Psychology Articles

Introduction

Psychology, the scientific discipline of the study of human and animal behavior, is a young science. Prior to the late 19th century, the study of “mind” was a discipline practiced as a philosophical or spiritual endeavor. Because Psychology is a new science, we should expect a continuing evolution of psychological theory as well as tweaking and revision of existing theories.

A Brief History of Psychology

In 1879, German physiologist Wilhelm Wundt used the laboratory setting to perform psychological experiments. He is known as “father of experimental psychology”, also then referred to as Structuralism.

William James, American scientist, psychologist, and philosopher introduced the concept that the practice of psychological theory should have practicality. That is, use psychological theory to bring tangible benefits to people.

Sigmund Freud introduced the psychoanalytic techniques to uncover first causes of behavior. One of Freud’s proteges was psychiatrist Carl Young who later broke with Freud and developed his own theory of analytical psychology. Carl Jung was first to declare a person’s psychological makeup religious by nature. He defined the process of a person becoming whole as “Individuation”. Individuation is the process of balancing opposites, i.e., unconscious with the conscious, but still keeping a measure of separateness. In fact, the core concept of analytic psychology is Individuation.

Jung then posited the reality of two distinct groupings of psychological functions: The Judging “rational” functions- feeling and thinking, and the perceiving “irrational” functions- intuition and sensing.

Jung then stated that the dichotomies are projected in either an extroverted or introverted fashion.

An analogy of these dichotomies is seen in the expression of right handedness or left handedness. One either develops it early in life or is born with it

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

From Jung’s original concepts, Myers and Briggs developed their own theory of psychological type, on which the MBTI is based.

They worked on the MBTI during WWII as a tool to help women in wartime industry zero in on the quality of work they would be most satisfied with. The first test evolved into the MBTI in 1962.

Isabel Briggs Myers mother Katherine Briggs started investigating personality traits in 1917. She saw personality differences between members of the same family. She identified the connection between Jung’s theory and her own. Katherine Briggs four personality types were then matched to Is, EPs, ETJs and EFJs.

Daughter Isabel advanced her mother’s work, which she entirely took over when her mother retired.

The MBTI has been used for over 50 years as a tool to bring tangible benefits to people. It is a measure of personality preferences. That is, how the relative strength of a person’s personality preferences is used to psychologically navigate in the world.

One enduring use of the MBTI is in the field of career counseling. The MBTI Career Report helps people zero in on fields of work that others with their same personality type have reported a high degree of satisfaction with. As such, The MBTI Career Report is a statistically valid testing instrument.

It can be used as a starting point for career search and one of many tools career and guidance counselors, life coaches and corporate managers can use to help others achieve a higher degree of job satisfaction.

Criticism of the MBTI is centered on two points of contention. (1) Over the decades, the MBTI has sometimes been used in inappropriate ways such as a psycho-therapeutic tool or as a forced testing instrument within the corporate environment. (2) Conflicting studies question the validity of the MBTI as a predictor of job satisfaction.

The MBTI should not be used as an end all and be all in gaining understanding of personality preferences. The same can be said of any testing instrument in the field of psychology. Human behavior is a manifestation of complex web of biological imperatives, psychological drives, and intangible yet identifiable motivations based on values, ethics, morality, and spirituality. Use of the MBTI needs to be kept in perspective and applied within the framework of such complexity.

For many, job satisfaction can be an ideal, a goal that is never fully reached. Many factors can affect career satisfaction over and above working a job that is complementary to a person’s personality preferences, including the relative health of a person’s interpersonal relationships and the age of the person. A job that’s appealing to a 20 year old may prove less fulfilling to a 40 year old.

Conclusion

Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a career satisfaction predictor is one of a number of tools a person can use in gaining perspective on what career may prove fulfilling. Likewise, the MBTI is a useful and interesting tool to help gain insight into how one psychologically navigates through life. Using the MBTI ideally should be combined with other tools and guidance to help a person identify fulfilling careers.

Stephen R Tiebout has over 20 years experience helping people discover their personality preference type using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator assessment. He is the administrator of Ransdell Associates.com, a testing portal for the MBTI. For more information on the MBTI and personal relationships, visit http://ransdellassociates.com/.

An essay that includes a definition, in own words, and history of social psychology, at least six major theorists, the types of issues this field considers, the five major variables of interest to social psychologists, and major contemporary research trends in the field.

This is a science that aims to accurately, objectively, open-mindedly and continuously research why and how people are in social settings (Baron, Byrne, & Branscombe, 2005). Some theorists that contributed to advancement of social psychology are French gentleman Gabriel Tarde, with the imitation concept, Gustave LeBon and Emile Durkheim with the theory on society’s influence on the individual. In 1874, Herbert Spencer extended Darwin’s concepts from biology into sociology. He coined the term “survival of the fittest.”

Spencer influenced many early 20th century American psychologists, such as William James, and sociologists, such as Edward Ross, Lester F. Ward and William G. Sumner, who introduced social psychology. J. Mark Baldwin, in 1897, used social psychology in a thesis on children. William McDougall published “Social Psychology” in 1908.

In 1897, Norman Triplett made the first experiment of this science, on how groups competed and set the pace for individual performance. In the mid-1920s social psychology took a firm hold in psychology. In 1924 Floyd Allport wrote “Social Psychology,” a scholarly book used in academia to this date.

In the 1930s, Gardner Murphy, Lois Barclay Murphy and Theodore Newcomb wrote “Experimental Social Psychology” and Carl Murchison “Handbook of Social Psychology”. They defined social psychology as experimental, instead of as naturalistic observations. Sociologists started studying the individual in society.

During the Depression and World War II, Thurstone and Likert researched changes in attitudes. Kurt Lewin and Gestalt psychology studied political groups, frustration and aggression in children. Lewin worked on group dynamics and conflict resolution from the 1940s through the 1970s.

Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif researched small group dynamics in summer camps in the 1940s and 50s. After World War II, the field searched for problems. John Dollard and Neal Miller worked on “Social Learning and Imitation” with learning and rats, in 1941.

In 1950, their “Personality and Psychotherapy” explained psychoanalysis as social learning. In 1946, Fritz Heider preceded Leon Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Theory, claiming that there is an imbalance when perceptions of a relationship do not match reality, which causes a change in either perceptions or reality to regain balance. In the early 1960s, Stanley Milgram’s research on obedience set up subjects to believe they were shocking a stranger for incorrect responses. That deception raised ethical concerns. Self-identity, self-esteem and self-image have been researched towards the end of the last century. Social psychology is part of the psychological mainstream.

This science recognizes the connection between social thought and social behavior. Social neuroscience studies social and social behavior in relation to the brain and biology. Modern social psychology focuses on the unconscious and multicultural parts of social thought and behavior.

In naturalistic observations, versus systematic observations, behaviors occur naturally.

There are several methods used in social psychology. One is the survey method. Another one is the correlational method that investigates the possible correlations, not causes, on studied variables.

In this science’s experiments, there is the systematic alteration of independent variables, to study their effects on dependent ones. Successful experiments randomly assign participants to experimental conditions and hold everything else constant to avoid confounding variables.

To determine validity, social psychologists use inferential statistics. They use meta-analysis to determine the effects of independent variables across studies. They also rely on theories to advance their work.

Deception, or withholding information from participants about the scope of an experiment, is often used in social psychology. Social psychology safeguards experiments by using informed consent and meticulous debriefing. To conclude,this science is cutting edge and its five major areas and variables of interest are: attitudes, group processes, social learning and cognition and self-perception (APA, 1999).

References
Baron, R. A., Byrne, D. R., & Branscombe, N. R. (2005) Social Psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
APA (Dec 1999) Social psychology: Once overlooked, now a staple. APA Monitor Online Author 30 (11).

Thank you.

Elena Pezzini, M.S., C.P.C.
You Have Got The Power, Inc.
Turnaround Coaching Psychology & Hypnosis
Office (702) 518-6649 Fax (251) 217-0082
http://www.YouHaveGotThePower.com

It takes students on a journey through the human mind. Intro to Psychology often looks at human behavior, memory, dreams, personality and intelligence. Students in this course are likely also to learn about abnormal behavior, perhaps even sexual attraction.

In an Intro to Psychology course, students might learn the role that genetics and outside influences have in shaping the mind. They might, as a result, come to understand why people behave differently. Students might also come to understand how, through psychotherapy, psychologists come to better understand and help their patients.

There are different approaches to psychotherapy that students in Intro courses might learn about. Students might come to understand a form of psychotherapy that involves focusing on reward and punishment, positive associations and “desensitizing.” They might also learn more about a form of psychotherapy where attempts to change negative thoughts, feelings and behaviors are made by gaining a better understanding of what might be causing that negativity.

Another approach to psychotherapy that might be addressed in an Intro to Psychology course is getting patients to change the way they think in order to change the way they feel and behave. Another form of psychotherapy involves helping people to make intelligent choices that lead them to become the best person that they can be.

Psychology is said to have been founded in the 1870s by William (“The Principles of Psychology”) James and Wilhelm (” Principles of Physiological Psychology”) Wundt. They were involved early on in experimental psychology, and they taught the likes of Ivan Pavlov, Granville Stanley Hall and Russ Dewey. Of course, students in Intro to Psychology are likely also to be introduced to Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud. B.F. Skinner of “Skinner box” behavioral conditioning notoriety, and Kurt Lewin, founder of modern social psychology, might also be introduced in Intro courses.

Many Intro to Psychology courses explore how personalities develop in children, how and why people are different in terms of thoughts and emotions. These courses also explore different theories related to dreams, what they mean and why they might exist. A few of these theories, Intro students might learn, include the ability to preserve sleep through the experience of hallucination, the ability to develop our personalities and solve problems.

In Intro to Psychology courses, students also are likely to learn the difference between normal and abnormal behavior. They might gain a better understanding of how professionals determine whether patients are afflicted with disorders such as depression or anxiety. As a result, students in Intro courses are likely to learn what the symptoms of these and other disorders are.

Intro to Psychology introduces students to what scientists so far understand about people’s behaviors. The course provides a broad overview that might help students begin to better understand others as well. Some students might find that their interest in psychology is piqued enough that they decide to minor in the subject or venture into the human mind even farther, perhaps by pursuing a degree and career in psychology. Test Drive College offers free psychology courses for students interested in studying psychology. http://www.testdrivecollege.com/ also may be found through Test Drive College.

There’s no doubt that regressing a client to a “past-life” can be therapeutic. But does that mean the client actually returns to a previous life, dozens or hundreds of years ago? No. The journey is akin to believing you’ve been abducted onto a flying saucer and impregnated by aliens. Past-life therapy is a tribute to the human imagination. And a metaphorical way to deal with present-day issues. After all, it’s patently absurd to think that because you recall in hypnosis being hit by an arrow in your neck when you were with Robin Hood that that can cure you of a mysterious ache in your neck today. Yet such metaphorical time-travel can actually have beneficial results (relief of the neck pain for example) but unfortunately, “The use of past-life therapy among professionals… can undermine the credibility of licensed practitioners.” *

This is the conclusion of two South Korean researchers whose experiments, published in the International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis,show how heavily influenced hypnotic subjects are by their culture and belief systems when they are hypnotised to go back to a supposed “past life.”

While there is not a shred of evidence that people actually return to a past life (and plenty of evidence that they do not — see, for example, the famous Bridey Murphy**story) there is no doubt that many people who have experienced hypnotic regression firmly believe that they actually returned to a previous life.

The researchers discovered that the “previous life” is strongly influenced by culture and religion. For example, some of the Korean subjects in the study reported having been animals in previous lives whereas none of the 110 subjects in a Canadian study*** reported having been an animal in a previous life.

Surprising to me was the finding that a previous belief in past lives was not correlated with a higher production of past life memories. Non-believers produced past life “memories” at the same rate.

Much of what is seen or thought in a client’s mind comes from suggestions of the hypnotist, coupled with the hypnotized person’s background and nationality.

Past-life hypnotic therapy creates fantasies. And that’s why it can be effective in dealing with a present-day problem. Once the human imagination is engaged (i.e. hypnosis) the possibilities are endless. If you believe that something in a previous life affects you in your current life then “visiting” that previous life (of course, in your imagination), can indeed provide the metaphorical basis for a real solution. Hypnotherapy rests on the focused use of one’s imagination.

So the fantasy can and does affect reality.

References

*Pyun,Y.D., & Kim, Y.J., (2009). Experimental Production of Past-Life Memories in Hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 57, 269-276.
** Straight Dope

***Spanos, N.P., et al (1991). Secondary identity enactments during hypnotic past-life regression: A sociocognitive perspective.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 308-320.

Bryan M. Knight is Canada’s foremost hypno-psychotherapist. Find out more about how you can benefit from hypnosis by visiting his site Hypnosis Depot where all your questions about hypnosis will be answered.

“I am really not only a man of practice whatsoever….
I’m practically nothing but a conquistador by temperament, an adventurer.”

(Sigmund Freud, letter to Fleiss, 1900)

“If you deliver forth that which can be in you, that which you produce forth will be your salvation”.

(The Gospel of Thomas)

“No, our practice is no illusion. But an illusion it would be to suppose that what science are not able to give us we are unable to get elsewhere.”

(Sigmund Freud, “The Long term of an Illusion”)

Harold Bloom called Freud “The central imagination of our age”. That psychoanalysis will not be a scientific concept within a strict, rigorous sense of this word has extended been established. However, most criticisms of Freud’s operate (with the likes of Karl Popper, Adolf Grunbaum, Havelock Ellis, Malcolm Macmillan, and Frederick Crews) pertain to his – long-debunked – scientific pretensions.

Nowadays it’s always widely accepted that psychoanalysis – even though some of its tenets are testable and, certainly, tend to be experimentally tried and invariably discovered to become false or uncorroborated – is really a program of ideas. It will be a cultural construct, along with a (advised) deconstruction of your human thoughts. Despite aspirations for the contrary, psychoanalysis is just not – and in no way have been – a value-neutral physics or dynamics with the psyche.

Freud also stands accused of generalizing his very own perversions and of reinterpreting his patients’ accounts of the memories to fit his preconceived notions of a unconscious. The train of psychoanalysis being a treatment have been castigated like a crude form of brainwashing in just cult-like settings.

Feminists criticize Freud for casting women inside part of “defective” (naturally castrated and inferior) men. Scholars of traditions expose the Victorian and middle-class roots of his theories about suppressed sexuality. Historians deride and decry his stifling authoritarianism and frequent and expedient conceptual reversals.

Freud himself would have attributed countless of these diatribes towards the defense mechanisms of his critics. Projection, resistance, and displacement do seem being playing a prominent role. Psychologists are taunted with the lack of rigor of the profession, by its literary and artistic qualities, through the dearth of empirical support for its assertions and fundaments, from the ambiguity of its terminology and ontology, through the derision of “proper” scientists with the “hard” disciplines, and from the limitations imposed by their experimental subjects (humans). These are precisely the shortcomings that they attribute to psychoanalysis.

Certainly, mental narratives – psychoanalysis 1st and foremost – are not “scientific theories” by any stretch with this much-bandied label. They may be also unlikely to actually become ones. Instead – like myths, religions, and ideologies – they’re organizing principles.

Psychological “theories” do not describe the globe. At ideal, they describe actuality and give it “true”, emotionally-resonant, heuristic and hermeneutic meaning. There’re much less concerned with predictive feats than with “healing” – the restoration of harmony amid persons and interior them.

Therapies – the useful applications of psychological “theories” – are much more worried with functionality, order, type, and ritual than with essence and replicable overall performance. The interaction between individual and therapist is a really microcosm of society, an encapsulation and reification of all other types of social intercourse. Granted, it will be further structured and relies on the entire body of knowledge gleaned from millions of similar encounters. Still, the therapeutic procedure is absolutely nothing a lot more than an insightful and informed dialog whose usefulness is well-attested to.

The two psychological and medical practices are creatures of the instances, children to the civilizations and societies where they were conceived, context-dependent and culture-bound. As this kind of, their validity and longevity are constantly suspect. The two hard-edged experts and thinkers inside the “softer” disciplines are influenced by modern values, mores, occasions, and interpellations.

The difference between “proper” practices of dynamics and psychodynamic theories is that the former asymptotically aspire to an objective “truth” “out there” – although the latter emerge and emanate from a kernel of inner, introspective, truth that’s instantly familiar and may be the bedrock of the speculations. Medical practices – as opposed to psychological “theories” – need to have, hence, to become tried, falsified, and modified because their truth isn’t self-contained.

Still, psychoanalysis was, when elaborated, a Kuhnian paradigm shift. It broke with the past totally and dramatically. It generated an inordinate amount of new, unsolved, issues. It advised new methodological processes for gathering empirical evidence (investigation techniques).

It had been based on observations (however scant and biased).

To put it differently, it absolutely was experimental in nature, not simply theoretical. It offered a framework of reference, a conceptual sphere after only which new suggestions formulated.

That it failed to generate a wealth of testable hypotheses and to account for discoveries in neurology doesn’t detract from its importance. The two relativity hypotheses had been and, currently, string theories are, in exactly the same position in relation to their topic matter, physics.

In 1963, Karl Jaspers created an essential distinction involving the medical activities of Erklaren and Verstehen. Erklaren is about discovering pairs of leads to and results. Verstehen is about grasping connections amongst occasions, occasionally intuitively and non-causally. Psychoanalysis is all about Verstehen, not about Erklaren. It will be a hypothetico-deductive approach for gleaning occasions inside a person’s life and creating insights concerning their connection to his present state of mind and functioning.

So, is psychoanalysis a research, pseudo-science, or sui generis?

Psychoanalysis can be described as field of analyze, not a concept. It is usually replete with neologisms and formalism but, like Quantum Mechanics, it has a variety of incompatible interpretations. It is actually, as a result, equivocal and self-contained (recursive). Psychoanalysis dictates which of its hypotheses are testable and what constitutes its very own falsification. To put it differently, it truly is a meta-theory: a concept about making practices in psychology.

Moreover, psychoanalysis the concept is generally perplexed with psychoanalysis the therapy. Conclusively proving that the therapy works doesn’t create the veridicality, the historicity, and even the usefulness for the conceptual edifice of one’s concept. Furthermore, therapeutic techniques evolve much more swiftly and significantly than the practices that ostensibly yield them. They may be self-modifying “moving targets” – not rigid and replicable processes and rituals.

Another obstacle in attempting to create the scientific value of psychoanalysis is its ambiguity. It really is unclear, for example, what in psychoanalysis qualify as causes – and what as their results.

Look at the essential construct of a unconscious. Is it the cause for – does it bring about – our behavior, conscious thoughts, and feelings? Does it produce them having a “ratio” (explanation)? Or are they mere signs or symptoms of inexorable underlying processes? Even these fundamental questions obtain no “dynamic” or “physical” treatment in classic (Freudian) psychoanalytic concept. So a lot for its pretensions being a medical endeavor.

Psychoanalysis is circumstantial and supported by epistemic accounts, beginning using the master himself. It appeals to one’s common sense and prior encounter. Its statements are of those forms: “given X, Y, and Z reported because of the affected individual – does not it stand to (everyday) cause that the triggered X?” or “We realize that B brings about M, that M is quite comparable to X, and that B is really comparable to some. Is not it reasonable to presume that a causes X?”.

In therapy, the individual later confirms these insights by feeling that they’re “right” and “correct”, that they are epiphanous and revelatory, which they possess retrodictive and predictive powers, and by reporting his reactions towards the therapist-interpreter. This acclamation seals the narrative’s probative worth being a fundamental (not to say primitive) type of explanation which offers a time frame, a coincident pattern, and sets of teleological aims, ideas and values.

Juan Rivera is appropriate that Freud’s statements about infantile life can not be proven, not even with a Gedankenexperimental movie camera, as Robert Vaelder advised. It is usually equally correct that the theory’s etiological statements are epidemiologically untestable, as Grunbaum repeatedly says. But these failures miss the point and aim of psychoanalysis: to offer an coordinating and extensive, non-tendentious, and persuasive narrative of human psychological improvement.

Ought to such a narrative be testable and falsifiable or else discarded (since the Logical Positivists insist)?

Depends if we desire to deal with it as discipline or as an art kind. This could be the circularity you get with the arguments against psychoanalysis. If Freud’s operate is regarded as for being the current equivalent of myth, religion, or literature – it need not be tried to get regarded “true” in your deepest sense in the term. Following all, how a great deal for the research for this 19th century has survived to this day anyhow?

Los Angeles Psychologist

Defending Psychology

Maria Montessori was born in the town of Chiaravalle (province of Ancona, Italy) in 1870. She became the first female physician in Italy upon her graduation from medical school in 1896. Then, she was chosen to represent Italy at two different woman’s conferences, in Berlin in 1896 and in London in 1900.

Her clinical observations led her to analyze how children learn, and she concluded that they build themselves from what they find in their environment. Shifting her focus from the body to the mind, she returned to the university in 1901, this time to study psychology and philosophy. In 1904, she was made a professor of anthropology at the University of Rome.

Maria Montessori is known as a developer of Montessori approach based on a child psychology. It can be established only through the method of external observation. We must renounce all idea of making any record of internal states, which can be revealed only by the introspection of the subject himself. Her intention was to keep in touch with the researches of others, but to make herself independent of them, proceeding to work without preconceptions of any kind. She confirmed that “all methods of experimental psychology may be reduced to one, namely, carefully recorded observation of the subject”. Treating of children must necessarily intervene the study of development. Discipline is another very important part of Montessori approach and it must come through liberty. She calls an individual disciplined when he is master of himself, and can regulate his own conduct when it shall be necessary to follow some rule of life.

Such a concept of active discipline is not easy to comprehend or to apply. But it contains a great educational principle, very different from the old-time absolute and undiscussed coercion to immobility.

What about lessons in school?
In Montessori method the lesson corresponds to an experiment. The more fully the teacher is acquainted with the methods of experimental psychology, the better will she understand how to give the lesson. In the first days of the school the children do not learn the idea of collective order; this idea follows and comes as a result of those disciplinary exercises through which the child learns to discern between good and evil. The lessons are individual, and brevity must be one of their chief characteristics. Another characteristic quality of the lesson in the is its simplicity. It must be stripped of all that is not absolute truth. The teacher must not lose herself in vain words. The carefully chosen words must be the most simple it is possible to find, and must refer to the truth. The third quality of the lesson is its objectivity. The lesson must be presented in such a way that the personality of the teacher shall disappear. There shall remain in evidence only the object to which she wishes to call the attention of the child.

Montessori approach is also based on exercises of practical life such as personal cleanliness, intellectual exercises (objective lessons interrupted by short rest periods;nomenclature, sense exercises), gymnastics (ordinary movements done gracefully, normal position of the body, walking, marching in line, salutations, movements for attention, placing of objects gracefully), free games, directed games (if possible, in the open air), manual work (clay modeling, design, etc.), collective gymnastics and songs, and exercises to develop forethought – caring for the plants and animals.

In order to protect the child’s development, especially in neighborhoods where standards of child hygiene are not yet prevalent in the home, it would be well if a large part of the child’s diet could be entrusted to the Montessori school. It is well known today that the diet must be adapted to the physical nature of the child. The diet of little children must be rich in fats and sugar: the first for reserve matter and the second for plastic tissue. In fact, sugar is a stimulant to tissues in the process of formation. As for the form of preparation, it is well that the alimentary substances should always be minced, because the child has not yet the capacity for completely masticating the food, and his stomach is still incapable of fulfilling the function of mincing food matter. Consequently, soups and meat balls should constitute the ordinary form of dish for the child’s table.

There are many crucial parts of Montessori method that I will try to explain on my own website, and in the other articles. Montessori method as every other method has some positive and negative sides that other
psychologists are researching.

http://parenthomecareer.webs.com

Parent with experience
http://parenthomecareer.webs.com

Back in the 1950s, Professor Jensen – a leading authority on intelligence – concluded that nothing could be done to improve our IQ level – that it was fixed from early childhood. This was the scientific consensus. Numerous studies investigating the effect of different types of cognitive training over the past 40 years have not done much to change this view – that is, until 2008 when a team of cognitive psychologists from Bern, Switzerland and Michigan, United States, demonstrated that a very specific type of cognitive training can improve IQ dramatically.

Why has it taken 40 years to discover how to improve IQ?

It is only thanks to recent insights from cognitive psychology about the nature of short term memory and its importance in cognitive functioning have at last enabled a training exercise to be engineered that improves IQ. As cognitive psychologists, we have now uncovered many underlying information processing systems of intelligence. It is this understanding that has enabled us to design the task to be effective to improve intelligence, regardless of starting IQ level. We will now look at how these mechanisms work.

We can improve IQ, but how does it work?

Our short term memory is a big part of the story. We use our short term memory all the time for any storage of information that is short term – perhaps over a matter of 10 or 20 seconds – for example, while remembering directions have have just heard while driving.

The Magical Number 7

The amount of information most people can hold in short term memory (numbers, food items, directions) is limited to around 7 items – plus or minus 2. This short term memory capacity or ‘memory span’ has been called the ‘magical number seven’ in one of the most famous papers in cognitive psychology, by George Miller at Princeton University.

Working memory

But more important than just remembering information by rote is being able to do mental operations on that information – to solve a problem, to figure something out, or reason through something to find an answer. For instance, while figuring out a 15% tip, or how much currency is worth while you are in another country. The ability to hold information in mind for brief periods, and manipulate it mentally is a type of short term memory called working memory. You have to do mental work on the information, not just store it. That is why it is called ‘working memory’.

The capacity of working memory

Most people have a working memory capacity of about 2 or 3 – much less than the memory span of the ‘magical number 7′ for just storing information without doing any cognitive operations on it.

The working memory-IQ link

People vary widely in their working memory capacity. Ä°t is now known that these differences predict IQ level. General intelligence – measured by standardized IQ tests – depends on working memory because working memory affects a wide range of complex cognitive tasks besides figuring out a tip, involving reasoning problem solving, and making sense of things. We use working memory every single time we reason, plan and problem solve. Even comprehending long sentences (like the ones in this article) requires working memory!

Working memory and the intelligence behind our IQ level both share the same brain circuitry – part of the frontal cortex of the brain called the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. (‘Dorsal’ means up, and ‘lateral’ means to the side – hence ‘dorsolateral’). This is one of the most recently evolved parts of the brain.

How to improve IQ – the logic

The logic is simple: If you can improve your working memory capacity by training it directly, you can therefore improve your intelligence level. There is, in technical terms, a ‘transfer effect’ from working memory training to gains in intelligence and IQ.

Intelligence can now be improved by 40% – as a side effect.

In 2008 cognitive psychologists at the University of Bern in Switzerland and the University of Michigan in the States, demonstrated that by training on a specifically designed working memory exercise you can increase working memory capacity by over 65% over just 19 days of training.

This improvement in this type of short term memory capacity had a remarkable side effect: a 40% gain in intelligence – as measured by a version of the time limited Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices IQ test – one of the most valid and highly regarded IQ tests for culture fair intelligence.

The author, Dr. Mark Ashton Smith, is a cognitive neuroscientist. Between 2000 and 2003 he was a Lecturer in the Department of Experimental Psychology at the University of Cambridge. His most recent position has been as Assistant Professor at Bilkent University, Turkey. His current research is in fluid intelligence and how it can be trained.

To find out more of what is known about intelligence and how to increase IQ, visit his website: http://www.highiqpro.com/about/how-to-improve-iq-working-memory

From two Greek words: psyche, which means the mind or the soul and logos, which means study, the science of Psychology has been studied and defined by many people throughout the ages. Hilgard, Morgan, Silverman, and Schlesinger are just a few. A careful analysis of their foregoing definitions of psychology reveals common points: Psychology is the scientific study of the behaviors of living organisms; the term behavior must not be solely attributed to man’s physical reactions and observable behavior; and thoughts, feelings, and attitudes are also connected to the term behavior.

The primary goals of Psychology are mainly to describe, identify, understand and explain behavior, to know its factors, and to control or change behavior. Psychologists often apply their knowledge and understanding of human behavior to solve issues and help in our society. Different areas of specialization in Psychology are studied to provide better understandings of this science.

Among these are the traditional fields consisting mainly of: Clinical Psychology which deals with the diagnosis, treatment, and evaluation of psychological problems. It also relates to Psychiatry which pertains to more serious problems; Counseling Psychology which deals with administering, storing, and interpreting psychological exams; Educational or School Psychology which deals with students’ learning and adjustment; Community Psychology which deals with problems of the aged, prisoners, and other problems in the community.

It also focuses on providing accessible care for these people; Social Psychology which deals with the behavior of man individually and in groups; Industrial or Organizational Psychology which deals with issues of people in the workplace; Personality Psychology which is concerned with the uniqueness of a person; Developmental Psychology which deals with factors affecting human groups; Experimental Psychology which focuses with the basis of scientific research; Physiological Psychology which is concerned with the functions of the brain; and Comparative Psychology which targets the differences of the species.

Aside from these, several branches of Psychology were discovered during the 70’s. Forensic Psychology deals with legal, judicial, and correctional systems. Environmental Psychology is primarily concerned about issues relating to the environment. Computer Science, on the other hand, uses computer programming for behavioral analysis. There is also Engineering Psychology which seeks to make the relationship between man and machines; and Psychopharmacology which deals with the relationship of behavior and drugs.

Furthermore, the latest fields of Psychology that were recently developed consist of: Health Psychology which focuses on multidimensional approaches that emphasize lifestyle and health care systems; Sports Psychology which applies psychological principles to improve performance and enjoy participation; Cross-culture Psychology which examines the role of culture in understanding behavior, thoughts, and emotions; and Women Psychology which emphasizes the importance of promoting research and study of women.

Allan enjoys writing up on a variety of subjects. Other than the above topic, he also likes to set up sites on different topics. Do check out his new site which covers useful information on spinal decompression.

When people talk about a person’s ‘intelligence’ it is not generally clear what underlying ability or abilities this term refers to. This article is intended to clarify in layman’s terms what psychologists and brain scientists can mean by intelligence. Basically, there are two good theories–and scientists are divided on which is the best theory–and one bad one which all scientists I know of reject. A good theory is one that is supported by the evidence; a bad theory is one that is not.

Official IQ tests such as the WAIS-IV claim to measure individual differences in an underlying ‘ level of cognitive ability given by a single number–your IQ or intelligence quotient. But is it true that there is a single underlying mental ability that we differ in and that explains what makes us different in our cognitive abilities? If someone is good at maths, are they also likely to be good at language comprehension, reasoning, thinking analogically, learning languages and general knowledge, due to their underlying ‘intelligence level’, as this theory implies?

Or are there ‘multiple intelligences’ underlying out abilities–perhaps dozens or even hundreds of them–each independent from each other, and measured by different types of test. If you have an ability in mathematics, is this ability completely unrelated to your ability in learning languages or play general knowledge games like trivial pursuit? If this is the case, is the idea of having a single IQ score quite meaningless? Or alternatively, are there a small number of underlying cognitive abilities (perhaps two or three) that we differ in, which are relatively independent from each other–and which together explain most the differences in our cognitive abilities?

1. The theory of general intelligence (g)–a good theory

A long standing an influential theory for our cognitive abilities states that underlying all our cognitive abilities (math, language comprehension, general knowledge) is a single factor–called general intelligence (also known as unitary intelligence, general cognitive ability, or simply ‘g’ ) that individuals differ on and which explains those differences.

Spearman (1923) proposed that underlying all cognitive abilities a ‘general ability’ factor (g) that all the abilities draw on. Individuals differ in g according to a bell curve distribution on this theory. g can be thought of in terms of information processing power. Some people –those with higher g–can process more information, more efficiently than others. Using a computer analogy, they have more RAM. The more RAM a computer has, the more complex and information-intensive the programs that can be run on it. If you have an IQ of 160 like Quentin Tarantino has, you have lots of RAM, large ‘bandwidth’ for processing information. If you have an IQ of 78 like Muhammad Ali as a young man (whose IQ was measured by the army), then you have less RAM. Muhammad Ali had many talents, but according to the unitary intelligence theory, intelligence wasn’t one of them.

The evidence for this theory is the same evidence that allows us to reject the theory of multiple intelligences. All standardized tests of cognitive ability (and there are dozens of them, measuring a wide range of different abilities) are positively correlated–not perfectly, but to a large degree. This means that if someone scores higher than average on one of those tests, they are likely to score higher than average on all the other tests–even ones that appear totally unrelated. Scoring higher in an arithmetic test means you will probably also score higher in a vocabulary test. This remains true, even when you take other factors like educational background, or family socioeconomic status into account. This is compelling evidence that there is a single underlying level of cognitive ability that is applied to each of the tests and that performance on one test is not independent from performance on another as the multiple intelligence theory claims.

Spearman (1904)–the psychologist who first proposed the g theory–argued that the variance (the person to person variation) of performance between individuals on ANY cognitive task can be attributed to just two underlying factors: g (general intelligence) and s –the skill unique to that particular task. A person could invest relatively more time into developing a specific skill such as arithmetic, and this will raise their score on an arithmetic test relative to another test such as vocabulary that they didn’t train or practice on, but their general intelligence g will still account for most of their performance on the arithmetic test. G is still the most important factor in explaining levels of performance, whatever the test.

2. The theory of multiple intelligences-a bad theory Spearman’s ‘g’ theory is the opposite of the theory of multiple intelligences. The theory of multiple intelligence is an appealing one because it gives some room for everyone to have their own unique strengths in ‘intelligence’. But as we have seen it turns out that our cognitive strengths and weaknesses are best explained by how much time and effort is we have invested into particular skills or types of knowledge. If I take up a technical trade and become good at it, and find that I am struggling with reading fiction, this doesn’t necessarily mean that I have a special ‘intelligence’ for technical thinking and have no ability for reading or language. The fact I struggle with fiction is better explained by the fact that I have invested my intelligence into building up this particular type of expertise and thus see more of a return on that investment in technical modes of cognition. If I had spent as much time reading fiction as I have applying myself to technical problems, chances are I’d be good at that.

3. The theory of fluid intelligence (gF) and crystallized intelligence (gC)–another good theory

This theory builds on the general intelligence theory, and was originally proposed by the psychologist Raymond Cattell back in 1943. It holds that g is meaningful–that we each have a different general intelligence level– but contributing to g are two different types of intelligence: fluid intelligence (gF) and crystallized intelligence (gC ). Fluid g is the ability to reason and problem solve with novel tasks or in unfamiliar contexts (measured reasoning tasks), while crystallized g is defined as acquired knowledge and is measured using tests of general knowledge, mathematics, and vocabulary. This dual way of understanding intelligence allows for knowledge that you have built up in particular areas to compensate for limitations in overall reasoning and problem solving ability– our ‘raw intelligence’. You may succeed due to knowledge about a task or domain (crystallized g), or due to sheer mental ‘horsepower’ (fluid g).

Where the idea of ‘multiple intelligences’ makes sense: as crystallized intelligence that we invest in

Our crystallized intelligence allows for ‘multiple intelligences’. You could have a high level of crystallized intelligence in graphic design, for example, while having only an average level of fluid intelligence. But you will only be able to use your crystallized intelligence for graphic design in situations in which you are familiar and have built up expertise. Unless you have a high level of fluid intelligence when you are confronted with an unfamiliar problem in graphic design–something ‘out of context’, requiring some difficult figuring out-then you are likely to have difficulties. On the flip side, if you have a high level of fluid intelligence, it will take you less time to pick up graphic design (or whatever) skills as you learn your basic skill set. Your learning will be more efficient, and you will find it easier. In general, the more fluid intelligence you have the more you will be able to ‘invest’ it into crystallized intelligence skills and knowledge–the more ‘multiple intelligences’ you will be able to develop if you so wish. In the context of work, the more gF you have the more quickly and efficiently you can be trained. One study showed that it took people in the 110 to 130 IQ range about 1 to 2 years to catch up with the super-charged performance of those with IQs of 130+ who had only 3 months’ experience on the job.

Summary

Looking at all the evidence, both the general intelligence (g) theory, and the fluid intelligence (gF) and crystallized intelligence (gC) are well supported and useful in explaining how we differ in our cognitive abilities. In my view, the fluid and crystallized theory is the more insightful and useful. It helps me understand intelligence-and how we can improve it-better. For instance, research shows that you can do a specific type of ‘working memory’ brain training to increase your fluid intelligence level substantially–but this training does not directly affect your crystallized intelligence.

The author, Dr Mark A. Smith, is a cognitive neuroscientist, author and entrepreneur. Between 2000 and 2003 he was a Lecturer in the Department of Experimental Psychology at the University of Cambridge. His most recent position has been as Assistant Professor at Bilkent University, Turkey. His current research is in fluid intelligence and its evolution in human cognition. He has recently set up a cognitive interventions laboratory for experimental research into brain training tools and brain nutrition.

To find out more of what is known about intelligence and how to increase IQ, visit his website: http://www.iqlift.com/.

Why should we bother with dreams?
Aren’t dreams just nonsense…just neurons randomly firing?

Evolution has selected for dreaming.
Sleep researchers tell us that all humans and many animals dream several times every night. Dream sleep is so important that experimental subjects prevented from experiencing REM sleep, the part the sleep in which dreams occur, begin to hallucinate after just a couple of nights of deprivation. They effectively begin to dream when they are awake. It is that important to dream. The ability to dream has been evolutionarily selected for because it serves a vital function in human life.

Human beings in all times and places have examined dreams with interest and attention. Mythical and religious characters are portrayed as valuing and being influenced or changed by dreams. The ancient Greeks dedicated temples and trained priests and priestesses to interpret dreams. Sigmund Freud, the originator of psychoanalysis, out of which developed most other modern therapies, called dreams “The royal road to the unconscious” and Moses Maimonides, the famous Jewish philosopher is famous for saying that “A dream unexamined is like a letter unopened”

Psychoanalyst Paul Lipmann (2008) offers us the following list of what he feels that dreams offer:
They state and solve problems.
They express emotion… subtle and loud.
They can express in images and stories those feelings and experiences that are most difficult to think or talk about when awake.
They can express hidden feelings about one’s relationship to powerful and less powerful others.
They can both dissociate and bind together aspects of traumatic or any experience.
They can help cover pain and shame or can rip apart a scab of defense.
They portray our current problems, past dilemmas, and future possibilities.
They gratify wishes.
They can give expression to the life not lived.

Dreams are unconscious products.
Cognitive psychologists tell us that we can hold approximately seven (plus or minus two if your memory is exceptionally good or bad) “chunks” of information in our minds at once.

That is seven digits in a phone number, seven items of a grocery list. That is not very many and yet we have access to a vast reservoir of memories, concepts and emotional experiences which are called up effortlessly and seamlessly into that famous set of seven chunks. And just as seamlessly those concepts not in immediate use slip out and are put away. It’s a truly amazing system when you think about it… effortless and taken for granted. But what is the mechanism that reaches down and pulls up the information that is needed? Most of the time it is not “conscious intention.”

Unconscious processing is a natural and necessary part of thinking
Unconscious processing always underpins and facilitates conscious thinking. It is the system which receives, organizes and makes accessible all of the concepts and experiences that we own. It is simply impossible to be consciously aware of everything we know or to consciously make all the associations between facts that we must in order to make sense of our experience.

Importantly related facts, ideas and feelings may have been accumulated over a lifetime, arriving at different times and out of different life experiences. Consciousness, which is busy figuring out what to make for supper, rarely takes time to sniff around and explore all the potential associations… even to pressing life problems.

Fortunately we have an alternative system to do this work… psychoanalysts call this the personal unconscious . Cognitive researchers call it “automatic processing”,” implicit thought systems” or even “deep psychological processes”. No one tries to pretend that consciousness is big enough or strong to do all the work alone.

When we are concerned about some aspect of our lives or relationships, the unconscious continues to work on the problem while consciousness is busy doing other things. Anyone who has ever had an “Aha!” moment has had the experience of things being brought together unconsciously and presented as a now obvious fact or solution.

Sleep on it!!

The unconscious attempts to offer us larger access to what we know.
One of the main ways that the unconscious is positively integrated in our lives is through dreams. Dreams contain attempts by the unconscious to bring us information and make the arguments that elaborate or counterbalance the conscious attitude.

Typically, our feelings about situations and persons are more complicated and nuanced than what positive thinking, common sense or good manners will endorse.
We have mixed feeling about most experiences.
The birth of a child brings joy but also a curtailment of freedom.
We love and admire our best friend but her success makes us jealous.
We think we want to study to be a lawyer but is it really our father’s dream for us?

Understanding our dreams helps us understand ourselves more fully.
When the conscious attitude agrees pretty well with the unconscious one, dreams will underline, endorse or strengthen belief and resolve… they support a feeling of confidence or “rightness”.
When consciousness overvalues a person or situation dreams may shrink it down to size by portraying it in an unpleasant or inferior way.
When consciousness does not sufficiently value a person, situation or goal the unconscious may elevate the idea, by symbolically representing it as appropriately precious.
Dreams can add new knowledge to consciousness, raise questions or suggest goals or things to be avoided.

A picture is worth a thousand words.
A huge amount of the information that we take in about the world is visual. Almost every important experience has a visual memory of people, places and things attached to it. Since most life knowledge and ideas are tied up in some way with visual images, it is not really surprising that images should be the material that the unconscious uses to represent its ideas.

Dream images may seem strange at first glance, but they are often proven on examination to be extremely accurate visual metaphors of a situation which concerns the dreamer.

A very personal point of view
There is no “one size fits all” in dream interpretation. The images in dreams are often often mysterious and bizarre, they may make reference to other times and places or show the dreamer as someone entirely other that what they are in reality.
Dream dictionaries should be used sparingly and treated mostly as sources of inspiration.
The dreamer is the only person who can say whether an interpretation “works”.

Dreams in Psychotherapy
A psychologist who works with dreams in therapy draws on her knowledge of the client’s life situation and life history as well as her training in typical patterns of human response. She works with her clients to understand the dream images in relation to what the client is struggling with or has experienced in life. Together they try to understand what particular relevance and associations that these images have for this particular individual.
Dream work in therapy contributes to the process of deepening self knowledge.
Understanding of the full range of their desires and responses permits the client to invent new possibilities for action and decision… to change their life in ways that make their desires and their actions more congruent.
Dream work deepens therapeutic intimacy and creates a collaborative atmosphere between therapist and client.

Brief therapy centered on dreams
Psychotherapeutic work with dreams may be part of an on-going therapy or may be helpful as a short term process which focuses on understanding a particular situation, for example:
In periods of normal transition such as life passages,
In periods of crisis,
When difficult decisions are being considered
When radically new life experiences must be assimilated.
Sometimes a particularly striking dream or dream series will evoke a desire to question or understand a current or past situation or experience. At these moments it may be helpful to consider working with a psychologist or therapist who will provide guidance and emotional support and help steady you as you explore the questions
that dream examination raises.

Dreams are part of our system of unconscious re-organization and creative problem solving. They pull the essence of a problematic situation out of the clutter of daily experience so we can see it more clearly. They remind us of what we have nearly forgotten, or of what we have tried to forget and bring together ideas that we knew separately but which click” and create new understanding when brought together. They help us see what we really desire and they point the way to future possibilities that grow out of past experiences.

Susan Meindl, MA, is a licensed psychologist in private practice in Montreal Canada. She has a special interest in Jungian ideas and practices a Jungian approach to psychodynamic psychotherapy

http://therapists.psychologytoday.com/rms/59983