
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkBiaI9PSQU
 
Psychological Figures and Concepts
Gordon Allport
Dan Ariely
Solomon Asch
Rene Descartes
Hermann Ebbinghaus
Sigmund Freud
Jerome Kagan
Daniel Kahneman
Eric Kandel
Joseph Le Doux
Elizabeth Loftus
Oliver Sacks
Nicholas Spanos
Amos Tversky
Robert Yerkes
Alzheimer’s disease
Amnesia
Amygdala
Auditory lobe
Autism
Backmasking
Behaviorism
Benzodiazepines
Bias (own age, own-gender, own-race)
Bottom-up processing and top-down processing
Brain region and memory (limbic system, frontal lobe, parietal lobe, temporal lobe, thalamus)
Change blindness
Chunking
Confabulation
Conformity
Dementia
Depression
Dissociation
DSM-5
Eidetic memory
Electroencephalography (EEG)
Emotion
Engram
Episodic memory
Eyewitness testimony
Face recognition
False memory
Flashbulb memory
fMRI functional magnetic resonance imaging
Forgetting
Hippocampus
Hypnosis
In-group bias
Innocence project
Inverted-U hypothesis
Language development
Long-term memory
Long-term potentiation
Maturation
Memory palace
Metamemory
Misinformation effect
MRI magnetic resonance imaging
Neurotransmitters (e.g., acetylcholine, GABA, glutamate)
Overconfidence
Parallel processing
Pineal gland
Plasticity
Post-traumatic stress disorder
Priming
Prospective memory
Prosopagnosia
Pruning
Psychoanalysis
Rapid eye movement (REM)
Schema
Semantic memory
Short-term memory
Source confusion
Super recognizer
Task switching
Theory of mind
Weapon focus effect