Allow Experience to Influence Research/Work Area?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

paramour

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
1,977
Reaction score
7
In the Why are eating disorders such a popular specialty? thread, psychanon replied, "People are usually interested in studying what they know or can relate to."

This brings to mind conflicting advice I have received from various sources. There are people in one camp who subscribe to the idea that you should conduct research and/or work in an area that you are passionate about, which is usually something you are close to for whatever reason. Perhaps because you, yourself, have experienced problems in that area, or perhaps because you know someone who has experienced problems in that area. In other words, you or someone you know has struggled with an eating disorder, has been raped or abused as a child, has struggled with depression and contemplated/attempted suicide, has survived a war, or whatever, so you work in an area related to eating disorders, or sex offenses, or suicide, or trauma . . . or [fill in the blank].

People in this second camp, however, believe that you should not work in an area that you have "too much" personal experience in, as it may cause more harm than good. So, if you were abused as a child or if you have contemplated suicide, you should most definitely not be working with child abuse victims/offenders or suicidal individuals or, in the case of the original thread, eating disorders.

So what do you think? Should we work in areas that we might be "too close to" because of our own past experiences or the experiences of those we know? Or should we find something else to be passionate about?

Discuss.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I think you can be passionate about something that you aren't personally effective by, but you do hear about people who go into areas that they have some kind of personal connection. I think people need to be very careful about too much of a personal connection, because the research should be about the research, and not some type of cathartic experience.

-t
 
This is a tough one for me, and one I've thought about a lot. I've boiled it down to 2 questions someone needs to ask themselves before choosing a field.

1) Are you capable of remaining objective about the research regardless of what your personal experiences were?
2) - and this one often gets missed when people talk about this - Are you capable of handling the stress of dealing day-in and day-out with people who may closely resemble a time that you or a loved one might not want near-constant reminders of?

There are some other factors at work as well, but I think if a person can answer yes to these two questions, I personally would not see anything wrong with them choosing a topic that affected them on a personal level. Without #1, their research is suspect. Without #2, I can't see them lasting long in this field, since many of these populations can be stressful enough for someone who doesn't have personal experiences in the area as well.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I personally fall into the second camp. I have a close relative diagnosed with bipolar, so I'm trying to stay away from that area of research. I am still interested in it, yes, but I was uncertain how I would deal with working in an area of research that has a lot of personal connections (as Ollie put it, I would probably say yes to ques. 1, but am unsure of ques. 2). So yeah, when I was figuring out my interests, I pretty much took that off my list rather quickly just to be safe (for me, potential clients/participants, etc.).

I understand the draw to do something like that, and kudos to those who can handle it. I just wanted a clear distinction between professional and personal (as much as that it can be done).

Great thread topic though. :cool:
 
I've also thought about this a lot. For me, applying to graduate school over two years and selecting a research area has been about answering the question "should you have to be what you study?". Two years ago I applied to programs wanting to study multicultural psychology. I really wanted to study racial stigma and learn more about the dynamic in therapy when the client is a different race than the participant. Although I think this question affects everyone, I couldn't help but notice that, being white, I was definitely in the minority in trying to break into this research area. I only received one interview that year and didn't get in to any programs.

This past year I changed my research focus (which happened organically as I started to work on another project) to gender. Suddenly, I was a girl applying to study gender issues, which seemed to make more sense to everyone involved. I received multiple interview invites and was able to have a good choice about the program I entered.

I'm not going to pretend that the only reason I got in last year and not the year before was because I happened to be what I wanted to study. There were definitely other confounding factors, not to mention the practice effects. However, it did make me think a lot about these issues and just how much we are expected to have personal experience in our area of interest. I don't have any definitive answers on the pros and cons of this, though.
 
My research area and interest makes me a unicorn.....:D (being a male looking at niche eating disorder Tx). I still may be able to pull a research grant for post-doc if I can get my act together over the next year. I haven't done grant writing for ~6-7 years, but I think with the right kind of packaging I can pull something out.

-t
 
Top