The case of Simon Singh has challenged British libel laws. Simon Singh is a science writer – having authored best selling books such as Fermat’s Last Theorem and contributing regularly to The Guardian. In 2008 he was sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) because of an article he wrote pointing out that some of the treatments offered are bogus, such as those for treating child colic and feeding problems. Singh’s view was that such practice was pseudoscientific and not evidence-based. However the BCA’s claim is that Singh has no evidence to support this and therefore his views are libelous. Within the scientific community this is regarded a challenge to the very nature of science – it should not be libelous to ask a scientist ‘where’s your evidence’ – in fact such a move would stifle the progress of science. Singh’s case and campaign has gained very high profile support from the science and entertainment business (including Jonathan Ross and Stephen Fry) – you can see the names and read much more about the case here (KEEP LIBEL LAWS OUT OF SCIENCE) or here.
Posts published during 2009
Diathesis-stress is an example of nature AND nurture, as it can be interpreted as a gene or genes switched on by environmental factors. Recently it’s been suggested that being lonely and stressed could affect the expression of cancer-linked genes, triggering their action. The research has been done in the USA on rats, comparing those kept in isolation with those living in groups. The former group had over three times the frequency of breast tumours than the latter group, and their breast tumours were also more aggressive and deadly. The isolated rats also produced more stress hormones and were more reactive to stressful situations. Rats, like ourselves, are social animals and so being isolated is likely to cause stress.
Perhaps the most influential change in society in recent years has been the vast involvement of technology in our everyday lives; such as mobile phones, digital cameras and the many practical uses of computers, such as data compiling, e-mailing and so forth. This has reached such a level that some see no reason for physical copies of music, such as records and cds, or even books on printed-paper. In California there has Read the rest of this entry »
You know I keep thinking about the face on that cheese toastie that Jean Marc wrote about a while back. We seem to have an immensely strong urge to see faces everywhere: on the moon, in clouds, even in the most abstract of shapes and doodles. In our minds, the most random of patterns or stimuli seem to readily coalesce into two eyes a nose and a mouth. Every Read the rest of this entry »
AQA have recently clarified the way that AO1 and AO2 will be represented on the Unit 4 exam paper. It says on the website:
General point regarding exam papers – Unit 4 (PSYA4) January 2010 onwards
Questions that assess a combination of AO1 and AO2/AO3 skills will have the breakdown of assessment objectives indicated on the exam paper.For example:
- Outline clinical characteristics of one anxiety disorder. (5 marks)
- Explain issues associated with classification and diagnosis of anxiety disorders. (10 marks)
- Outline and evaluate one or more explanations of the anxiety disorder outlined in your answer to question 1(a). Refer to research evidence in your answer. (4 marks + 6 marks)
Not sure what will happen on Unit 3??
If you smash your fist into someone’s body are you being aggressive and anti-social, or are you just doing what your genes programme you to do? The idea of genes affecting behaviour isn’t new and isn’t disputed, but the use of certain genes as a mitigating factor in criminal behaviour is a contentious issue. Genes have been used as part of the defence in cases of murder, and moral and ethical arguments around this use have focused on the low validity of the research evidence plus the generally accepted concepts of free will and personal responsibility. The argument has been taken a stage further now as a convicted murderer in Italy has had his sentence reduced partly because of his history of psychiatric illness and also partly because his genome includes five genes known to be associated with violent behaviour. One of these genes is a variant of MAOA, which codes for an enzyme which breaks down amines in the brain, and this low-activity variant correlates in research findings with violence and aggression, giving it its nickname the “warrior” gene. However, as we all know, correlations are not necessarily causal; and then there is the responsibility debate. So, what would you decide if you were on the jury, the defendant was clearly guilty of murder, but also had a gene profile predisposing him or her to violence and aggression?
I am again grateful to an enquiry from a teacher about an apparent contradiction – this time between our AS Complete Companion and another AS book. Logie (1995) proposed that the visuo-spatial sketchpad (a component of the working memory model) could be further divided into a visual cache and inner scribe. In the Complete Companion we have said that the cache is a store and the scribe deals with spatial relations, whereas another AS book says that the cache is a store and the scribe is a rehearsal mechanism. Both versions are correct and both lack detail.The visual cache is a passive store. It holds information about form and colour. However some research evidence (e.g. Coleman and LeFevre, 2002) has found that information is actively rehearsed.The inner scribe is an active rehearsal component. It is proposed to deal with spatial and movement information. There also may be some storage component.Any further comments welcome!
Classic A02 point gets the humorous podcast treatment here at the ever entertaining Psychfiles site.
The WJEC AS Complete Companion was published (finally) on Friday 23 October. I only received my copy in the post this morning so hopefully everyone will receive theirs soon. Please do let us know your thoughts – good as well as bad! If you do come across mistakes then let us know so we can put them right.
The answers to the Can You questions can be found under the ‘Book Resources’ tab (the ones for Chapter 6 are coming very soon).
I was recently asked by a teacher to explain an apparent contradiction in the text on working memory. On page 12 of the AS Complete Companion the text says that the central executive component of the Working Memory Model has a ‘very limited capacity’ but later, on the same page the text says the central executive has ‘no storage capacity’. Sounds like a contradiction! But on closer inspection there isn’t a contradiction – of course the the central executive has to have some capacity to direct attention but it has no extra storage capacity. I did double check this with Professor Alan Baddeley, who says ‘I assume that the executive has limited attentional capacity, but does not act as a store. Central storage in working memory is now assumed to depend on the episodic buffer’.
Keep your queries coming in!