Recent research in Psychology that really excites you

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

psych84

Membership Revoked
Removed
7+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
272
Reaction score
20
So what is some of the more recent research out there that really excites you about the future of psychology? I've heard there is some exciting stuff coming out of neuropsychology but don't know much about it. In the next 10-20yrs, how different will things be?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
Those are very different questions in my mind.

Research: Condensed trauma treatment for the primary care setting with promising outcomes. Not yet trained in it.

Future: primary care metal health paradigm. Decrease of traditional psych services outside private practice.

I not sure what you mean about closing the gap with medicine. Psychiatric Medicine has... Medicine. Procedural stuff like TMS and stuff is growing though. Biofeedback for us perhaps?
 
I'm excited by the research Behavioral Tech is doing with integrating DBT and evidence-based treatment for trauma. I'm also excited by Craske's work showing that habituation isn't really the mechanism of change in prolonged exposure therapy.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm also somewhat confused by the the questions - this sounds like a badly worded homework question. I have no idea what you mean by "tools at our disposal" relative to medicine. Particularly at the research level, there isn't a clean distinction between the fields.

I think the NIMH RDOC and recent work on transdiagnostic models will completely reshape how we understand psychopathology, likely in a way that is much closer to "reality" than the relatively archaic diagnostic system currently in place. A complete shift will likely take longer than 20 years, but I expect to see it in our lifetime.
 
I'm also somewhat confused by the the questions - this sounds like a badly worded homework question. I have no idea what you mean by "tools at our disposal" relative to medicine. Particularly at the research level, there isn't a clean distinction between the fields.

It is badly worded. I mean right now Clinical Psychologists rely on clinical interviews, observations and "tools" (i meant instruments/tests like MMPI-2.) In essence, I consider all those things "tools" for Psychologists for assessment/diagnosis. So I just meant other instruments that could help in assessing/treating a patient. Someone mentioned biofeedback, well there is a machine used for that process. I guess I was just thinking in a general sense if there is some new instruments/technologies, that can help Psychologists diagnose/assess/treat patients.
 
Last edited:
I'm excited by the research Behavioral Tech is doing with integrating DBT and evidence-based treatment for trauma. I'm also excited by Craske's work showing that habituation isn't really the mechanism of change in prolonged exposure therapy.

I haven't kept up with that. If avoidance is still viewed as escape conditioning, we should still view habituation as the anecdote, no? There is no doubt that processing and alleviation of misplaced guilt chafes thoughts and schemes that contribute to host of other associated symptoms though. But we have long known this.
 
Craske's research indicates that the key is inhibitory learning. So, it's not important that the client experiences a decrease in SUDs so much as the client continues to expose themselves to the anxiety. Therefore, clients can experience treatment gains even if they just do something like maintain mindful awareness of the anxiety without engaging in avoidance or escape.

Keep in mind that this is just what I've read (and the ABCT listserv discussed it at one point), so that's what I took away from it at least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
So what is some of the more recent research out there that really excites you about the future of psychology? I've heard there is some exciting stuff coming out of neuropsychology but don't know much about it. In the next 10-20yrs, how different will things be?

Read Lamiell's Statisticism paper. It's exciting when people agree with him.
 
Any specific article/author/group you'd recommend on the topic?

On the definition aspect:
Naylor, P., Cowie, H., Cossin, F., de Bettencourt, R., & Lemme, F. (2006). Teachers' and pupils' definitions of bullying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 553-576. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709905X52229

Kert, A. S., Codding, R. S., Tryon, G. S., & Shiyko, M. (2010). Impact of the word “bully” on the reported rate of bullying behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 47(2), 193 – 204.

On the intervention aspect:

I know Scott Ross and Rob Horner are doing some really interesting work on this. AFAIK, they only have pilot data published so far, but I've spoken to Ross at conferences (super nice guy!), and it sounds like they have some really nice large scale replication data forthcoming.

Ross, S. W., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Bully prevention in positive behavior support Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 747-759. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-747.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Read Lamiell's Statisticism paper. It's exciting when people agree with him.
I'll have a read at some point. (unfortunatley really swamped now) What is his overall point?
 
I'll have a read at some point. (unfortunatley really swamped now) What is his overall point?

Note the distinction between individual differences and population statistics; one should not draw false conclusions from one to the other. Also, remember that techniques such as factor analysis lend support for the idea of mathematical constructs, not necessarily personality characteristics existing to some degree in individuals themselves.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I was recently in washington and spoke to Ian Penton-Voak from the UK.

They have developed a simple training paradigm that apparently helps modify cognitive biases and can reduce symptoms of depression and, in another sample, aggression in adolescents/children (using a tweaked version of the same task). Full data not available on the former, but results look promising, they even registered it as a clinical trial.

Adams et al. 2013 Effects of emotion recognition training on mood among individuals with high levels of depressive symptoms: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Penton-Voak et al., 2013. Increasing recognition of happiness in ambiguous facial expressions reduces anger and aggressive behavior.
 
I was recently in washington and spoke to Ian Penton-Voak from the UK.

They have developed a simple training paradigm that apparently helps modify cognitive biases and can reduce symptoms of depression and, in another sample, aggression in adolescents/children (using a tweaked version of the same task). Full data not available on the former, but results look promising, they even registered it as a clinical trial.

Adams et al. 2013 Effects of emotion recognition training on mood among individuals with high levels of depressive symptoms: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Penton-Voak et al., 2013. Increasing recognition of happiness in ambiguous facial expressions reduces anger and aggressive behavior.

Wow, really exciting. But it sounds like something that be readily available, not exactly good for the business side of things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Wow, really exciting. But it sounds like something that be readily available, not exactly good for the business side of things.

?
Are you suggesting we "patent" psychotherapies?
 
As of this morning via the AACN listserve, I can say I'm excited to see this letter to the editor by Jim Andrikopoulos: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1867435

That was published un-edited in response to this original piece by Robert Cantu: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/NEUR/929441/nvp130006.pdf.gif

Jim has a few of these letters and responses, and I love him for it. I've long harbored ill feelings towards Cantu. That guy will do anything for a grant and/or media coverage.
 
?
Are you suggesting we "patent" psychotherapies?
I simply mean that this has the potential of causing a loss in business for Psychologists.
 
Last edited:
Craske's research indicates that the key is inhibitory learning. So, it's not important that the client experiences a decrease in SUDs so much as the client continues to expose themselves to the anxiety. Therefore, clients can experience treatment gains even if they just do something like maintain mindful awareness of the anxiety without engaging in avoidance or escape.

Keep in mind that this is just what I've read (and the ABCT listserv discussed it at one point), so that's what I took away from it at least.

This sounds really interesting. Do you happen to have the citation?
 
Note the distinction between individual differences and population statistics; one should not draw false conclusions from one to the other. Also, remember that techniques such as factor analysis lend support for the idea of mathematical constructs, not necessarily personality characteristics existing to some degree in individuals themselves.

Unfortunatley, everything we study is ridden with our values, which means values become facts. Values impact our research methods and our methods, and they often determine the theoretical models/constructs. We really don't know much at all.
 
This sounds really interesting. Do you happen to have the citation?

Craske, M. G., Kircanski, K., Zelikowsky, M., Mystkowski, J., Chowdhury, N., & Baker, A. (2008). Optimizing inhibitory learning during exposure therapy. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46, 5–27.

Also an article on ways to implement the recommendations of inhibitory learning theory in to practice (unedited manuscript available only)... Craske, M.G., Treanor, M., Conway, C., Zbozinek, T., Vervliet, B., Maximizing Exposure Therapy: An Inhibitory Learning Approach, Behaviour Research and Therapy (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2014.04.006.
 
Top