Posts
The APA leans left – sometimes way left – to the exclusion of divergent viewpoints. (It’s an interesting contrast to their incessant preaching about diversity.) That means that my membership dues support political agendas with which I sometimes disagree. The APA’s latest crusade concerns global warming, and their aim seems to be to silence their opponents.
They have made it their mission to change your behavior, whether you like it or not. USA Today quotes APA president, Dr. Alan Kazdin:“We know how to change behavior and attitudes. That is what we do.”
I’ve long admired Dr. Kazdin but those words are chilling. Let’s see a show of hands out there: how many of you asked the APA to modify your behavior? I surely did not...
(Stanford social psychologist Jon) Krosnick discovered that diverse viewpoints lead to diverse opinions among news-watchers. And therefore what? He has established a solid premise (hearing both sides of the debate causes some people to form an opinion that Krosnick dislikes) but there is no conclusion stated here. I want to know what Krosnick and the APA intend to do about the problem of distasteful opinions. How are they going to use this research to modify our behavior? For that, I had to dig deeper into Krosnick’s writings...Their concern with national politics and social causes leaves diminishing resources for clinically relevant topics. And frankly, their methods are becoming Orwellian in nature. Fortunately, there are other professional organizations that limit their attention to the business of psychology. I will be paying them a visit.
Several other organizations also seem to be more adept at politics than professional enhancement... the National Education Association immediately comes to mind. These groups wield tremendous influence. Do they really know how to use it responsibly, or in their hubris do they aspire to be Plato's philosopher kings? The APA's behavior certainly suggests the latter.
3 comments:
When psychologists discuss behavior change, this typically refers to positive change. I attended the APA Convention in Boston last month and I attended the presidential sessions (on Global Climate Change, Reducing Violence, and many other topics). "Changing behavior" is simply one facet of psychology (there are many as you know, including intersections with fields such as the hard sciences, soft sciences, and everything in between). For example, changing behavior may refer to reducing violence among women & children, enhancing interpersonal communication, improving study methods, decreasing carbon emissions, improving athletic performance, and so on. I don't understand why you would be offended by the thought of changing behavior, or go the extreme of leaving the world's largest psychology organization, especially when nobody is forcing anyone to change. We all have choices. If this subset of psychology does not interest you, there are many, many other areas of the field you can turn your attention towards. If you believe that there is political motivation, perhaps you have it backwards. Many fields of science and social organizations are trying to solve the same problems (e.g., environmental contamination) and elected officials are finally catching on. This is a good thing. Best wishes
Providing resources to help clinical psychologists work with their patients to reduce violence or enhance interpersonal communication is one thing. Committing the community of practice in psychology to work to change SOCIETY'S behavior on the ASSUMPTION human-caused global warming is both a fact and a danger is something quite different. The latter once again places the scientific community in the role of the Wise Men, who must force everyone to change (isn't that one of our candidate's mantras?) for their own good.
Please explain how you believe you are being forced to change your behavior. Change is an option or recommendation, particularly when things are not going well (to use your example, people can vote to keep the same party or change it - hence the mantra). I see no evidence of anyone forcing change upon anyone else, not in the professional organizations you mentioned nor in the political examples you provided.
Post a Comment