Podcasts about scientific psychology

Coop and Taylor discuss Freud's Project for a Scientific Psychology with an emphasis on how it informs the 3 syntheses of the unconscious for Deleuze and Guattari. Freud Playlist: https://soundcloud.com/podcast-co-coopercherry/sets/freud?si=c51111042521492db6bd5311890dacd7&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/muhh Twitter: @unconscioushh Instagram: @unconscioushh

Subscribe to get access to the full episode, the episode reading list, and all premium episodes! www.patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessAbby, Patrick, and Dan close out The Project for a Scientific Psychology - and the first volume of the Standard Edition - in its entirety! First, they unpack the key steps of Freud's quantitative argument" from the nature of "Q" to Freud's proposal of different kinds of "neurones" to how (in his view) the whole apparatus works to discharge built-up energy. Then, they turn to the qualitative half of Freud's account, which includes: how Freud relates the perception of pain to the emergence of memory; his schematic formula of a minimal "ego"; and the remarkable capacity of the brain to temporarily satisfy itself through a hallucinatory "primary process." Along the way, they also encounter Freud trying out some new terms for the first time, get a preview of some key material that will appear in Studies on Hysteria and The Interpretation of Dreams, and more!The promised “chunky bibliography” is available on Patreon.Have you noticed that Freud is back? Got questions about psychoanalysis? Or maybe you've traversed the fantasy and lived to tell the tale? Leave us a voicemail! (646) 450-0847  A podcast about psychoanalysis, politics, pop culture, and the ways we suffer now. New episodes on Saturdays. Follow us on social media:  Linktree: https://linktr.ee/OrdinaryUnhappiness Twitter: @UnhappinessPod Instagram: @OrdinaryUnhappiness Patreon: patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappiness Theme song: Formal Chicken - Gnossienne No. 1 https://open.spotify.com/album/2MIIYnbyLqriV3vrpUTxxO Provided by Fruits Music

Subscribe to get access to the full episode, the episode reading list, and all premium episodes! www.patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessAbby, Patrick, and Dan continue their journey through the Project for a Scientific Psychology. They explore how the Project reflects recent developments in technology, and how Freud is staging an intervention into ongoing contemporary investigations in the fields of neurology and biology. Working through key early chapters of the Project itself, they unpack how Freud's thought reveals a preoccupation with flows of energy (“Q”) that traverse boundaries and both sustain and trouble psychic life. Have you noticed that Freud is back? Got questions about psychoanalysis? Or maybe you've traversed the fantasy and lived to tell the tale? Leave us a voicemail! 484 775-0107  A podcast about psychoanalysis, politics, pop culture, and the ways we suffer now. New episodes on Saturdays. Follow us on social media:  Linktree: https://linktr.ee/OrdinaryUnhappiness Twitter: @UnhappinessPod Instagram: @OrdinaryUnhappiness Patreon: patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappiness Theme song: Formal Chicken - Gnossienne No. 1 https://open.spotify.com/album/2MIIYnbyLqriV3vrpUTxxO Provided by Fruits Music

Subscribe to get access to the full episode, the episode reading list, and all premium episodes! www.patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessAbby, Patrick, and Dan turn to one of Freud's earliest and strangest works: an untitled “psychology for neurologists,” begun in shorthand on a moving train, which went unpublished until 1950. Grappling with the text in terms of its significance and genre, they explore how abandoned experiments and seeming dead-ends can still yield insight and how, when it comes to the tricky interfaces between mind and brain, theories and metaphors can illuminate precisely in how they fall short.Have you noticed that Freud is back? Got questions about psychoanalysis? Or maybe you've traversed the fantasy and lived to tell the tale? Leave us a voicemail! 484 775-0107 A podcast about psychoanalysis, politics, pop culture, and the ways we suffer now. New episodes on Saturdays. Follow us on social media: Linktree: https://linktr.ee/OrdinaryUnhappiness Twitter: @UnhappinessPod Instagram: @OrdinaryUnhappiness Patreon: patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappiness Theme song: Formal Chicken - Gnossienne No. 1 https://open.spotify.com/album/2MIIYnbyLqriV3vrpUTxxO Provided by Fruits Music

Hi everyone!This week, we give you episode three: “Violins and Violas.”You can find a nice (not Substack-generated) transcript of episode 3, as well as a music-free remix, here. In this week's episode, Joanna and I speak with the psychology researcher Tobi Abubakare about the bewildering history of psychology research connecting autism and theory of mind, as well as the harmful legacy of that research.“Violins and Violas”In the early 1980s, Simon Baron-Cohen, Uta Frith, and Alan Leslie conducted an experiment. They administered verbal false belief tests to a few autistic and non-autistic kids, and their results suggested that the autistic kids had a unique deficit in theory of mind. So they wrote up their results, and published a paper that would end up shaping autism research for decades.But here's the catch: those early experimental results couldn't be reliably replicated. And instead of giving up on the “theory of mind deficit” view of autism, researchers decided to go looking for new ways of measuring theory of mind in order to vindicate the “theory of mind deficit” idea.Tobi Abubakare (they/them), an autistic autism researcher and PhD candidate in clinical psychology, explains what caused those replication failures, why researchers clung to the “theory of mind deficit” view in spite of those failures, and how this type of research has affected autistic people. Plus, they have some important advice for researchers–with the help of a musical analogy.Topics Discussed* Baron-Cohen, Frith, and Leslie's paper, “Does the autistic child have theory of mind?” (00:31)* Why researchers got so excited about the “theory of mind deficit” view of autism. (03:11)* The failures to replicate Baron-Cohen et al.'s results, and the “methodological arms race” to develop new measures of theory of mind that would vindicate the theory of mind deficit view of autism. (06:27)* Tobi's introduction. (09:40)* Tobi's first explanation for those replication failures: small sample sizes. (11:26)* Tobi's second explanation for those replication failures: poorly characterized samples. (13:20)* Tobi's explanation for why the theory of mind deficit view remained influential, in spite of those failures of replication: it confirmed what researchers already believed about autistic people. (16:48)* Value-laden assumptions in autism research, and in research on race. (18:55)* How scientists (including autism researchers) can end up performing “mental gymnastics” in order to hang on to their theories. (20:46)* The strange notion that autistic people who pass false belief tests are “cheating” on the tests. (21:33)* How the theory of mind deficit view of autism causes real-world harm. (23:13) * Tobi's story about how the “theory of mind deficit” view of autism has impacted them personally. (23:54) * How the “theory of mind deficit” view of autism shapes many of our everyday interactions. (29:18)* Tobi's recommendations for researchers: when you're looking for a difference, ask yourself why you're looking for that difference, and then interrogate your assumptions about that difference. (30:41)Sources Mentioned* Simon Baron-Cohen, Uta Frith, and Alan Leslie, “Does the autistic child have theory of mind?” Cognition, Vol. 21, Issue 1 (1985), 36-47. https://docs.autismresearchcentre.com/papers/1985_BC_etal_ASChildTheoryOfMind.pdf * DSM-III (The American Psychiatric Association, 1980). https://aditpsiquiatriaypsicologia.es/images/CLASIFICACION%20DE%20ENFERMEDADES/DSM-III.pdf * Morton Ann Gernsbacher and M. Remi Yergeau, “Empirical Failures of the Claim that Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind,” Archives of Scientific Psychology, Vol. 7, Issue 1 (2019), 102–118. https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2019-75285-001.html * Oluwatobi Abubakare, “An Unexpected Autistic,” Autism in Adulthood, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2022). https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/aut.2022.0004 * Press release about the first in-person meeting of the Black Empowerment in Autism Network (BEAM): https://ed.unc.edu/2023/06/15/creating-new-momentum-in-autism-research/CreditsHosting, Research, Fact-Checking, Script-Editing: Amelia Hicks and Joanna LawsonGuest: Oluwatobi “Tobi” AbubakareMusic and Audio Production: Amelia HicksAdditional Voicework: Rach Cosker-RowlandThank-YousAnother thank you to Rach Cosker-Rowland for lending us her voice to read some pieces of text for us! We're also grateful for her editorial advice.Many thanks to Tobi Abubakare for speaking with us about the (very confusing) history of theory of mind deficit research. Tobi has been incredibly generous with their time and knowledge, and we're very grateful to them for helping us understand this piece of the history of autism science. You can read more about Tobi's experiences and how those experiences shape their approach to autism research in their recently published paper, “An Unexpected Autistic.”And thanks to the Marc Sanders Foundation and the Templeton Foundation for their support of the show. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit neurodiving.substack.com

"They interviewed more than 6,000 American parents and their children from ages eight to thirteen. They wanted to identify what the perception and realities were of the parents' use of technology. It is important to know that about one-third of the children said that their parents spent equal or less time with them than in using their devices. Over half of the children felt that their parents check their devices too often and complained that their parents allow themselves to be distracted by the devices during conversation, something that made a third of them feel unimportant. Many parents too, when asked about their device usage, agreed that it was too frequent and many parents also worried about how this looked to the younger generation. Almost a third concluded that they did not set a good example for their children with their internet devices."    Episode Description: We begin by distinguishing adult addiction to pornography from the situation of childhood overstimulation. Central to the child's experience of being able to psychically metabolize pornographic images is the presence of an adult who is able to recognize "the importance of his presence for the child, the value of their mutual contact so that they can together confront difficult questions and dilemmas." Indeed, Franco and Andrea define the traumatic aspect of pornography for children to be the lack of contact with an object, "a lack that renders impossible the working through of the [pornographic] solicitations." We discuss the three models that characterize parents' rule setting for their children - digital orphans, exiles and heirs - and we also address the meaning to the children of their parents' own dissociative over-involvement in screen watching. They end on an optimistic note finding that "we can view technological experiences as an opportunity to elaborate and construct shared meanings."   Our Guests:   Franco D'Alberton, Ph.D. is a psychologist and child and adolescent psychoanalyst, full member and training analyst of the Italian Psychoanalytic Society (SPI/IPA). He worked in NHS services first as a psychologist in the field of child mental health then as consultant in Psychology at the Pediatric Department of S.Orsola University Hospital in Bologna (Italy). Initially focused on adults training in clinical psychology and psychotherapy, he has increasingly turned to children and adolescents and to family problems. He is currently working in private practice.   Andrea Scardovi MD, PHD, is a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, and full member of the Italian Psychoanalytic Society (SPI/IPA). He worked in NHS services and at Bologna University, where for many years taught courses on communicative elements of psychotherapy. He developed a training method to improve interview skills of General Practitioners, which was adopted in various Italian regions. He has been a member of the editorial board of the Italian Journal of Psychoanalysis. He is currently working in private practice.   Linked Episode: Episode 103: Addictive Pornography: Psychoanalytic Considerations with Claudia Spadazzi, MD and Jose Zusman, MD – IPA Off the Couch   Recommended Readings:   Balint, M. (1969) Trauma and Object Relationship. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 50:429-435   Benjamin, J., Atlas, G. (2015). The “Too Muchness” of Excitement: Sexuality in Light of Excess, Attachment, and Affect Regulation. Int. J. Psychoanal, 96(1):39-63.   Freud, S. (1895). Project for a Scientific Psychology. S. E., 1:281-391.   Freud, S. (1908). On the Sexual Theories of Children. S. E., 9:205-226.   Freud, S. (1924). The economic problem of masochism. In S. E., Vol. XIX, 155–70. London: Hogarth Press.   Dodes L. (2019) A general psychoanalytic theory of addiction. In: Savelle-Rocklin, Salman Akhtar, ed., Beyond the Primal Addiction. Food, Sex, Gambling, Internet, Shopping, and Work. Routledge, London.   Gilmore, K. (2017). Development in digital age. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 70(1):82-90.   Green, A. (2000) Time and Psychoanalysis: Some Contradictory Aspects. London: Free Association Books, 2002, 95-96.   Lemma A., Caparrotta L. (2014). Psychoanalysis in the Technoculture Era. London: Routledge.   Marzi, A. (2013). Introduction. In Marzi, A. (ed.), Psychoanalysis, Identity, and the Internet: Explorations into Cyberspace. London: Karnac, 2016,XXXIII-L.   Tylim, I. (2017). Revisiting adolescents' narcissism in the age of cyberspace. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 70(1):130-134.   Zusman J.A. (2021) Between Dependency and Addiction. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 74(1): 280-293.  

Colleges and graduate programs seek a broad range of attributes in applicants, only some of which are effectively measured in current entrance exams. Amy and Mike invited professor Robert Sternberg to explore advancements for improving admissions tests. What are five things you will learn in this episode? What is the theory of successful intelligence? How do we test for a broader range of contributors to success? What do assessments of creativity or wisdom look like? How predictive are tests like these of college success? What are the impediments to implementing better admissions tests? MEET OUR GUEST Robert J. Sternberg is Professor of Psychology in the College of Human Ecology at Cornell University and Honorary Professor of Psychology at Heidelberg University, Germany.  Previously, Sternberg served 8 ½ years in academic administration as a university dean, senior vice-president, and president.  Before that, he was IBM Professor of Psychology and Education and Professor of Management at Yale and Director of the Yale Center for the Psychology of Abilities, Competencies, and Expertise.   Sternberg is a Past President of the American Psychological Association, the Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, the Eastern Psychological Association, and the International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology. Sternberg also has been president of four divisions of the American Psychological Association and Treasurer of the Association of American Colleges and Universities. Sternberg's BA is from Yale University summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, his PhD is from Stanford University, and he holds 13 honorary doctorates. Sternberg has won more than two dozen awards for his work, including the James McKeen Cattell Award (1999) and the William James Fellow Award (2017) from APS.   He has won the E. Paul Torrance Award from the National Association for Gifted Children, 2006, and the Distinguished Scholar Award, also from the National Association for Gifted Children, 1985. He also is the winner of the Grawemeyer Award in Psychology (2018). He is the author of over 1800 publications.  He was cited in an APA Monitor on Psychology report as one of the top 100 psychologists of the 20th century and in a report in Archives of Scientific Psychology by Diener and colleagues as one of the top 200 psychologists of the modern era.  He was cited by Griggs and Christopher in Teaching of Psychology as one of the top-cited scholars in introductory-psychology textbooks.  According to Google Scholar, he has been cited over 200,000 times. He has authored textbooks in introductory psychology, cognitive psychology, and in communication in psychology.  Sternberg is a member of the US National Academy of Education and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Find Robert at robert.sternberg@gmail.com. LINKS Intelligence — Robert J. Sternberg Assessment of Creativity: Theories and Methods Tufts and the Kaleidoscope Project Assessment - Social Emotional Learning RELATED EPISODES ALTERNATIVES TO MULTIPLE CHOICE ARE IQ TESTS VALID FIVE MYTHS ABOUT ADMISSIONS TESTS ABOUT THIS PODCAST Tests and the Rest is THE college admissions industry podcast. Explore all of our episodes on the show page. ABOUT YOUR HOSTS Mike Bergin is the president of Chariot Learning and founder of TestBright. Amy Seeley is the president of Seeley Test Pros. If you're interested in working with Mike and/or Amy for test preparation, training, or consulting, feel free to get in touch through our contact page.  

At the start of the 19th century, the field we now call psychology was still the branch of philosophy that studied the soul. How did psychology come to define itself as a separate area of inquiry, and how did it come to be a science? In Wundt, Avenarius and Scientific Psychology: A Debate at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Palgrave MacMillan 2019), Chiara Russo Krauss considers the conceptual foundations of psychology as a science in the conflicting views of Wilhelm Wundt and Richard Avenarius. Wundt established the first psychology lab but continued to see psychology as a science of self-observation, while the philosopher Avenarius embraced the emerging materialistic perspective in which the same physical methods that had just been successfully applied to explaining life could be used to explain conscious experience. Russo Krauss, a researcher at the University of Naples Federico II, makes clear the major role that Avenarius played in the shaping of psychology into the science that it is today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the start of the 19th century, the field we now call psychology was still the branch of philosophy that studied the soul. How did psychology come to define itself as a separate area of inquiry, and how did it come to be a science? In Wundt, Avenarius and Scientific Psychology: A Debate at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Palgrave MacMillan 2019), Chiara Russo Krauss considers the conceptual foundations of psychology as a science in the conflicting views of Wilhelm Wundt and Richard Avenarius. Wundt established the first psychology lab but continued to see psychology as a science of self-observation, while the philosopher Avenarius embraced the emerging materialistic perspective in which the same physical methods that had just been successfully applied to explaining life could be used to explain conscious experience. Russo Krauss, a researcher at the University of Naples Federico II, makes clear the major role that Avenarius played in the shaping of psychology into the science that it is today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

At the start of the 19th century, the field we now call psychology was still the branch of philosophy that studied the soul. How did psychology come to define itself as a separate area of inquiry, and how did it come to be a science? In Wundt, Avenarius and Scientific Psychology: A Debate at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Palgrave MacMillan 2019), Chiara Russo Krauss considers the conceptual foundations of psychology as a science in the conflicting views of Wilhelm Wundt and Richard Avenarius. Wundt established the first psychology lab but continued to see psychology as a science of self-observation, while the philosopher Avenarius embraced the emerging materialistic perspective in which the same physical methods that had just been successfully applied to explaining life could be used to explain conscious experience. Russo Krauss, a researcher at the University of Naples Federico II, makes clear the major role that Avenarius played in the shaping of psychology into the science that it is today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the start of the 19th century, the field we now call psychology was still the branch of philosophy that studied the soul. How did psychology come to define itself as a separate area of inquiry, and how did it come to be a science? In Wundt, Avenarius and Scientific Psychology: A Debate at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Palgrave MacMillan 2019), Chiara Russo Krauss considers the conceptual foundations of psychology as a science in the conflicting views of Wilhelm Wundt and Richard Avenarius. Wundt established the first psychology lab but continued to see psychology as a science of self-observation, while the philosopher Avenarius embraced the emerging materialistic perspective in which the same physical methods that had just been successfully applied to explaining life could be used to explain conscious experience. Russo Krauss, a researcher at the University of Naples Federico II, makes clear the major role that Avenarius played in the shaping of psychology into the science that it is today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the start of the 19th century, the field we now call psychology was still the branch of philosophy that studied the soul. How did psychology come to define itself as a separate area of inquiry, and how did it come to be a science? In Wundt, Avenarius and Scientific Psychology: A Debate at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Palgrave MacMillan 2019), Chiara Russo Krauss considers the conceptual foundations of psychology as a science in the conflicting views of Wilhelm Wundt and Richard Avenarius. Wundt established the first psychology lab but continued to see psychology as a science of self-observation, while the philosopher Avenarius embraced the emerging materialistic perspective in which the same physical methods that had just been successfully applied to explaining life could be used to explain conscious experience. Russo Krauss, a researcher at the University of Naples Federico II, makes clear the major role that Avenarius played in the shaping of psychology into the science that it is today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the start of the 19th century, the field we now call psychology was still the branch of philosophy that studied the soul. How did psychology come to define itself as a separate area of inquiry, and how did it come to be a science? In Wundt, Avenarius and Scientific Psychology: A Debate at the Turn of the Twentieth Century (Palgrave MacMillan 2019), Chiara Russo Krauss considers the conceptual foundations of psychology as a science in the conflicting views of Wilhelm Wundt and Richard Avenarius. Wundt established the first psychology lab but continued to see psychology as a science of self-observation, while the philosopher Avenarius embraced the emerging materialistic perspective in which the same physical methods that had just been successfully applied to explaining life could be used to explain conscious experience. Russo Krauss, a researcher at the University of Naples Federico II, makes clear the major role that Avenarius played in the shaping of psychology into the science that it is today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Robert D. Mather is a Professor of Experimental Psychology at the University of Central Oklahoma and has also taught at the in the School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences at University of Texas at Dallas. He is editor of Journal of Scientific Psychology and has conducted experimental research on both social cognition and visual perception. He has co-authored the books Automaticity and Cognitive Control in Social Behavior (Fountainhead, 2007) and The Analysis of Variance: An Integrated Approach to Experimental Design (Kendall/Hunt, 2008).

In this episode, we talk with Dr. Scott O Lilienfeld, author of 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology (https://www.amazon.com/Great-Myths-Popular-Psychology-Misconceptions/dp/1405131128). Dr. Lilienfeld is Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Psychology at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia (USA). Dr. Lilienfeld is Editor of Clinical Psychological Science, Associate Editor of the Archives of Scientific Psychology, and President-Elect of the Society for a Science of Clinical Psychology.

SMART Recovery is honored to bring you Dr. Carlo DiClemente, PhD, ABPP, co-creator of the the Stages of Change, speaking about how people maintain change and ways in which to support that in the field of addiction and recovery. Carlo C. DiClemente's Stages of Change, or the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change (TTM), are foundational to SMART's approach to supporting people where they are as they embark in the process of change with regard to addictive behavior. Dr. DiClemente is most widely known for his co-authorship of the self-help book, Changing for Good. Dr. DiClemente's career-long passion and dedication to create and research a functional, multidimensional and integrated care model for treating addictions has influenced the practice of providers from multiple disciplines. His thoughtful articles are highly cited in the field of addictive behavior. His pioneering views on motivation, mechanisms of change and natural recovery have transformed clinical practice and influenced research in psychology, health and mental health. He has used stages and processes of change to understand how risk and protective factors influence initiation and recovery from addictions and created an innovative framework for linking prevention and treatment. In this talk, he emphasizes that the locus of change lies within the individual's personal processes, even while counselors, therapists, and facilitators may offer a variety of helpful methods and choices for healthy change.   Dr. Carlo DiClemente is currently University of Maryland, Baltimore County presidential research professor of psychology, Director of MDQuit, Tobacco Resource Center, the Center for Community Collaboration. For his work in the addictions, Dr. DiClemente was given the Innovators Combating Substance Abuse award by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the John P. McGovern Award from the American Society on Addiction Medicine (ASAM), and a Distinguished Contribution to Scientific Psychology award by the Maryland Psychological Association and the American Psychological Association Division on Addictions. He has served as president of the APA Division on Addictions (50) and is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science. In 2007 he was named the first Lipitz Professor of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences at UMBC, in 2011 he was named as Presidential Research Professor at UMBC. He serves on SMART Recovery's International Advisory Board. SMART Recovery was privileged to host this private presentation with Dr. Carlo DiClemente for professionals in mental health and addiction treatment: Graciously, Dr. DiClemente allowed us to record and present that talk, free, as a service to the general public.  SMART Recovery depends on your donations! Please visit SMART Recovery or Click the Donate button below. ©2016 SMART Recovery®.  Music created and copyright 2016 Donald Sheeley with unlimited use as is donated to SMART Recovery.

Fr. George offers some comments on Christmas and then concludes his series on "Overcoming Anxiety."

Fr. George continues his discussion of the cognitive psychological components of dysfunctional anxiety. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George continues his discussion of the spiritual aspects of overcoming anxiety. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George continues with the behavioral aspects of overcoming anxiety, focusing this time on self-efficacy, and then moves on to the spiritual aspects. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George discusses exposure methods and systematic desensitization as behavioral therapeutic strategies.

Fr. George discusses the clinical application of behavior therapy to anxiety disorders. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George continues his discussion of the cognitive psychological components of dysfunctional anxiety. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Why doesn't Jesus heal all of us like he did the son of the widow of Nain? Fr. George explains that the answer to this question is the underlying aim of his podcast.

Fr. George lists a few more cognitive distortions and then shares the three questions that are most likely to restructure these distortions.

Fr. George continues his discussion of the cognitive psychological components of dysfunctional anxiety, this time focusing on the cognitive "modes." Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George discusses the cognitive psychological components of dysfunctional anxiety. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George continues his new series, explaining that anxiety sometimes occurs without an identifiable stressor. Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George begins this new series by explaining what we mean when we talk about "anxiety." Click here to view the webpage that Fr. George mentions in his podcast.

Fr. George begins his series by looking at the symptoms of depression and its physiological distinctions.

Combining a remarkable intellect with penetrating insight, and what might best be described as astonishing literary talent, Sigmund Freud approached the study of human personality with fresh new insights, and the skills of an extremely well trained researcher. Freud pioneered the study of the human personality, and founded the modern specialty of personality psychology. Throughout his career, Freud sought to identify and trace the roots of personality, and to define the intricate relationship, and often-delicate balance between mental structures, personality components, societal pressures, and overt behavior. Sigmund Freud was born in 1856, the son of an unsuccessful wool merchant, in the small catholic town of Freiberg Austria, the north of Vienna, province of Moravia (then part of the Hungary Empire, now The Czech Republic). He was one of eight children, including two older half brothers from his fathers first marriage, the first born of his mother, Emilie (Sigmund was her favorite) and she expected great things of him, third son to his father Jacob, recognized young Sigmund’s intellectual potential and encouraged him in his early academic inclinations. His mother gave little Sigmund the only reading lamp in the house, to put in his room. Sigmund’s mother would not allow his brothers and sisters to disturb him when he was reading or studying. His father, Jacob, was a strict, authority figure, and was somewhat detached. Although Sigmund excelled in school, he experienced some emotional upheaval as well as episodes of depression. (These difficulties may have motivated him to later search for the mechanisms that prompt emotional problems and personality difficulties.) In 1873, Freud entered the University of Vienna medical school, with the intentions of becoming a medical researcher, rather then practice medicine. He eventually specialized in Neurology, and intended to become an “academician” (a member of an academy or society concerned with the arts or sciences), as evidence of this Freud published five major studies by the time he was 26. In one of these studies, Freud discovered the anesthetic properties of cocaine during surgery, but missed fame when a colleague took credit for the discovery before him. While at the University of Vienna medical school, Freud was greatly influenced by his Professor Ernst Brucke, who had developed theories of behavioral and Psychological processes, and he continued studying with him after earning his medical degree. Freud came to the realization, that because of discrimination, opportunities for faculty appointments, as a medical researcher, and advancement in academia, were severely restricted for Jews at that time, and was compelled to enter the practice of medicine. He took the advice of Dr. Brucke and entered private practice as a clinical neurologist, and was soon able to marry his fiancée of four years, Martha Bernays. Freud, with his new career goal in mind, traveled to Paris, France, to study for a year with Jean-Martin Charcot, well known for his skill in treating nervous disorders. Charcot expertise was in the use of hypnosis, and his role as one of the founders of the “new” specialty of psychiatry. Freud learned the use of hypnosis as a treatment method, but soon became dissatisfied with this technique for treatment of patients with “hysteria”. Eventually, Freud began to work with an older Viennese colleague, Jozef Breuer, who had accidentally begun using a “talking cure” with such patients (which would later become the technique of “free association”) in an attempt to trace the origin of “neurotic symptoms”. Freud was impressed by Breuer’s discovery that a patient, who recalled her earlier traumatic event, was relieved of her symptoms when the treatment session was ended. Freud and Breuer collaborated and coauthored a book in 1895, entitled Studies on Hysteria. The two men ultimately parted over a disagreement concerning the importance of sexual factors as the cause of hysteria, and in 1896, Freud wrote his now famous paper, “Project for the Development of a Scientific Psychology.” Freud began to practice on his own in both neurology and psychiatry, using free association techniques in the treatment of a variety of “psychiatric” patients suffering from psychological disturbances that produced both psychological as well as physical symptoms (without any apparent underlying physiological causes.) Like other physicians of his day, Freud looked for physical causes of psychiatric problems. As a neurologist he knew that damage to the brain or nervous system could cause individuals to behave in strange ways, including physical symptoms such as loss of sensation (anesthesia), loss of motion (paralysis), and emotional symptoms such as anxiety and depression. For a number of patients, however, no physical causes could be found, and many of Freud’s colleagues were of the opinion that such patients were faking their symptoms. In France, however, some psychiatrists were treating patients with “hypnosis“, although mainstream medicine considered it quackery. Freud, however, had observed Charcot induce psychiatric symptoms in patients through the use of hypnosis. The evidence of hypnosis converted Freud from the “medical model” of psychiatric disorders to a psychological model (i.e. “Psychodynamics” [i.e. becoming convinced that powerful unconscious forces have the power to influence behavior, and the functioning of the body]). The impact of unconscious forces on the body can produce the physical symptoms of paralysis, blindness, mutism, deafness, and other maladies, which resembles physical disease, but which occur in physically normal bodies, with undamaged nervous systems. Later, Freud began asking his patients to relate their dreams during their treatment sessions. From insights gained during these treatment sessions, he formulated a system of interpreting dream symbolism, which he presented in his first book in 1900, the Interpretation of Dreams, which he considered his most original and important work. During this period of time, Freud developed new ways of thinking about mental and emotional disorders, and formulated the theory and methods of psychoanalysis (which he believed to be a new science), and the first technique of psychotherapy. Freud eventually turned away from neurology, which was based on a physical model of human behavior and founded his new science based on psychological or mental causes. For more info on this topic visit http://psy101.MyUCCedu.com