The Psychologist March 2019

the

the psychologist

psychologist march 2019

march 2019

Voices In Psychology Why do we need psychology?

And what does psychology need?

www.thepsychologist.org.uk

psy 0319 pOFC.indd 1

11/02/2019 16:39

the

the psychologist

psychologist march 2019

march 2019

contact The British Psychological Society 48 Princess Road East Leicester LE1 7DR 0116 254 9568 mail@bps.org.uk www.bps.org.uk the psychologist and research digest www.thepsychologist.org.uk www.bps.org.uk/digest www.jobsinpsychology.co.uk psychologist@bps.org.uk Twitter: @psychmag Download our iOS/Android apps advertising Reach 50,000+ psychologists at very reasonable rates.

CPL, 1 Cambridge Technopark Newmarket Road Cambridge CB5 8PB contact Kai Theriault 01223 378051 kai.theriault@cpl.co.uk february 2019 issue 56,183 dispatched environment Printed by Warners Midlands plc on 100 per cent recycled paper.

Please re-use and recycle.

Mailing bag is potato starch-based and fully compostable.

Voices In Psychology Why do we need psychology?

And what does psychology need?

www.thepsychologist.org.uk

The Psychologist is the magazine of The British Psychological Society It provides a forum for communication, discussion and controversy among all members of the Society, and aims to fulfil the main object of the Royal Charter, ‘to promote the advancement and diffusion of a knowledge of psychology pure and applied’

The Psychologist needs you!

We rely on your submissions throughout the publication, and in return we help you to get your message across to a large and diverse audience.

For details of all the available options, plus our policies and what to do if you feel these have not been followed, see www.thepsychologist.org.uk/contribute The main message, though, is simply to engage with us.

Contact the editor Dr Jon Sutton on jon.sutton@bps.org.uk, tweet us on @psychmag or call /write to us at the Society’s Leicester office.

issn 0952-8229 (print) 2398-1598 (online) Managing Editor Jon Sutton Production Mike Thompson Journalist Ella Rhodes Editorial Assistant Debbie Gordon Research Digest Christian Jarrett (editor), Emma Young, Matthew Warren

© Copyright for all published material is held by the British Psychological Society unless specifically stated otherwise. As the Society is a party to the Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA) agreement, articles in The Psychologist may be copied by libraries and other organisations under the terms of their own CLA licences (www.cla.co.uk). Permission must be obtained for any other use beyond fair dealing authorised by copyright legislation. For further information about copyright and obtaining permissions, e-mail permissions@bps.org.uk.

psy 0319 p1 contents.indd 1

Associate Editors Articles Paul Curran, Harriet Gross, Rebecca Knibb, Adrian Needs, Paul Redford, Sophie Scott, Mark Wetherell, Jill Wilkinson History of Psychology Alison Torn Interviews Gail Kinman Culture Kate Johnstone, Sally Marlow Books Emily Hutchinson Voices in Psychology Madeleine Pownall International panel Vaughan Bell, Uta Frith, Alex Haslam, Elizabeth Loftus, Asifa Majid Psychologist and Digest Editorial Advisory Committee Catherine Loveday (Chair), Emma Beard, Harriet Gross, Kimberley Hill, Rowena Hill, Deborah Husbands, Peter Olusoga, Richard Stephens, Miles Thomas

11/02/2019 16:12

the

psychologist march 2019

62 Careers We meet Educational Psychologist Juliet Whitehead; and Trevor Powell on a lifetime of achievement

68 Jobs in psychology Featured job, latest vacancies

72 Culture Including an interview with poet Hussain Manawer

82 Looking back Graham Davies and Alan Costall on ‘mass observation’

88 One on One… …with Au Alma

Dr Jon Sutton Managing Editor @psychmag

Getty Images

We’re a forum for a whole choir of voices in psychology. Obviously we love to showcase the work of the most eminent in the field, but we’re proud to also offer early writing opportunities to those seeking to be heard for the first time. This year we’re looking to nurture a few people more formally, with our ‘Voices In Psychology’ programme (see p.34).

We posed the question ‘Why do we need psychology? And what does psychology?’, and this month we publish the best responses. We’ll be offering some of these authors opportunities and guidance in order to amplify that voice in science communication.

For this year, our question is ‘what makes a psychologist?’ Does there tend to be anything distinct about psychologists, key to what drives them, common ground which can help drive our discipline forward? See also p.5.

As ever, we hope to attract diverse voices.

Our revamped ‘one on one’ spot (p.88) will seek to do the same, by showcasing a random Society member each issue.

02 Letters Medication, masculinity and more 08 Obituaries

12 News

Genetics,

replication

and more

22 Digest Ideology, learning, drawing and more

psy 0319 p1 contents.indd 2

28 Children’s friendships Elian Fink and Claire Hughes

34 Why do we need psychology?

And what does psychology need?

Seven entries from our first

‘Voices in Psychology’

programme, identifying and

nurturing new writing talent

46 Embrace the unknown Chris Ferguson washes his hands of ‘science laundering’

52 ‘There’s nothing I’d rather be doing than fighting the corner for people with psychosis’ We meet Emmanuelle Peters

56 Shining a light on the dark side Adrian Furnham

11/02/2019 16:12

Getty Images

Challenging the very core of psychology D

12

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 12

o our genes determine who we are? Does the environment have an independent impact on our development, or are so-called environmental effects actually reflective of the ways particular genes cause us to interact with the environment? Do parents and family ‘matter’ in child development? Or would an adopted child raised away from their biological family turn out much the same as if they had remained with their birth family?

While advances in genetic testing allow behavioural geneticists to find likely groups of genes which may be associated with particular traits of human behaviour, the nature-nurture debate rumbles on.

One of the best-known researchers in Behavioural Genetics, Professor Robert Plomin (King’s College, London), published his book Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are last year. One of the headline assertions of the book is that parents make little difference to how children turn out, something which has surprised many in the world of psychology.

Writing for Psychology Today prior to the publication of his book last year, Plomin stated that genes contribute ‘importantly to all the psychological differences between us’ with inherited DNA accounting for roughly half of the differences in psychological traits including personality, cognitive ability and mental health. He goes on: ‘The environment is responsible for the other half, but genetic research has shown that the environment does not work the way environmentalists thought it worked. For most of the 20th century, environmental influences were called

nurture, because the family was thought to be crucial in determining environmentally who we become… Genetic research has shown that this is not the case. We would essentially be the same person if we had been adopted at birth and raised in a different family.’

Dr Naomi Fisher, a Chartered Psychologist writing for The Psychologist online, examined some of Plomin’s claims. She writes: ‘Reading Plomin’s book as an applied psychologist, there is a sense of perhaps defensive disbelief… so much of what he writes runs counter to accepted psychological perspectives. Parenting and nurturing don’t “make a difference”? Crucial environmental events in our lives are down to chance?

This challenges the very core of psychology…’

Events we experience in our environment, Plomin says, are in part determined by our genes. In an email interview with Fisher he explained: ‘Many experiences assessed on measures of life events, such as conflicts with others, don’t just happen to us as hapless bystanders. Blueprint describes a new way of thinking about the environment, as experiences that we actively select, modify and create in part on the basis of our genetic tendencies.’

It may be hard for psychologists to accept that all human behavioural traits are heritable, but Fisher points out this idea, dubbed the Fist Law of Behavioural Genetics

by Professor Eric Turkheimer, is uncontroversial in the field. She writes: ‘Plomin argues that DNA is the only stable, systematic and long-lasting source of who we

11/02/2019 16:17

the psychologist march 2019 news become – and that the environmental events which do make a difference are “unsystematic and unstable – in a word, chance”. This is where the headline “Parents don’t make a difference” comes from. He bases this on the absence of evidence for systematic effects of nurture, or in the terminology of behavioural genetics, “shared environment”: that which is shared between children in the same family and which is assumed to make them similar.’

But Fisher poses the question: ‘Parenting style and social economic status are counted as shared environmental factors. If they don’t make a difference to what we become, then what does? Plomin’s answer is chance or random events – but this feels unsatisfactory for many psychologists. Why would our brain respond differently (and in a more permanent way) to chance events than to many hours of nurture?

How could this actually work?’

Scott Barry Kaufman, writing for Scientific American, outlines 12 of Plomin’s statements, made in various publications since Blueprint was released, which he deems ‘particularly problematic’. Kaufman, while excited about the progress being made in using DNA to predict traits, suggests caution: ‘I firmly believe we need to be more thoughtful in determining what relevance these rapidly emerging findings have for the actual individual human beings who are inhabited by the DNA.’ He goes on: ‘What the evidence actually suggests is that families don’t generally make siblings more similar to each other, or they only do to a small degree and only for specific traits. And to the degree that they do, those traits tend to diverge when children leave the home… But that’s absolutely not the same as showing that family does not matter in terms of who we become. That conclusion simply does not follow logically from the scientific research.’

Emphasis within the field has shifted in recent years from finding ‘the gene for…’, to the calculation of ‘polygenic risk’ – predictive scores made up of thousands of genetic markers. When Fisher asked him, Plomin admitted that it was unlikely we would ever understand the mechanisms behind such scores. This is hard to swallow for some, with Fisher writing ‘For applied psychologists, to think of polygenic scores as causal (as Plomin says they are) without understanding the pathway doesn’t really make sense, because the pathways are what we work with.’ Turkheimer added ‘What do you do with your therapist? You sit there and try and reconstruct your nonshared environment.’

And commenting on Twitter, neurogeneticist Kevin Mitchell (@WiringTheBrain) said: ‘not everything that matters can be measured’ (to which we might add ‘not everything that can be measured matters…).

It appears that the age-old ‘nature-nurture’ debate remains as complext and potentially divisive as ever.

But surely if there is a ‘blueprint’, psychologists will remain in demand in terms of reading it, and mapping out how it unrolls across our lifespan. er To read Fisher’s article see: tinyurl.com/y72mka4x

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 13

Practice guidelines and masculinity The American Psychological Association recently released psychological practice guidelines for men and boys. Based on 40 years of research, the guidelines suggest that psychologists should be aware of the impact of certain elements of masculinity which may have a negative effect on men’s mental health.

While APA guidelines for working with women and girls were published over 10 years ago, the current guidelines for practicing with men and boys have been met with outrage in some sections of the media. While they have been in development for 13 years, some have suggested their publication is ideologically motivated.

The 10 guidelines, each presented with relevant evidence and potential applications in psychological practice, attempt to help psychologists tackle the barriers that might lead to the difficulties men face. In their introduction the authors point out that the varied social identities men have affect the way they experience and perform masculinity – which can have both negative and positive effects.

Men and boys are disproportionately represented as victims, and perpetrators, of violence, have higher levels of suicide and die younger. However, many do not seek help when they need it and report difficulties in finding gender-sensitive psychological treatment. As the guidelines point out ‘boys and men have historically been the focus of psychological research and practice as a normative referent for behaviour rather than as gendered human beings.’

The guidelines suggest, among other things, that psychologists should be aware of each individual man’s experience of masculinity and understand its social and cultural context. They should encourage positive father involvement and healthy family relationships.

They point to the importance

of understanding the impact of privilege, power and sexism on boys’ development, and how this may affect their relationships with others.

Psychologists should also be aware of the special issues boys face during education: a disproportionate number of boys struggle academically, particularly those from African American and Latino communities. When working with boys and men, the guidelines suggest, psychologists should be aware of the problems with aggression and violence many men face and understand these at both a cultural and individual level.

The APA’s Division 51, the Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity, has issued a statement following what they describe as ‘media misrepresentation’ of the guidelines.

They point out the guidelines, rather than damning masculinity as a whole, encourage its many positive aspects.

‘When we report that some aspects of “traditional masculinity” are potentially harmful, we are referring to a belief system held by a few that associates masculinity with extreme behaviors that harm self and others… For example, people who believe that to be a “real man” is to get needs met through violence, dominance over others, or extreme restriction of emotions are at risk for poor physical, psychological, and social outcomes (e.g., increased risk for cardiovascular disease, social isolation, depression relationship distress, etc.). When a man believes that he must be successful no matter who is harmed or his masculinity is expressed by being sexually abusive, disrespectful, and harmful to others, that man is conforming to the negative aspects associated with traditional masculinity.’ er

11/02/2019 16:17

Routledge Psychology are proud sponsors of

The British Psychological Society Research Digest

Psych

podcasts We’re offering PsychCrunch listeners the chance to discover even more ground-breaking research, with free access to 25 articles of their choice from our Behavioral Sciences journals.

Find more details and register for access at:

bit.ly/psychcrunch2017

Follow us: @RoutledgePsych

Like us: Routledge Psychology

bit.ly/psychcrunch2017

14

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 14

11/02/2019 16:17

the psychologist march 2019 news

Therapists want guidance on prescription psychiatric drugs, survey confirms Early findings from a recent survey of practising therapists provides compelling evidence that guidance for therapists to support them dealing with clients taking or withdrawing from psychiatric prescription drugs is greatly needed.

Of the 1,200 therapists that responded to the survey led by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Prescribed Drug Dependence (APPG for PDD), nine out of ten said it would be helpful to discuss issues around taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs with clients, but fewer than one in ten (7 per cent) felt their training equipped them to respond to questions very well.

Over 50 per cent of respondents said that more than half of their clients were taking psychiatric drugs such as antidepressants, anxiolytics or antipsychotics. They felt their ability to provide effective therapeutic help to people on such drugs was hampered because of a lack of knowledge about their effects.

Dr Anne Guy of the APPG for PDD said: ‘The survey confirms the lack of knowledge and training in this

complex area, and as the world has changed since many of us completed our training, a real need for professional guidance. The very clear message from therapists is that they want access to guidance to help them respond confidently to questions from clients.’

Over 93 per cent of respondents said they wanted to have professional guidance to help them work competently with people either taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs.

The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Prescribed Drug Dependence (APPG for PDD) is working with the British Psychological Society, British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, the UK Council for Psychotherapy and the National Service User Network to produce guidance materials for the UK’s 70,000 talking therapists to support them when working with issues related to prescribed psychiatric drugs. The materials are due to be published in the Summer.

See also the letter on p.2. er

Getty Images

Educational Psychologists fear that children, particularly those out of school or living in poverty, do not have fair access to their services.

A survey carried out by the British Psychological Society’s Division of Educational and Child Psychology also revealed concerns over unfilled Educational Psychology posts within their local services.

The study, which was carried out in partnership with the Institute of Education at University College

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 15

London and the University of Glasgow, surveyed 57 Educational Psychologists from 29 local authorities in England. The majority said they did not believe there was fair access to their services, while more than half reported unfilled vacancies in their local service – possibly due to the number of Educational Psychologists working exclusively in private practice, as a fifth of the respondents to the survey do.

Significant changes to funding for Educational Psychology services have been made over recent years and the survey suggested that this has led to some vulnerable groups no longer receiving the services they need. The government recently announced a 25 per cent increase in the number of educational psychologists being trained from 2020, which may go some way to addressing the issues highlighted. er

11/02/2019 16:17

The Psychologist app …

Available as a free download via your iOS/Android store.

Complete access for British Psychological Society members.

Read on the go, search across editions, and get the occasional special.

‘Your Psychologist, Your way’: log in via tinyurl.com/YourPsych for other options.

With thanks to our app sponsors, SDS Seminars Ltd – see www.skillsdevelopment.co.uk/seminars.php

And don’t miss our Research Digest app: the latest research, digested, every weekday!

16

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 16

11/02/2019 16:17

the psychologist march 2019 news

Cancer screening award A psychologist and Senior Lecturer has been awarded the Scottish Cancer Foundation Prize and Evans Forrest medal for her research into the early diagnosis of cancer.

Dr Katie Robb (University of Glasgow), who has spent her career using psychological knowledge to develop interventions to improve cancer screening attendance and awareness, was the first ever psychologist to win the foundation prize and medal.

Since her PhD with the late Professor Jane Wardle, who pioneered research on cancer prevention, screening, and early diagnosis, Robb has devoted all of her research to the field. Thanks to a Cancer Research UK fellowship Robb was able to explore ways to improve public uptake of home-based bowel cancer screening which involves taking a stool sample and sending it for analysis.

Robb explored whether including testimonials of the bowel screening experience along with the test would have an impact on the likelihood people would do the test themselves in the future. ‘As it’s a test you do at home there’s no interaction with a health professional when you do it, so the information that is sent along with this test provides an important opportunity to engage with people.

Typically in the health service we give people facts and figures and tell them things like “1 in 20 people are going to get bowel cancer”… I wanted to see what the response would be to providing more experiential information to people. I was interested to see if you could use testimonials or stories and experiences in a positive way.’

Robb’s results showed that potential screening participants found the stories reassuring and the approach also increased their intention to take part in bowel screening in the future. Recently Scotland’s bowel cancer screening programme has adopted this approach

after Robb informed them of her findings.

During this time Robb was also heavily involved with developing the Cancer Awareness Measure, intended to provide a standardised method of assessing cancer awareness. The measure has been adopted in the UK and in many countries across the globe and allows for the assessment of changes in the awareness of cancer across time, between and within countries.

Now Robb has her own research group at the University of Glasgow where she remains dedicated to applying psychological knowledge to improving cancer outcomes. ‘We’re looking at adding information to the Dr Katie Robb bowel screening invitation to see if it has an impact on uptake. We know that many people intend to do bowel screening but don’t get around to it. So the idea we’ve taken, that has been successfully used in psychology in smoking cessation, is if you give people a planning help sheet this can help them overcome barriers and find a solution. It could be something as simple as, “If I keep forgetting to do the bowel screening test” and then the solution would be “then I’ll leave the kit in the bathroom to remind me”.’

Although there are ample opportunities for the role of psychologists in improving cancer awareness and early diagnosis the area remains under-researched.

Robb, who now has a post-doc and three PhD students, also hopes to train a cohort of people in this area over the coming years. er

Obesity Special Interest Group The British Psychological Society’s Obesity Special Interest Group is up and running once again following a short hiatus. Founded in 2012 as part of the Division of Clinical Psychology’s Faculty of Clinical Health Psychology, the group is hoping to attract new members from academic and applied backgrounds and reunite members from the earlier days of the group.

Dr Ian McKenna, Lead Clinical Psychologist for the Specialist Weight Management Service at Torbay and South Devon NHS Trust, was voted in as the group’s Chair late last year.

He said the group’s activity died off late in 2017 after no-one took up the mantle from departing Chair Dr

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 17

Emma Shuttlewood. ‘I felt that our voice was missing from the national debate on the obesity crisis. I felt that we needed to resurrect the Obesity Special Interest Group to provide this national voice from BPS psychologists, as well as to support psychologists working in obesity, and to carry on the momentum started by the Obesity Task Force.’

The group’s vision is to ‘shape and change the culture of obesity by placing psychology at the core of any obesity prevention and management programme’ and its committee has met twice since its resurrection.

McKenna said he and the committee are intending to organise a national

meeting and CPD event this year.

If you work as an applied or academic psychologist in obesity and wish to connect with other psychologists working in the area, make use of shared resources, training and peer support, and potentially have a contributing role in national guidelines on obesity, please contact Dr McKenna at membernetworkservices@bps.org.uk quoting ‘facchp-obesity’. er News online: See thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/reports For much more of the latest peer-reviewed research, digested, see www.bps.org.uk/digest Do you have a potential news story?

Email us psychologist@bps.org.uk or tweet @psychmag.

11/02/2019 16:17

‘Every discipline does something well, and there’s a lot we can learn’ The UK Reproducibility Network is a peer-led consortium to investigate factors which contribute to robust research, provide training, and disseminate best practice. We spoke to one of its founders, psychologist Professor Marcus Munafo (University of Bristol), along with other stakeholders.

Why has psychology led the reproducibility charge?

Issues around reproducibility are related to current incentives in academic research being misaligned – what is good for scientists is not necessarily good for science.

To improve quality we need to understand these influences on the behaviour of scientists, and work out how to change them (and therefore those behaviours).

Psychologists are well placed to lead on these issues, since our business is understanding behaviour.

Is psychology still ‘in crisis’, or are we now over the hump?

I’ve never really liked the ‘crisis’ narrative. It perhaps served a purpose early on in raising awareness of the issues, but now I think we’re in a much more exciting phase of exploring how we can ‘The issue for the library improve our ways of working. community that has been raised But we’re still at an early stage when by the reproducibility debate is it comes to changing the incentive whether what we are spending structures that we work within, for all this money on has value? Is example. the scholarly record as valuable as we think it is? Is peer review What’s the main practical role you see sufficient to ensure that what we for the UK Reproducibility Network? purchase and make available is Hopefully it will serve to support actually good research? We want individual researchers and groups to make sure that what we are of researchers, as well as relevant paying for is of quality and helps professional services staff (e.g. to advance scholarship.’ library services) at individual David C Prosser, Executive institutions, for example by helping Director, Research Libraries UK them to set up local activities and ‘We’ve made huge strides over the last couple of years and I truly believe that psychology is undergoing a renaissance. Science is a collection of behaviours, and I argued in my Royal Society talk last January that we should use well established behaviour change approaches (such as the COM-B) to help move psychological science forward. We should also recognise that change needs to happen at all levels: addressing questionable research practices (p-hacking, HARKing etc.) as well as the research culture and incentive structure (i.e., publish or perish).

The UKRN is an excellent initiative which has the potential to change grassroots approaches to promoting open science, as well as to help change the scientific incentive structure by influencing Universities, funders and other relevant agencies.’

Professor Daryl O’Connor, Chair of the British Psychological Society’s Research Board

working groups, and providing training and resources.

As well as this, we want to coordinate activity between these individuals and groups, the institutions themselves, and key stakeholders (e.g. funders and publishers).

There’s a lot of activity intended to improve reproducibility, but this will be more effective if its coordinated.

Why is a multi-disciplinary approach to reproducibility so important?

Some of the issues are relatively universal and apply across disciplines; others are more specific to individual disciplines. One thing I’ve learned from working across different areas is that every discipline does something well, and there’s a lot we can learn simply by sharing best practice and solutions that have already been identified and implemented somewhere.

Science reform can be seen as a behaviour change problem. Of all the ‘stakeholders’, who might be the hardest to nudge?

I suspect more established researchers might, as a group, be slowest to adopt new ways of working, simply because they’ve become used to the current system and (by definition) have done reasonably well within it.

Perhaps understandably, changing how they work might be perceived as onerous and potentially a threat to their continued success. Institutional change can also be quite slow, so this may take longer than, for example, ‘Reproducibility in research impacts across all disciplines. Having a network which brings together people from a wide range of institutions and variety of subjects to consider how reproducibility in research can be addressed, and to develop good procedures, practices and processes that improve the reliability of research, is a very positive step forward.

This is not a new situation, but the research landscape is becoming ever-more complex. New areas of research are emerging, and we are seeing more multi-discipline and multi-method research, with large amounts and multiple types of experimental data being collected and analysed in many studies. It is essential to also have a multidisciplinary approach to reproducibility.’

JT Janssen, Director of Research at the National Physical Laboratory

18

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 18

11/02/2019 16:17

the psychologist march 2019 news because they see science through fresh eyes and can see how curious and in many ways antiquated our ways of working are.

How are we looking to the outside?

I think there’s a very positive framing we can put on this. Science continues to make advances, but we’re now engaged in an ongoing process of improvement to ensure that it continues to do so, that investment in science continues to represent good value for money, and so on. This isn’t a one-off event; we should always be looking at how we work and whether we could be doing better. encouraging change among individual researchers.

Are the people who really need to join the UKRN precisely those who won’t?

I think this would be a danger if it was simply a peer-led initiative working at the grassroots. However, by making sure we’re working with institutions and stakeholders the hope is that we will be able to work at different levels (bottom up and top down, if you like), and engage the wider community that way. For example, if funders and publishers change the incentives (what you need to do to get a grant or to publish, for example), that will encourage a change of behaviour at multiple levels (individuals and institutions), and UKRN will be there to provide support and training, as well as to evaluate whether those incentives are having the intended consequences (and no unintended ones!).

Is the reproducibility movement really penetrating those grassroots?

In my experience the most engaged group are the early career researchers. In part I think that’s because they are acutely aware of the pressure to, for example, publish and get grants in order to succeed. But it’s also

Do you have any messages for our practitioner readers, who might feel that this whole debate is of less relevance to them?

Ultimately, we want to make sure that science produces robust evidence. We know that the evidence for the efficacy of drug treatments, for example, is influenced by publication bias and other biases. It seems that the same is also true for psychological treatments. If the evidence for a particular treatment is not as robust as the published literature might have us believe, then practitioners need to know this.

If the current appetite for reform at a national level is sustained, where do you see us in 20 years’ time?

I would like to see meta-research – research into factors that influence the quality of research outputs – mature into a distinct discipline that cuts across traditional disciplinary boundaries, and provides evidence to inform how science (and scientists) should work. I’d also like to see UKRN as an independent body that provides advice and training to UK institutions, informed by this evidence.

Connect with the UKRN via email ukrn-admin@bristol.ac.uk and @ukrepro on Twitter

‘Many of the issues around reproducibility are common across a range of research disciplines. At the heart are questions of good experimental design and appropriate and robust statistical analysis.

Meaningful change will require all stakeholders to be engaged. But more importantly, the different groups are influenced by one another. For example, the questions have been raised by researchers themselves, which has resulted in funders and publishers becoming more aware of the issue. Changing funder and publisher policies will then raise awareness of more researchers. So, there’s the potential for a virtuous cycle… a researcher-led initiative like the UKRN has an important role to play.’

Steven Hill, Director of Research, Research England

psy 0319 p12_19 news.indd 19

‘Impact is a massive issue for publicly funded charities and we cannot possibly hope to have impact if the work we fund is not reproducible.

Currently it takes an average of 17-years for new basic science discoveries to reach the clinic. That will be much faster if more work is reproducible.

Junior researchers are the ones most motivated by the repro movement. People go into science wanting to discover new things, and often to also help particular groups. They want their work to be reproducible and are highly motivated to ensure it is. Many have also been caught out by working to replicate something from a senior researcher that turns out not to be reproducible (as I was – it’s one of the reasons I left frontline science). That actually gives me hope about the longevity of the repro movement, as one day these idealistic young researchers will become senior leaders – as long as they can produce reproducible work within the current incentive structures.

It’s a shared problem – no one discipline is worse off. Institutions – especially big names - are the ones who most need to be at UKRN’s centre. They need to incentivise senior researchers to ensure that their own work is reproducible, and that they are developing a cadre of junior scientists who have fully adopted reproducible practices. Incentives is the biggest issue that will lead to behaviour change becoming mainstream, so any body with capacity to give incentives needs to be at the table.

In my field, a lot of servicedelivery based charities do research in house, but many of those researchers do not have the benefit of a climate where methods are discussed and developed. I’d love to see researchers outside mainstream academia – in charities, research institutes, or think tanks, whether service implementation or theoretical in focus – understand the importance of the issues, and importantly be equipped to conduct their work in a reproducible way.’

Sarah Shenow – MQ Mental Health

11/02/2019 16:17

Blinded by ideology Jesse Singal digests the research

Find our Research Digest at www.bps. org.uk/ digest Editor: Dr Christian Jarrett Writers: Emma Young and Jesse Singal Full reports and much more on the Digest website

22

psy 0319 p22_25 digest.indd 22

A

heated political story in the United States in January perfectly illustrated how tribal politics can supercharge a human weakness that psychologists have been studying for some time – our deep-seated tendency to accept evidence that supports our existing beliefs, and to ignore evidence that contradicts them.

It involved a conflict near the Lincoln Memorial featuring a handful of Black Israelites (a radical black nationalist group), a large group of mostly White American high-schoolers, some in Donald Trump hats, who were in town for an anti-abortion march, and a small group of Native American protesters, one of whom found himself in the midst of the high-schoolers.

Following the initial reports of what happened, and spurred along by a short video and dramatic photos, suggesting that the teens had encircled and confronted the Native American protester in an apparent act of intimidation, there was widespread condemnation of the teenagers, calls for them to be suspended or expelled from school, doxxed, and so on. But what’s telling is that when new details emerged, most notably the emergence of a longer video showing it was the protester who had waded into the sea of teens (because, he said later, he wanted to break up the conflict between them and the Black Israelites), and which complicated other aspects of the narrative as well, still many commentators continued to interpret events in line with their own political leanings.

In fact the cacophonous online argument about what happened only seemed to explode in volume when the longer video was released – more information didn’t resolve things. At all.

As the Georgetown University professor Jonathan Ladd put it so well on Twitter: ‘Regarding the incident at the Lincoln Memorial,’ he wrote, ‘it’s fascinating to see motivated reasoning play out in real time over a 24 hr period … Despite lots of video, all interpretations now match people’s partisanship.’

These politically motivated cognitive gymnastics are the subject of an important new paper lead-authored by Anup Gampa and Sean P. Wojcik that’s just been made available as a preprint (and due to be published in Social Psychological and Personality Science). Specifically, Gampa and Wojcik, working with a team that includes the openscience advocate Brian Nosek, decided to test the effects of politically motivated reasoning using logical syllogisms, a type of logical argument in which premises are assumed to be true, and arguments proceed from there.

The syllogism the researchers use as an example at the top of their paper nicely shows how this sort of thing works: All things made of plants are healthy. [premise] Cigarettes are made of plants. [premise] Therefore, cigarettes are healthy. [conclusion] By the rules of logic and the conceit of logical syllogisms, this argument is logically sound (even if factually incorrect). But because ‘cigarettes are healthy’ clangs loudly against people’s beliefs about the world, some people will reject this syllogism as false, even after having the logical rules of syllogisms explained to them.

This example isn’t a particularly political issue – no one really thinks cigarettes are healthy at this point. What the researchers wanted to know was whether logically valid or invalid politicised syllogisms (pertaining to abortion, for instance) would be more likely to be misinterpreted as false or true, respectively, based on readers’ political beliefs, even though these beliefs should be irrelevant to interpreting the logical soundness of the syllogisms.

So, in a series of studies drawing on thousands of visitors to YourMorals.org and Project Implicit (the first two studies), and a nationally representative online sample of Americans (the third), Gampa and Wojcik asked a group of participants about their political beliefs and then presented them with a series of syllogisms designed

11/02/2019 16:19

the psychologist march 2019 digest

psy 0319 p22_25 digest.indd 23

Re-watching lecture videos Given a passage of text to study, many students repeatedly re-read it in the hope the information will eventually stick. Psychology research has shown the futility of this approach.

Re-reading is a poor strategy, it’s too passive and it leads the mind to wander. Better to test yourself on what you read, or explain it to yourself or someone else. Now a paper in Experimental Psychology suggests the same is true of lecture videos – immediately re-watching them doesn’t lead to any greater learning.

Leonardo Martin and his team asked 72 participants to watch two lecture videos, both around 10 minutes long. One was a live recording of a lecture about sanitation in the middle ages; the other consisted of voice over slides and was about problem solving.

Some students watched the sanitation video first, the others watched the problem solving video first. Also, all the students watched one of the videos (either the sanitation one or the problem-solving one) just once before being tested on it, whereas they watched the other video twice in succession before being tested on it (nine multiplechoice questions in each case).

Finally, while they were watching the videos, the students answered a few prompts about whether they were

mind wandering or not.

If immediately re-watching a lecture video helps improve learning then the students ought to have performed better at the test that followed the video they watched twice. But this wasn’t the case – they averaged 79 per cent accuracy in the test about the video they watched once, compared with 76 per cent accuracy in the test that followed the video they watched twice (a statistically non-significant difference). The students also mind wandered more during the repeat viewing than when watching either of the lectures for the first time.

One important caveat is that this research was specifically about the effects of immediately re-watching a lecture video (‘massed re-watching’, as the researchers put it). Rewatching a video after a sufficient delay could be more effective (akin to a form of distributed practice), although testing yourself is probably still the more favourable strategy.

‘Re-watching a video lecture does not encourage individuals to build a richer representation of the content,’ the researchers concluded, ‘thus leading to a more passive mode of viewing that puts little demands on attentional control, ultimately leading to more mind wandering’.

[Christian Jarrett]

Getty Images

to tap into either liberal or conservative sentiments, or no such sentiments at all — sometimes presented in traditional, formal syllogistic structure, and sometimes in more everyday language. The participants’ task was simply to determine which syllogisms were valid, and which were invalid.

As prior research and theory on this subject would suggest, in the first study both liberals and conservatives were more likely to wrongly evaluate syllogisms whose conclusions’ clashed with their politics.

The researchers found a similar pattern in their second study, which dealt with arguments presented in more common language, and in a third drawing on a bigger, national American sample — though in that one ‘the effect was somewhat less pronounced’.

Summing things up, the researchers write, ‘participants evaluated the logical structure of entire arguments based on whether they believed in or agreed with the arguments’ conclusions. Although these effects were modest in magnitude, they were persistent: we observed these biases in evaluations of both classically-structured logical syllogisms and conversationally-framed political arguments, across a variety of polarised political issues, and in large Internet and nationally representative samples.’

As the furore over the recent events at the Lincoln Memorial illustrate, this is an interesting finding that is of course reflected constantly, albeit in a different and more nuanced form, in the real world: People routinely dismiss perfectly sound arguments that would cause them cognitive discomfort by threatening their political beliefs, or their sense of themselves as members in good standing within their political tribe, and so on.

As a general rule, the more political and emotional and social ties we have to an idea – the more an idea matters, in a deep way, to our sense of ourselves – the less likely we’ll be to let it go even in the face of strong evidence it is false.

This study can’t contribute to the debate over whether liberals or conservatives are more likely to commit such errors, the researchers write, because the stimuli weren’t constructed to be equally polarising to the two ‘sides’ (though some prior research suggest both tribes are equally vulnerable). It also doesn’t tell us what can be done about this sort of ill-formed reasoning. Though on that front, at least, Gampa, Wojcik, and their colleagues do have some ideas: ‘A takeaway from this research… may be that reasoners should strive to be epistemologically humble. If logical reasoning is to serve as the antidote to the poison of partisan gridlock, we must begin by acknowledging that it does not merely serve our objectivity, but also our biases.’ That is, people should dispense themselves of the notion that when they sit down to reason a problem through carefully, the act of doing so automatically shields them from the effects of political bias. Because bias isn’t a problem endemic to any one political movement: It’s a problem endemic to having a human brain.

More evidence for the special canine-human relationship comes from a study that has found dogs have separate brain areas for processing human and dog faces. (Learning and Behavior)

11/02/2019 16:19

Drawing on patient experience Asking patients to draw the parts of their body affected by illness (and similar drawing challenges) can provide insights into how they think about their illness, the seriousness of their condition, and how well they are likely to cope, among other things. For instance, when people who had experienced a heart attack were asked on repeated occasions to draw their heart, an increase in the size of their drawings over time correlated with more anxiety and a slower return to work.

This example and many others feature in a new paper in Health Psychology Review that has charted the use of patient drawings in peer-reviewed research, finding that the approach has increased in popularity in recent years. From 1970 to 2002, the average number of papers involving patient drawings published per year was 0.5, whereas that increased to an average of 5.9 per year between 2003 and 2016. In all, Elizabeth Broadbent (University of Auckland) and her colleagues found 101 relevant studies covering 27 categories of illness (most often cancer) and involving participants from 29 different

24

Those who drew greater damage on their brain also tended to experience a longer recovery time

psy 0319 p22_25 digest.indd 24

countries. ‘We can utilise patients’ drawings to improve our understanding of the illness experience and inform our clinical interventions,’ they said.

Besides assessing drawing size, other approaches used in this field include identifying themes in drawings; looking for distortions or omissions; studying drawing styles, such as use of colour; and analysing facial expressions.

Other study examples that feature in the review include research with brain injury survivors in which those who drew greater damage on their brain also tended to experience a longer recovery time and a worse quality of life; research with kidney transplant patients in which those who drew their kidneys larger tended to have higher anxiety and lower feelings of control; research comparing the drawings of healthy and sick children, which found sick children’s drawings featured fewer human figures; and research with AIDS-affected children that showed their drawings featured more bed-ridden people and less beauty and more distress.

There has also been drawing-based research involving people diagnosed with mental health conditions – for instance, a paper published in the 1970s found that drawings by people with depression ‘had less colour … and more emptiness and amorphousness than other diagnostic groups.’

While the research in this area is fascinating, it has suffered from a lack of methodological consistency such that Broadbent and her team were unable to conduct a meta-analysis (an analysis of findings combined from multiple prior studies). For example, there was great variation from one study to another in terms of the drawing instructions given to participants.

This methodological variation also makes it difficult to establish the reliability and validity of using drawings as a research tool.

However, Broadbent’s team are optimistic: they recommend future research use drawing instructions that are as explicit as possible, and they believe patient drawings can offer insights missed by traditional health psychology questionnaires, thus helping to improve and personalise health psychology interventions (that are intended to help patients better understand and cope with their illness and treatment). For a flavor of this approach, here is one of their suggestions: ‘One way in which drawings could be used to personalise interventions is for the person delivering the intervention to discuss the patient’s drawing with the patient. Where misconceptions about pathophysiology are evident, these could be pointed out, and patients’ scans or x-rays, or medical test results could be discussed with the aim to correct misconceptions. Where emotions have been drawn, the drawing could be a good starting point for a discussion about how the patient has been emotionally affected by the illness.’

[Christian Jarrett]

11/02/2019 16:19

the psychologist march 2019 digest Getty Images

Although various visual impairments are more common in people diagnosed with schizophrenia, prior research has suggested that blindness may be a protective factor. New evidence to support this has come from the first population-wide study of the phenomenon, involving half a million people in Western Australia. Of the 613 people with peripheral blindness, just 8 had developed a psychotic illness (lower than the population average) and of the 66 with cortical blindness, none had psychosis. (Schizophrenia Research) Researchers are getting closer to understanding the neurological basis of personality with the discovery that people with more advantageous personality traits (for example, higher conscientiousness and lower neuroticism) tend to have greater myelination – that is, fatty insulation – in parts of the brain that evolved more recently, such as prefrontal cortex. The research was based on brain scans of 1000 young men and women. (Journal of Personality)

When our companion orders an unhealthy meal or drink sometimes we copy them to stop them from feel embarrassed, a phenomenon that researchers call ‘altruistic indulgence’. (Social Influence)

Fail to capture the true picture

psy 0319 p22_25 digest.indd 25

Getty Images

Many conventional diagnostic labels applied to children who struggle at school, such as ADHD or dyslexia, may fail to capture the true picture of a child’s problems.

That’s according to a team at the University of Cambridge, which has come up with a radical alternative approach. As reported in Developmental Science, Duncan Astle and his colleagues studied 520 children who’d been referred to a research clinic for problems with attention, memory, language or poor school progress. They gave the children a battery of cognitive and communication assessments, and a parent or teacher completed a behavioural assessment. An artificial neural network then looked for any patterns in the data, grouping kids with distinct similarities into clusters.

The children fell into four distinct groups: one had behavioural problems but ageappropriate cognitive scores; another had ‘broad cognitive deficits’; a third had particularly poor phonological scores, but were also poor at maths; and a final group had distinct working memory difficulties. But these groups bore no relationship to their previous

diagnoses. As the researchers write, ‘children referred primarily for problems with attention, poor learning or memory were equally likely to be assigned to each group’. This finding is worth stressing. The conventional diagnostic labels already given to the

children did not reflect their cognitive profiles identified by the thorough testing in this study: ‘The four groups cut across any traditional diagnostic groupings that existed within the data,’ the researchers wrote.

[Emma Young]

11/02/2019 16:19

Getty Images

Why do we need psychology?

And what does psychology need?

We’re always listening out for ‘Voices in Psychology’ Psychology’.

People who can take often complex ideas and communicate them in a way that will engage and inform our large and diverse audience. Writers with real impact, who are learning to avoid some of the traps of academic writing. They’re the future of our science, of our Society, of our magazine.

But perhaps you need help to find that voice.

Perhaps you’ve got that certain something but you need practice, nurturing. We think we’ve made a real effort with this in recent years, providing opportunities and guidance to many first-time authors. Now we’ve started to develop a more formal structure to this process.

For 2018, we set a question which ran until the end of the year: Why do we need psychology? And what does psychology need? People were asked to address either or both of those questions, in any way they saw fit. While we were not exclusively aiming at students, we were mostly interested in identifying high potential amongst those starting their journey in psychology.

Now the fun begins… we are in discussions with some of these authors about playing a role in developing their ‘Voice in Psychology’ Psychology’, through the provision of advice and opportunities to write more in various contexts.

As this is a trial, we can’t be more specific at this stage. This will be about co-creating a Programme for the future. But we hope this will grow. For 2019, the question we’re asking is ‘What makes a psychologist?’

Deadline 20 September. See our website and follow us on Twitter @psychmag for more details.

34

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 34

Dr Jon Sutton (Managing Editor) Madeleine Pownall (Associate Editor, VIP Programme)

11/02/2019 16:23

the psychologist march 2019 voices in psychology

A critical revolution at work Zoe Sanderson In work psychology, we aim to study human behaviour in organisations and apply the knowledge we gain for beneficial ends. But what are these ends? Whose interests do our efforts serve? What assumptions lie beneath the knowledge we use and create? What better ways of doing research in work psychology could there be?

Questions like these invite us to consider the fundamental nature of what we do, perhaps leading us towards more ‘critical’ ways of thinking and being.

In this context, ‘critical’ does not necessarily mean destructive or negative. Critical approaches – which are many and varied – highlight the limitations of how we usually do work psychology research, seeking to create alternatives that could generate a different future for our field.

The pursuit of social justice and individual freedoms lies at the heart of most critical perspectives, and this often involves examining the patterns of power in which individuals are embedded, in and beyond their workplaces. These ways of thinking also prompt us to consider how we personally relate to our research, promoting self-awareness of the concepts and paradigms we use, and the assumptions they rest upon.

Qualitative methodologies and diverse epistemologies are valued alongside quantitative approaches in critical work. In mainstream academic work psychology, the desirability of some goals – such as the promotion of employee productivity and managerial authority – are often viewed as normal, universal, or even natural.

Critical work identifies and challenges the assumptions that lie beneath these imperatives. We must look inwards at our own values and beliefs, outwards at the impact our research creates, and sideways at the diverse paradigms on hand in our field.

In a more critical future for work psychology, we would expand what gets researched, and how.

Which questions get to the top of our research agendas, and how we address them, are values-laden issues. When we research, we take sides in debates, frame ideas, privilege certain kinds of data, shape possibilities for practice, and benefit or disadvantage groups of people. Creating knowledge is a powerful act that has considerable downstream impacts over which we have some control. If we undertake research that ultimately seeks to enhance employee productivity, we could reasonably foresee that this may be detrimental to certain groups of workers. A more critical research agenda might explore the challenges that the ‘productivity discourse’ poses to disabled workers or those with major non-work responsibilities.

We might formulate a more inclusive conceptualisation of productivity itself. We could draw inspiration from post-structuralist, feminist, or post-modern scholarship in neighbouring academic fields. Expanding the repertoire of ‘legitimate’ work psychology research

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 35

questions and approaches in this way would enable us to make different kinds of knowledge that eventually could benefit more people in the workplace.

This is not a new idea.

Since at least the 1970s, critical psychologists have resisted individualist perspectives, pointed out the impact of the status quo on disadvantaged groups, and held other psychologists accountable for their role in perpetuating these impacts. Many social science disciplines have established critical traditions, several of which overlap with our focus on people in organisations. In our Zoe Sanderson own field, pioneering thinkers ‘I’m a doctoral researcher at the have championed radical ideas University of Bristol. I use qualitative that challenge the status quo. For methods to explore the psychological example, Wendy Holloway’s 1991 responses of employees towards history of work psychology and organisational values. I’ve studied organizational behaviour dispelled several social sciences and political the illusion of objective scientific philosophy, developed policy for enquiry by documenting how public bodies, and run third-sector specific people, problems, and organisations. I’m an activist and a contexts have produced mainstream scholar, and curious about how we knowledge in our field. Gazi Islam can make the future better than the and Michael Zyphur explored present and the past. I bring all those how the core subjects of work identities to my work. I’m on Twitter’ psychology such as job analysis, @ZoeWSanderson or email leadership, and motivation might be zoe.sanderson@bristol.ac.uk. differently imagined in their chapter in 2009’s Critical Psychology: An Introduction. A few months ago, the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology published an article by Matthijs Bal and Edina Dóci on neo-liberal ideology in work psychology, alongside several responses. Unfortunately, these ideas and debates remain the exception rather than the norm.

This revolution is beginning to gather pace: researchers across the continent are voicing their desire for more critical work psychology. I’m working with European colleagues to plan an event on the future of work psychology that will allow us to explore together how our discipline can become more critical, healthy, equal, and relevant (www.futureofwop.com). This initiative mirrors the development of a Manifesto on the Future of Work and Organizational Psychology which encompasses critical aspirations. A substantial list of work psychology researchers from across Europe will sign the Manifesto, including me. Change is happening, and here in the UK we need to keep up.

This isn’t just an exercise in intellectual gymnastics.

Many of us enter the field of work psychology with

11/02/2019 16:23

the intent to do good. In a more critical future, we could bring more of our values and beliefs to our work – provided we do so conscientiously, explicitly, and judiciously, as the proponents of evidence-based practice wisely advise. We would generate more (and more diverse) evidence on issues that concern the people who do not hold most power in organisations, and reappraise the extent to which the building blocks that form the edifice of today’s work psychology are

still fit for our purposes. Critical approaches could offer a new sense of why our work matters in a society that is increasingly concerned with values-based issues of equality, sustainability, and freedom.

Work psychology won’t save the world, but we can individually make changes that accumulate to create a better impact in the future than we’ve made in the past.

Our discipline is overdue for a critical revolution: will we make it happen?

It’s the part that makes us all human Gunjan Sharma

36

I work as a junior doctor in a hospital, and I am constantly aware of the need for psychology. When a young person walks into A&E with self-harm cuts down their arm, there is a clear psychological need.

It is more difficult to appreciate the emotional side and even more so to offer psychological support when someone comes to hospital for a physical problem; a heart attack that has torn apart a person’s selfconfidence or a twenty-year battle with Diabetes filled with constant anxiety and the dread of being perceived as a outsider. We as medical doctors are all too ready to treat the pathophysiology. We stack our offices with the British National Formulary and research papers citing the latest pharmacological breakthroughs.

What we leave to one side are the aspects of a person’s suffering that we feel we have no part to play in; the part that makes us all human.

There is a greater need to appreciate the psychological aspects of physical health. While this is already done in certain areas of healthcare such as chronic illness and palliative care, it is not part of our day-to-day role as physicians.

There are barriers – the time available on a quick ward round being just one of them – but holistic care is the cornerstone of modern medicine.

Medicine is becoming more Gunjan Sharma ‘I am a junior doctor working in Devon. technological with every passing minute. We wrap our patients in I have an interest in writing and wires, inserting needles into every psychology, and have aspirations of pore in an attempt to nourish a combining both of these interests.

My aim is to become a Psychiatrist and body ravaged by disease. Everyday we note the minute changes in heart continue my interest in writing nonrate and blood pressure, staring at fiction about topics that interest me, the X-rays as we view the interior such as global mental health, mental illness and the criminal justice system, of our patients’ bodies. Yet it is the interior of their minds that we and social injustice and mental health. are yet to fully appreciate. Our I’m looking to stimulate a discussion ten-minute ward rounds offer little and exchange ideas.’

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 36

incentive to sit down and listen to our patients’ fears and anxieties. Our prescriptive proformas offer little opportunity to appreciate the decades of isolation and bereavement, the fear of a loss of one’s identity and independence.

I do not speak here of Psychiatry or of the medical diagnosis of mental disorders. I am talking about the psychological implications of being a patient and the lack of care we attribute to these. We must not forget that people are at their most vulnerable when they are unwell. Psychology is needed not just for medicine but for medics as a profession; it allows us to step out of our tunnel of physiology and pathology and step into the world of our patient.

One particular study, the ongoing ‘Diabetes 360’ survey, highlights this need very well. Nearly half of healthcare professionals reported that their ability to care for their patients lay in their ability to understand their patients’ perspectives and adequately manage their patients’ emotional issues alongside their physical ones. This is of particular importance when one compared with the results from the patients; 30 per cent of patients felt their Diabetes was taking up a significant amount of their mental and physical energy, with 32 per cent feeling overwhelmed as a result of their Diabetes.

We know that physical and psychological health are closely linked. This can be illustrated with something as simple as a cold. Think back to when you were tied up in bed with a dribbling nose, a barking cough and a stone-cold headache. It was not just the awful pains down your neck and fatigue of the muscles that felt so horrible; it was the fact that you felt useless as a partner, guilty for not being able to get to work, frustrated at the helplessness to which you were bound, the anxiety of whether you would still be able to submit that paper in time. Being ill is more than just an increase in white cells in our bloodstreams or an imbalance of our vital signs; it is something that happens to a person as a whole, and it is this entirety that physicians need to appreciate and manage.

Things are changing. More focus is being placed on the psychological sphere of healthcare in medical

11/02/2019 16:23

the psychologist march 2019 voices in psychology Getty Images

education. We are treating the medical doctor as one who covers the patient as a whole (see, for example, Cordingley and colleagues’ 2015 article ‘What Psychology do medical students need to know?’).

But there is a long way to go. Ward rounds are not conducive to emotional support when the patient in the next bed can hear the entire conversation; ten-minute appointments do not always get to the heart of the problem. But an appreciation that patients present not only with physical symptoms but psychological burdens is a strong place to start.

Our ten-minute ward rounds offer little incentive to sit down and listen to our patients’ fears and anxieties

Using psychology to think about psychology Beth Carrington All of I sudden I got it. I understood it all.

The embarrassment. The shame. The stigma.

That is, once I left my ivory tower of perceived knowledge and sat one-to-one in a therapist’s office, with the chairs placed ‘just so’. All that was missing was the box of tissues. I thought working in mental health would make me immune to mental health difficulties; boy, was I wrong. Working in mental health in no way makes me immune to anything.

Looking back, it was a terrifying experience that I now wouldn’t change for the world; I was in the shoes of a service user. I saw everything as a user of mental health services for the very first time and it changed my whole perspective. At first I did feel embarrassed and awkward, especially when the trainee CBT therapist asked if it was ok for the sessions to be recorded, ‘for clinical supervision and training purposes’. I couldn’t say no… I was in similar shoes myself, bringing every experience to my own supervision to aid my enhancement and learning. But I panicked: what if other students on her course were to watch these videos, and I later worked with these people in the very same services?

It took me a little while to understand that

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 37

if I expect myself to one day become a clinical psychologist and help people who are experiencing mental health difficulties, I need to be able to reflect on myself and my own struggles. I feel grateful that I now have an insight into what it actually feels like when you are on the other side of the table, with a person asking you potentially intrusive questions and asking you to reflect upon your thoughts and feelings – a very difficult task! As I see it, this can only make me a better psychologist in the future. I no longer feel as removed as perhaps I once did. The ‘us’ and ‘them’ ideology, albeit most likely an unconscious power in our minds, has been obliterated.

Psychology needs a kick up the ‘you know what’ to end stigma, not just amongst society, but within the profession itself. What could be more destigmatising than therapists seeking their own therapy? I acknowledge the concerns brought up in Research Digest coverage surrounding compulsory therapy for psychotherapists: the author Christian Jarrett discusses the fact that personal therapy put a strain on some trainees, which consequently affected their personal relationships. However I can’t help but applaud the trainees who have made it through this

11/02/2019 16:23

Beth Carrington ‘I graduated with a merit from the MSc Development, Disorders and Clinical Practice from the University of York in 2016 (I graduated with a First Class BSc in Psychology and Child Development in 2014) and I am currently working as an Assistant Psychologist within the NHS. I have learnt a lot from my early experiences of clinical psychology.

Now that I believe I have developed my own identity in the world of clinical psychology, I am confident to share my reflections and ideas.

I am looking for opportunities to share my experiences as somebody who is quite new to the professional world of psychology, in order to perhaps encourage a new generation of psychologists to realise that this profession is not a static one and we can embrace change. A line from the 2015 ‘Words and sorcery’ article in The Psychologist comes to mind; ‘above all consider your audience and try to write in smaller words for bigger circles’. This really inspired me to take a leap and go for a submission in The Psychologist, as it’s a slightly bigger audience than who usually hears my moaning – my rabbit and my partner.’

process and who may now possess the self-knowledge and willingness to reflect on what they can bring to that relationship.

Some clinical psychology courses provide trainees with funding for personal therapy, whilst many do not. Why is there such little consensus among the profession? Of course we need to acknowledge ethical considerations such as how to maintain professional boundaries. However, we also need to consider whether certain social defences may be at play. Take the humble psychology office, for example. In many inpatient settings they are separate from service users, sometimes in completely separate buildings. Who are these social defences really for? Do they perpetuate a stigmatising view of ‘them’ and ‘us’?

Even though I am ‘new to the game’ I have already witnessed some very difficult situations and unfortunately I have witnessed stigma within the profession. I was also guilty of this for feeling such ambivalence towards my own therapy. However if we state that we are in a non-stigmatising profession, this should not just be a label on the tin. Perhaps psychology needs a culture change, to allow itself to think of the uncomfortable. Instead of answering curiosities with ‘that’s just the way it’s always been’, let’s challenge that and ask why.

Why do we need psychology? Because psychology is for every single person, whether that’s people with enduring and complex mental health difficulties, people experiencing mild anxiety, the professional that is seemingly ok or the person you get the bus to work with every morning. Psychology is an incredible profession that listens to you and tries to understand with you. We use psychology every day to help understand the individual, so why not use psychology as a tool to think about psychology itself?

Respected and ridiculed Ciara Wild

38

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 38

‘What does Psychology need? And why do we need psychology?’ These questions have been on a loop in my mind ever since I saw the VIP programe advertised in The Psychologist. I felt compelled to write, but was stuck on how best to frame my answer. Then, as I read New Scientist over a cup of tea, it struck me.

A small entry in the magazine began: ‘To a curmudgeon, Psychology is the art – not science – of stating the bleeding obvious. Either that, or of jumping to false conclusions.’ Reading a little further in the magazine, I found psychological research being cited to help describe an issue and relevant treatments. A glance around the public sphere and it’s not hard to identify less than complimentary attitudes towards our field and yet there are calls for a better ‘psychological’ understanding of modern society with its terrorism, crime, mental health, autism, learning disabilities,

politics, education and trauma. Somehow, as psychologists, we tend to polarise opinion and achieve what physicists consider impossible; being two states at once, both respected and ridiculed at the same time.

As a psychologist I can think of so many reasons why our field is vital to the world; we are an everevolving society and we need psychologists to help us understand the thoughts and feelings evoked by new technologies, social and political changes and new discoveries that impact all earth’s inhabitants, humans, plants and animals alike. We need psychology to develop new treatments and interventions to meet new needs and also to continue to validate current treatments; to influence policy and budgeting regarding treatments and interventions and to make the case for treatments such as talking therapies, driving this expansion so that people can access good

11/02/2019 16:23

the psychologist march 2019 voices in psychology

Perhaps we need to look at what research actually makes it into the media and how it is interpreted by the public, and distinguish the science from media-friendly pseudopsychology

quality support when they need it and not some six months or so down the line.

But, what does psychology need? It would be presumptuous of me to think that I have the answer, but I certainly have some questions.

We are not considered a science by some academics, so why aren’t we doing more to drive reform around replication: encouraging students to replicate, or pulling null findings out of the file drawer? Why, out of all the sciences, do we not have a general interest magazine that tells the public about the work taking place in our field? There are many interesting discoveries and theories and much work being done by universities, labs and services all over the country. Perhaps psychology needs to better publicise itself as a science.

While many students study psychology at A-level and University, relatively few complete their training to become Chartered or registered. Why? Psychology has taken huge strides foward over the years, so why are we still focusing A-level psychology on studies from over half a century ago, and not on current issues and more recent studies? Psychology needs to modernise.

Ever-more frequently the letters pages of The Psychologist publish complaints about the treatment of trainees, and criticise students and assistants for having to work for low wages or take voluntary positions. Do we need to be more transparent about the time, effort and training the pathway to becoming a registered psychologist requires? Do we need to demonstrate

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 39

the value of assistant psychologists and trainees and recognise the work they have completed to get to that stage? By improving their pay and conditions we might also encourage colleagues in other disciplines to recognise the rigorous training we complete and encourage them to better value our trainees and assistants. In this way our psychological expertise could be far more valued overall. Perhaps what psychology needs is for us to better value ourselves, our work and each other’s work.

Some think we state the obvious, regard us as ‘quacks’ and pseudo scientists. We clearly need to be more transparent about how we generate our theories and formulations. Psychology belongs to all humans, not just to a few after all. Perhaps we need to provide clearer demonstrations of how, in psychology, the obvious is not always the actual outcome.

Perhaps we need to better present ourselves in the media to escape the usual ‘you’re not reading my mind are you?’ conversations with the uninformed. Perhaps we need to look at what research actually makes it into the media and how it is interpreted by the public, and distinguish the science from mediafriendly pseudo-psychology. Perhaps psychology needs to better educate Ciara Wild the world on what psychology ‘I am a Chartered Forensic actually is, what psychologists Psychologist, HCPC Registered, are and why what we do is as currently working for HMPPS and I interesting and as valuable as the am a Registered Scientist with the other sciences.

British Science Council. I am also Psychology, perhaps uniquely an avid reader and budding writer among the sciences, is as much and have recently finished my blog defined by the human mind as it on my experiences of the Stage attempts to define and understand 2 Forensic Psychology Training the mind. It is only to be expected, (forensicpsychtrainees.blogspot.com). then, that society needs psychology I am really interested in expanding and psychology needs society my writing skill beyond research to support it: the relationship papers and making the outcomes of is symbiotic. We need to come psychological research more accessible together as scientists to improve the to the general public. Whilst I was rigour and validity of our research qualifying, I was tutoring A-level while respecting and valuing each Psychology and always wondered other’s work and training. We how all the intrigue and excitement should improve our public relations, about learning psychology from the communicate why psychology start seemed to wither by the end of is important and get people on the A-levels. I was astounded that the board by modernising how we syllabus seemed to have not changed teach psychology and how we train in over 15 years since I had last done those who wish to follow in our it! But I was able to talk to the students footsteps. Together, we need to find about new and exciting findings and a way to detach ourselves from our research; things that were relevant poor image and start a new phase to circumstances now. It is this of modern, relevant psychology, communication that I wish to continue transparent and accessible to all. and improve upon through writing.’

11/02/2019 16:23

‘We must maintain our own voice in everything we do’ Becky Scott

40

Any project in psychology, regardless of field or allegiance, is underpinned by curiousity and passion; a question we want to answer, an event or phenomena that intrigues or touches us, or a part of ourselves that we can vicariously explore alongside others, so as to learn more about the world around us. Ultimately in doing psychology, we begin a journey towards engaging with the human psyche, whether we explore the function of the brain or the lived experience of others.

In beginning this journey psychology equips us with necessary skills to help us empathise, to improve our personal relationships, to cope with difficult circumstances and to guide us in the workplace. Psychology also holds us accountable to what we are doing in practice. It encourages and reminds us to be reflexive and consider what we represent when we call ourselves psychologists and how we impact others. We need psychology as a tool to help us better ourselves personally, professionally and in practice.

Similarly, psychology can be applied to help others, whether in adult mental health services, in academia, the classroom and beyond. The sheer breadth of ways Becky Scott in which psychology can be used to ‘I am currently undertaking a PhD at the University of Huddersfield exploring empower others is a demonstration of the value of psychology to society media representations of people with far beyond the confines of the mental health difficulties who claim discipline. benefits. I also work with service user In beginning a career in advocacy groups to explore how they psychology, criticism is regularly make sense of assumptions about cited as one of the most difficult benefit claiming in politics and the media. Like any PhD, it comes with a lot barriers to overcome. With the of my own baggage, frustration with the plethora of perspectives and approaches in the field, we can’t way people are being oppressed, my own experiences of contesting disability hide from criticism – it is pervasive and persistent. The beauty and navigating the mental health of exploring the discipline of system. I have always found academia psychology is that we must always a little odd and difficult to navigate engage with this, not only to be – I still do. A career in academia is successful in our own careers, but to something I never anticipated but accurately and respectfully represent now aspire to. When I began my PhD and empower the voices of others.

I certainly didn’t think the musings of The material value in these a straight-talking Northerner would brisk yet frequent encounters is be of interest to anyone, so I tried to that the very skills we learn and use be an academic instead and my ideas to defend from criticism are used and insights became entangled and to then create critique, whether obscured. I have come to learn that maintaining our own voices may just be within psychology or wider society.

We’re taught the value of debate, the thing that keeps us grounded.’ the importance of engaging with Becky.Scott@hud.ac.uk

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 40

Psychology needs to work with the people it works for

real social problems, and the necessity of always asking difficult questions.

What does psychology need? Psychology needs to work with the people it works for, to ensure that we always strive for real-world impact. Psychology needs to be mindful that there are spaces for impact beyond the Research Excellence Framework. We are skilled in our ability to engage with social inequality by applying what we learn, and to enact real change. Engaging with the lives and experiences of the people who take part in our research is equally as important as going away and writing our findings up for the lofty heights of academia. Amidst the rat race and prevailing sense of competition, it can be easy to lose sight of this.

We mustn’t get bogged down in ‘academese’: we should work with the media to disseminate our work to the people that matter. We must work with the political system and shout our findings from the rooftops from the platform of responsibility and experience it grants us. If it does not, then it is our responsibility to create these spaces for resistance.

We must always remember that what we say and do is not limited to the confines of academia, extravagant conference venues and the constant pursuit for publication in high-impact journals. It’s done for the good of others too. We must always maintain our own voice in everything we do, loaded with our thoughts, feelings and experiences, both positive and negative. It is this which humanises the work we produce and in turn communicates both empathy and integrity.

Yes, this is a bold endeavour for postgraduate and early career psychologists, who may not have the job security, profile or platform to begin shaping the lives of communities for the better. But there is always room for psychology to change, alongside the academy, so that what we do is always driven by our Impact on others.

11/02/2019 16:23

the psychologist march 2019 voices in psychology

Beth Clare McManus Psychology needs be more creative in how it builds its credibility as a science and a move away from the perception of psychologists as some less pantomime version of Mystic Meg haphazardly stating the obvious whilst gazing into a glowing crystal ball.

It’s easy to engage people with stories and colour and art and wonder. Unfortunately for psychology, these are not the traditional tools of the ‘people’ scientist, already far removed from the theatre of the lab with its bunsen burners and test tubes billowing with impossibly coloured smoke. People are fascinating and contradictory and perplexing – and here lies the power of the subject.

Psychologists need to reinvent the ways in which we engage others with our work, avoiding both the Beth Clare McManus ‘I have recently graduated from Alliance Manchester Business School with an MSc Organisational Psychology following my BSc Psychology and Human Resource Management, marking a departure from my early career in retail management. Following a summer spent teaching strangers survival skills in an abandoned office building as part of a production called ‘Party Skills for the End of the World’, I have just spent the last year working in staff engagement and OD within the NHS. I am now coming to my terrifying but exciting first steps on my own path, in whatever format that might take.

I am really interested in emotion, wellbeing and creativity at work and I am currently working with illustration and storytelling to explore these themes. I hadn’t picked up a pencil since leaving school 16 years ago but I discovered illustration as a means of communication whilst procrastinating the night before my dissertation deadline.

Something that started out for me as an individual reflective practice has resonated with friends and strangers alike.

Through my work I have connected with so many individuals and opportunities and I believe that this is my tool to use in combination with my writing to communicate my passion for psychology and the difference it can make. I am particularly interested in the experience of young people at work and I am a member of the Division of Occupational Psychology’s ‘Youth Employment’ working group. I think that using storytelling and creativity provides an innovative way to engage young people with what can be viewed as an overly academic subject.

My recent work has included partnering with Manchester International Festival to document their creative community events and a project with The British Council designing interactive, illustrated placemats for a series of ‘Global Cities’ events exploring how people connect with their cities.

I passionately believe that building up communities and establishing opportunities for collaboration is the future of psychology, to push the boundaries of traditional research but also as a way to diversify our impact as people scientists.’

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 41

Beth Clare McManus

The magic of our insight

patronising tendency to ‘dumb down’ data for those outside our field and the false assumption that our fellow scientists will engage with pages of statistics.

Proof of our work is essential to maintain credibility, but we can deliver that information through academic literature for those curious enough to seek it out.

In our regular dialogue, it alienates and distances people from psychology and builds on the basic mistrust of anyone dealing in minds and brains.

It may feel contradictory to suggest that borrowing methodology and delivery ideas from areas like design thinking and the arts will lead to more credibility for psychology as a science. Yet I believe this is where we can really build the impact of the subject by connecting our audience – intended or accidental – with the magic of our insight.

Psychologists need to be accessible and inclusive to both our peers and the layperson. There’s a real danger that psychology itself becomes elusive and obscure to others even within our own community.

In my experience, psychologists can be their own worst enemies in terms of alienating people from their work. We compromise the perception of potential impact and value by remaining aloof, with complicated titles and accolades that the majority of people simply don’t understand. In my chosen field of Occupational Psychology there is disagreement over what we should call ourselves when we don’t have chartered status – a work psychologist? Business psychologist? If we can’t decide, how can we even begin to communicate our worth meaningfully to those who we wish to collaborate with?

I came to psychology through a fascination of people and behaviour, and found that I had to stumble my way through the same old provocative studies, a smokescreen across the real psychologist. I sought, clumsily, to express my understanding of the subject through academic writing. It felt creatively stunting, and needlessly, repetitively academic. I said the same thing five times: not very much.

Although there are pockets of inclusive, supportive and easily-accessible information out there, you have to wade through the mire to find it. Don’t get me wrong, real life interaction seems no better. At events, information is shared through PowerPoint, post-its and posters. Conversations are a rushed addendum at the

11/02/2019 16:23

Beth Clare McManus

42

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 42

Getty Images

end of the event, whilst everyone necks a free glass of wine and dashes for the train home, promising to be in touch. So often, the focus is on the ‘how’ and the potential for kudos and not the ‘why’ when planning knowledge-sharing events and opportunities. We are missing connections and thought-provoking insights due to something as boring as an overstuffed agenda that doesn’t allow us time to breathe.

In terms of public perception of psychology’s impact, we may present ourselves as the ‘experts’ but we rely on people for our research and to generate our findings. How much more insight could be gleaned if people understood the why of our fascination in their behaviour, perhaps then feeling able to engage in dialogue which provides additional insight into their own ‘why’. Surely conversation and debate is how many psychologists establish what it is that piques their interest in the first place? It currently feels that psychologists all too often slip into top-down observation like a child with its first bug-catching kit.

We appear rather bored with the predictability of our subject’s behaviour, despite the fact that our entire hypothesis often relies on that very same predictability.

If psychology is to thrive in this strange, new, increasingly digital world, we have to build a community that champions community as much as it values insight. Truly supporting each other to enable our contribution to have a wider reach goes way beyond a ‘like’ or a share – engaging not just psychologists but interested parties in conversations about the work they are doing, finding innovative ways to turn dialogue into action through collaboration or seeking out ways to swap skills and creativity.

There is space for us all out there. If we clasp our collective hands together to give someone a peg up over the wall rather than all struggling to climb our individual ropes, we can launch psychology further into the unknown, and that’s incredibly exciting.

Creatives across Instagram brandish ‘community over competition’ banners and hashtags on a daily basis – perhaps they’re onto something.

Sustainable development – how do you contribute?

Daniella Watson Imagine: You are ‘Aashi’, a 19-year-old Indian girl from a rural desert village called Kardala. Having been married with a dowry since the age of 8, you become pregnant with your first child at 19. However, there is currently no midwife in your village, and the hospital is two-hour drive away, if you get access to a vehicle to make the journey. A group of volunteers enter the village and help to campaign for a village midwife.

After petitions are signed by the community, the local government assigns an Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) to your village. You feel hopeful for a safe and healthy birth. However, after barely a month of the ANM being appointed, she is signed off on her own maternity leave. On paper, to the officials, there is a functioning ANM in the village, but realistically to you, your baby and your community a midwife is absent again. Who will deliver your child? Or, ironically, who will deliver the midwife’s baby?

I witnessed this scenario first hand when I was volunteering in India. As a mere MSc Health Psychologist, I recognised multiple ways psychology could positively impact the community including facilitating stakeholder meetings, engaging with the needs of village people, and capacity building.

Within the placement we also reflected on how our experiences could link to the 17 sustainable development goals (SDG) set by the United Nations (2015), and I again recognised the role/duty that psychologists have in reaching these goals. It was through this experience (not my University education) that I linked Global issues in Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMIC) with Psychology.

Seems simple? Unfortunately Psychology in Global health has barriers. As many of you may relate, Psychology is often anchored by the title of ‘soft science’, and this weighs heavier when working alongside clinical professionals within Global Health.

I’ve heard from psychologists attending workshops in

11/02/2019 16:23

the psychologist march 2019 voices in psychology

sub-Saharan Africa eluding that LMIC were not ready for Health Psychology as they still need to develop the basics such as infrastructure, medicines and skilled health workers. This concurs with commentary from Health Psychologists working in LMIC: Lucy ByrneDavis and colleagues reported that health psychologists are not given opportunity to use their specific skills and knowledge when attempting to volunteer, consult and research internationally.

Another barrier those authors reported challenges the way psychologists measure and record impact. The traditional westernised psychology research methods, such as questionnaire Likert scales, are not functional in LMIC, leading to data lacking in reliability and validity. With conventional research methods irrelevant in LMIC, psychologists are inspired to think outside the box and adapt to more appropriate methods to measure and implement interventions. Research in LMIC has potential to evolve psychology research methods, and revamp the way we record and conduct

Daniella Watson ‘After completing MSc Health Psychology, I then volunteered as a Team Leader for VSO ICS in rural India, focusing on health, education and government schemes. Following this, I volunteered for humanitarian response work with the charity All Hands and Hearts, after the 2017 Caribbean hurricanes Maria and Irma. These experiences gave me my first insight into the variety of global successes and challenges. This has led me to pursue a PhD in Maternal and child nutrition health interventions in sub Saharan Africa, guided by each country’s community views, policies with an economic stance.

Alongside the PhD, I am aiming to complete my Health Psychology stage 2 (independent route). My aspiration is to become a Global Health Psychologist, with the goal to give local people in LMIC a voice in health decisions, which are economically and politically realistic. In this process, I would like to learn from other psychologists from all disciplines, to share research, experiences and mainly learn how to communicate about Global Health Psychology.’

psy 0319 p34_43 vip.indd 43

behaviour change research, interventions, teaching and leadership. I believe that Psychologist have much to unlock and learn from LMIC. To rethink how we conduct research for global psychologists, let us learn from individuals like Aashi, and communities like Kardala.

Fortunately behaviour change is increasingly being recognised as crucial to global health development.

In his Global Health Science and Practice paper from 2013, Jim Shelton recognised from the Global Burden of Disease report of sub-Saharan Africa that the top 20 high risk diseases are influenced by behaviour, and outlined six domains of behaviour change: Freestanding, personal or lifestyle behaviours; Careseeking behaviour or demand; Client adherence and collaboration; Provider behaviour; Pro-social and anti-social behaviour; and Policy and priority setting.

This was a great step for global health to recognise the role of behaviour change. Similarly, Joseph Daniels’ team, in their 2014 paper on ‘training tomorrow’s global health leaders’, showed how they successfully used the behaviour change model as a training block. Psychology has a crucial role in implementing behaviour change techniques as solution for the global issues, and addressing the 17 sustainable development goals by 2030 (United Nations, 2015).

Thinking towards the future of our discipline, climate change has been called the biggest global health threat of the 21st century, and LMIC will be affected the worst although they contribute the least.

How do psychologists fit into this? The 2015 Lancet commission highlighted 10 recommendations to reduce the effect of climate change on health, such as: investing in research; strengthening healthcare systems in LMIC; promote healthy lifestyles; protect against health threats, and empowering health professionals.

These recommendations seem to map onto psychologist’s remit of skills, knowledge and interests.

More recently, the UK Medical Research Council announced £2m funding towards global mental health stigma. It seems that funding bodies, official guidance and research councils are starting to look towards behavioural techniques and research for solutions to the global challenges. Psychologists have the skills to impact behaviour from an individual up to societal levels.

As a fresh voice – new to psychology, to global health, and especially the combination together – I would value the opportunity to hear from other psychologist experiences working in LMIC. I believe that Psychology is a discipline to look to for innovative solutions to meet the sustainable development goals, and in return the discipline of psychology itself can evolve through cross-cultural research. Even simple low-cost interventions and workshops from Psychologists could benefit communities like Kardala, allowing individuals like Aashi to increase their ‘good health and wellbeing’ (Sustainable Development Goal 3). How does your role in psychology contribute towards the sustainable development goals?

11/02/2019 16:23

researchdigest_Layout 1 01/12/2016 16:36 Page 1

Research. Digested.

Free.

Now including PODCAST and APP

www.bps.org.uk/digest ‘Easy to access and free, and a mine of useful information for my work: what more could I want? I only wish I’d found this years ago!’

Dr Jennifer Wild, Consultant Clinical Psychologist & Senior Lecturer, Institute of Psychiatry ‘The selection of papers suits my eclectic mind perfectly, and the quality and clarity of the synopses is uniformly excellent.’

Professor Guy Claxton, University of Bristol 26

psy 0319 p26_27 ads.indd 26

11/02/2019 16:20

HARROGATE 2019

The British Psychological Society’s Annual Conference Harrogate Convention Centre, 1–2 May

The Psychological Impact of Inequality Speakers Sir Mark Walport, UK Research and Innovation Professor Kate Pickett, University of York Professor Richard Wilkinson, University of Nottingham Medical School Registration now open – book early to qualify for discounted rates.

Follow us @BPSConferences using #bpsconf.

Credit: Catherine Aldred, www.catherinealdred.co.uk Watermark Gallery, www.watermarkgallery.co.uk

www.bps.org.uk/ac2019

psy 0319 p44_45 ads.indd 45

11/02/2019 16:24

Getty Images

46

psy 0319 p46_49 ferguson.indd 46

11/02/2019 16:26

the psychologist march 2019 rated

Embrace the unknown Chris Ferguson washes his hands of ‘science laundering’: cleaning up messy data for public consumption

C

satisfactory and easier to digest in the short-term, onsider the basic premise ‘Does X but they are fundamentally deceitful, and they cast cause Y?’ It’s at the root of almost psychology as a dishonest science. any question of interest to the Accusations of science laundering have been general public or policy makers. levelled at professional guilds such as the American Does cognitive-behavioural therapy Psychological Association (APA) for many years treat PTSD? Does the TV show 13 Reasons Why cause suicide in teens? (Ferguson, 2015; O’Donohue & Dyslin, 1996). The formula appears to be to take an issue of great interest Can implicit racism be tested for, to the general public or policy makers and boil it and does training reduce racism in society? Generally down to simplistic truisms using science language. speaking, people outside of psychological science (and In most cases, these quasi-scientific truisms are arguably many people within it) want the answer to either politically palatable for the such simple questions. And it is members of the organisation, which often in the interest of professional the illusion that social guilds – the advocacy organisations “Individual studies can be creates science tends to support liberal that represent psychology and other irresponsibly promoted causes (Redding, 2001), or appear sciences – to give simple answers. to make psychological science The result is a communication of by press release, or indispensable to a policy decision quasi-scientific nostrums that are, entire research fields when, in fact, it is not. at best, partially true and, at worst, summarised in policy My own field of video game absolute rubbish. violence presents a case study in Science laundering is the statements in ways this phenomenon. Twice, in 2004 washing away of inconvenient data, that cherry-pick data and 2013, the APA convened a methodological weaknesses, failed to support a particular taskforce to study the issue. Both replications, weak effect sizes, and were composed of a majority of between-study inconsistencies. The narrative” individuals with strong, public, cleaned-up results of a research anti-game views, unbalanced by field are then presented as more sceptical voices (Copenhaver & solid, consistent and generalisable Ferguson, in press). This was particularly puzzling to real-world concerns than they are. Individual given that no fewer than 230 scholars had written to studies can be irresponsibly promoted by press the APA expressing their concerns about the quality release, or entire research fields summarised in policy of their public stances on this issue (Consortium statements in ways that cherry-pick data to support a of Scholars, 2013). It’s hard to shake the sense that particular narrative. Such promotions are undoubtedly

psy 0319 p46_49 ferguson.indd 47

11/02/2019 16:26

48

‘science by committee’ may be an ineffective way to reach objective conclusions, and that a taskforce report has little to do with the true state of a science; in this case, an area that has suffered a series of retractions, corrections, failed replications (e.g.

Przybylski et al., 2014), failed re-analyses and null results using preregistered designs (e.g. McCarthy et al., 2016). Video game science was repudiated by the US Supreme Court in the 2011 case Brown v. EMA, and some scholars have expressed the view that the APA’s continued public stance on this particular issue has damaged the credibility of psychological science in the eyes of Key sources the courts (Hall et al., 2011).

Why do this? Why not change course and release honest Copenhaver, A. & Ferguson, C.J. (in statements for research fields press). Selling violent video game that are messy, inconsistent, solutions: A look inside the APA’s internal notes leading to the creation of have systematic methodological the APA’s 2005 resolution on violence weaknesses or that may be in video games and interactive media. outright unreproducible? Incentive International Journal of Law and structures. Individual scholars Psychiatry. are likely seduced by their own Ferguson, C.J. (2015). ‘Everybody knows hypotheses for a multitude of psychology is not a real science’: Public perceptions of psychology and how reasons, both good and bad. Big we can improve our relationship with claims get grants, headlines, book policymakers, the scientific community, sales and personal prestige. I note and the general public. American this not to imply wrongdoing, but to Psychologist, 70, 527–542. acknowledge we are all human and Fiske, S. (2016). Mob rule or wisdom respond to incentives. of crowds [Draft of article for APS Observer]. Available at http://datacolada.

These incentive structures have org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ been well documented in science Fiske-presidential-guest-column_APSmore widely, and psychology Observer_copy-edited.pdf specifically, in recent years.

Gilbert, D.T., King, G., Pettigrew, Unfortunately, the public remains S. & Wilson, T.D. (2016). Comment largely unaware of such debates, and on ‘Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science’. Science, ill-equipped to critically evaluate 351(6277), 1037. research. As one recent example, Nosek, B.A., Ebersole, C.R., DeHaven, Jean Twenge and colleagues (2018) A.C. & Mellor, D.T. (2018). The released a study, covered widely preregistration revolution. Proceedings in the press, linking screen use to of the National Academy of Sciences of youth suicides. However, another the United States of America, 115(11), 2600–2606. scholar with access to the same Open Science Collaboration (2015). dataset noted in an interview that Estimating the reproducibility of the magnitude of effect is about psychological science. Science, the same as for eating potatoes 349(6251), 1–8. on suicide (see Gonzalez, 2018: Nelson, L.D., Simmons, J. & effect sizes ranged from r = .01 to Simonsohn, U. (2018). Psychology’s renaissance. Annual Review of .11 depending on outcome). Such Psychology, 69, 511–534. correlations are likely within Meehl’s Simmons, J.P., Nelson, L.D. & ‘crud factor’ for psychological Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive science, wherein everything tends to psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in correlate with everything else, to a data collection and analysis allows small but meaningless degree. presenting anything as significant.

Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366.

In some cases, the Weir, K. (2014). Translating meaningfulness of a hypothesis (such psychological science. APA Monitor, as saving children from suicide) 45(9), 32. Available at www.apa.org/ can seem critical, even if the effects monitor/2014/10/translating-science. are trivial. And I can understand aspx why professional guilds, who can

psy 0319 p46_49 ferguson.indd 48

be considered to function as businesses for whom psychology is a product they must market, are driven to ‘get it out there’. Perhaps they lament the perception of psychology as a ‘soft’ science (e.g. Breckler, 2005).

Psychologists are often pushed to be more assertive in marketing or branding psychology (e.g. Bray, 2009; Weir, 2014, although also see Koocher, 2006 for a different approach), and professional bodies actively advocate for psychological science (Bersoff, 2013). This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but such calls may inadvertently communicate that accuracy is of secondary importance. For instance, Weir (2014) quoted one scholar as indicating that ‘it’s more important to put the science out there, even if a news story misses some of the subtleties’.

To be clear, I am not suggesting anything remotely like bad faith: merely that the understandable zeal to promote psychological science may have backfired, insofar as promotional efforts often overlook psychology’s weaknesses.

The issue of poor communication can spill over into the clinical realm. For instance, a recent treatment guideline for post-traumatic stress disorder focused on recommending cognitive-behavioural therapy (APA, 2017). These recommendations were controversial with practitioners from other modalities, perhaps not surprisingly. A 2018 meta-analysis led by Joseph Carpenter found fairly modest results for CBT with PTSD (better results were found for other anxiety disorders), which raises the possibility that the clinical guidelines may be overselling its value.

Some readers may be thinking, ‘Isn’t it better to attempt to apply psychology to important societal issues even if the evidence available falls short of being conclusive? How certain do we really need to be before we stop fretting about overselling the value of our science?’ I take an unapologetically hard line on this: honesty must be a fundamental facet of scientific communication. We cannot and should not sweep under the rug inconvenient data, methodological weaknesses or tiny effect sizes for the sake of an appealing narrative, no matter how heartfelt that narrative may be. To do so simply isn’t scientific and, inevitably, will do more harm than good to our field.

In some cases, a ‘messy’ policy statement can still have important policy implications. They’re woefully difficult to find among professional guilds, but government reviews are sometimes more honest. For instance, a 2010 review of violent video game research correctly identified conclusions as inconsistent and limited by methodological flaws (Australian Government, Attorney General’s Department, 2010).

Despite the messiness, this review paved the way for Australia to rate more violent games, which previously had been effectively censored, unavailable even to adults.

Ultimately, we should be looking to educate the public about data. People are complex; behaviour is messy. Often psychological science doesn’t have the answer, and we should be comfortable

11/02/2019 16:26

the psychologist march 2019 rated

2000s, and observations became generalised across psychological science soon after (e.g. Simmons et al., 2011). Way back in 1999, Wilkinson and the Task Force on Statistical Inference highlighted the importance of interpretation of effect sizes. Yet most articles ignored this suggestion, and those with a response that is murky, Chris Ferguson is Professor of that reported effect sizes happily convoluted, difficult to parse, Psychology at Stetson University defended the most trivial of effects controversial, non-politically cjfergus@stetson.edu so long as p = .05 had been reached, correct or simply ‘We don’t know’. rendering the entire effort pointless.

It’s time for psychological science By contrast, this recent wave has continued to gather to embrace the unknown and become more honest momentum, ushering in what some have called a about our debates, methodological weaknesses and psychological science ‘renaissance’ (Nelson et al., inconsistencies.

2018) or, in Brian Nosek’s words, a ‘reformation not a crisis’.

Others, to be sure, are less enthusiastic. In one Our brave pioneers infamous early draft of a 2016 column by Susan Fiske, After climbing down from my high horse on science she referred to data replicators as ‘self-appointed laundering, it is only fair to recognise that our field data police’, and to ‘methodological terrorism’. has seen some pioneers push toward better, more Fiske’s detractors tended to view her comments as transparent and open methods. This ‘open science’ movement has often been fraught with controversy and defending a status quo of elite scholars, restricting peer commentary and sheltering bad science. Her even acrimony, but it deserves to take hold as a way defenders worried over the proliferation of harsh peer forward to clearer scientific values. comments online (comments that themselves did not The incentive structures in science developed such go through peer review). In fairness, Fiske had a kernel that ‘publish or perish’ and publication bias created an environment of widespread Type I error. It appears that of a fair point – the replication process did sometimes only a minority of findings in psychology are replicable savage individual scholars in a way that appeared to kick a dog after it was down. For instance, Amy (Open Science Collaboration, 2015), although, in Cuddy appeared to be singled out fairness, this appears to be true for as a sacrifice for the replication other sciences, such as medicine. cause (see Susan Dominus’s 2017 This concern has sometimes been New York Times piece). Although passionately challenged (e.g.

“We can’t return to discrediting the power pose Gilbert et al., 2016). But if we the false-positive hypothesis is fair game, was it reflect upon researcher biases, results of the past” right for Cuddy to be humiliated expectancy effects, fluidity of repeatedly in the public eye? Did methods and the pressure to her own self-promotion, including produce positive findings, it would a TED talk that remains the #1 seem clear that the issues with Google search result for ‘power poses’, open her up to reproducibility are almost certainly true. Or, put more particularly harsh criticism? Do we feel less sympathy bluntly, a fair percentage of things we’ve been telling for Phil Zimbardo over new analyses of the Stanford introductory psychology students for decades are Prison Experiment (see ‘Time to change the story’ via rubbish.

Finding a way out of this state of affairs will require The Psychologist website) because he spent decades cultural change within psychology. In part this involves promoting it?

These are hard questions to answer. Yet it’s clear the adoption of more transparent methods. Primary we can’t go back. We can’t return to the false-positive among these is pre-registration. With pre-registration, results of the past, nor continue to reify them because scholars thoroughly publish, in advance of data they’re part of a comforting narrative of how wonderful collection, their hypotheses, measures, methods and psychological science is. Only by embracing change, analysis plan. Pre-registration increases confidence openness and transparency can psychological science that results were not manipulated after data collection progress. Sure, let’s have a conversation about the most to produce false positive publishable findings (Nosek civil way to make these changes happen. But ultimately et al., 2018). Other aspects of open science, such as science is about data, not people, and we should worry transparency in measures and data with data-sharing, less about personalities and more about methods can also increase the rigour of our field. that produce the best data. Those who have pushed It’s interesting that concerns over the methods of psychological science aren’t new – some research fields, for open science and this renaissance in psychology deserve great credit. such as media violence, began to crumble in the late

psy 0319 p46_49 ferguson.indd 49

11/02/2019 16:26

52

psy 0319 p52_55 peters int.indd 52

11/02/2019 16:28

the psychologist march 2019 interview

Emmanuelle Peters ‘There is nothing I’d rather be doing than fighting the corner for people with psychosis’ Dr Emmanuelle Peters is director of the Psychology Interventions Clinic for Outpatients with Psychosis (PICuP) at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, and a Reader in the Psychology Department of the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience. She is a winner of the BPS Professional Practice Board’s Award for Distinguished Contributions to Psychology in Practice. Jon Sutton poses the questions.

Take me back to when you first began working in psychosis. What was it like?

Basically it wasn’t seen to be a wise thing to talk time that experts-by-experience movements started to people with psychosis about their ‘symptoms’, to develop, such as the Hearing Voices Network as it would make them worse, i.e. they would (HVN) – the CBT framework dovetails with that of the ‘decompensate’. So you might take them out for a HVN, and was very much influenced by it, with both walk from the ward, making small talk, to distract approaches normalising hearing voices and focusing on them; or if there ‘behavioural’ problems you might the person as a whole, rather than on the ‘illness’. do a behavioural programme for the nursing team to implement. Another role of the psychologist would be And if you could understand symptoms to do cognitive assessments, which would be ordered psychologically, then you could also change them by the consultant psychiatrist as psychologically? part of a range of tests like blood Exactly. Around the late 80s/ “we shouldn’t assume that early 90s people like Kingdon and tests, often with little rationale for its purpose. psychotic symptoms will Turkington, David Fowler, and Paul Chadwick published case necessarily be the most How did things begin to change? series of cognitive therapy for important issue to address positive symptoms, which then led In the 1980s people like Richard Bentall started ‘rebelling’ against to the early pilot RCTS of CBTp, for the person” the dominant medical model as it became known. Some of the view, arguing that schizophrenia early trials, for instance by Tarrier as a diagnosis or concept did not and colleagues, focused on the hold up to scientific scrutiny, nor did it have much more behavioural side of CBT (e.g. coping strategy clinical utility. He and others argued that psychosis enhancement), while the Garety, Fowler and Kuipers, was on a continuum with health and ‘normality’, and Morrison, and Chadwick and Birchwood groups were that it would be more fruitful to study/understand the more cognitive, focusing on the meaning of psychotic symptoms or experiences people were having, such as experiences. As the literature and clinical practice delusions and hallucinations, rather than diagnostic developed, people became more focused on therapies entities. that target specific symptoms rather than generic This was the start of people coming up with psychosis (such as the work of Max Birchwood on psychological models of symptoms, culminating in command hallucinations, and of Daniel Freeman on the now well-known cognitive models published persecutory delusions), as well as investigating thirdby Philippa Garety et al, Tony Morrison, and Paul wave or process therapies such as ACT, mindfulness Chadwick and Max Birchwood. It was also around this and CFT.

psy 0319 p52_55 peters int.indd 53

11/02/2019 16:28

The stereotype has often been that psychosis is just too tough, too tangled, to tackle with a basic cognitive model and the talking therapies approach.

That’s not what you’ve found?

It is true that psychosis is complex, and as a result CBTp involves many adaptations to traditional CBT: it is more flexible, with a greater emphasis on engagement and working towards valued goals, and typically lasts over six months. It is an adjunct therapy to medication, rather than an alternative, although it should also be offered to people who do not wish to take medication. Formulations are often ‘bespoke’ for the particular presentation, which are complex and varied, rather than relying on a single ‘model’. Although the main trials have tended to have severity of psychotic symptoms as their primary outcome measure (mainly because funders will insist on the ‘gold standard’ measure for that population), in practice the primary aims of CBTp are to reduce distress and improve functioning, rather than necessarily getting rid of symptoms. Not everyone will engage or benefit, but often you might get small

What should a person do if they experience a first psychotic episode, or suspect it in a friend or relative?

‘The first thing to do is to not panic. Hearing voices or feeling paranoid does not mean the person will inevitably develop psychosis – such experiences are much more common than you think.

For many people the experiences will go away by themselves, and even for people whose experiences persist it is still possible to lead a perfectly normal life. Make sure the person gets plenty of sleep and stays away from drugs. If it is happening to a friend or relative, resist the temptation to try and convince them they’re wrong – this will be invalidating to the person, and only serve to cause psychological reactance and increase paranoia. Instead validate their distress and offer your support. There are self-help groups for people who hear voices or spiritual bodies that can be helpful.

However, if the experiences are very distressing or get in the way of the person being able to function day to day, then get help. The GP is the first port of call; they may prescribe some medication and/or make a referral to an Early Intervention for Psychosis (EIP) service.

EIP teams will offer medication, social/vocational support and psychological interventions, as appropriate. Or if it is an emergency situation, then go to A&E. As a very last resort, and the person is at risk of harming themselves or others but won’t go to A&E, then you should call the local mental health crisis team or the police, who may need to arrange for the involvement of a Home Treatment Team or an admission to hospital. But this is very much a last resort – for most people a psychosis episode can be resolved through support of friends and family or an EIP team.’

Further useful information can be found in the British Psychological Society document Understanding Psychosis and Schizophrenia (www.understandingpsychosis.net).

gains that are nevertheless meaningful to the individual – which are not necessarily easily captured by our current outcome measures.

So is looking at symptoms entirely the wrong approach?

I wouldn’t say that looking at symptoms is the ‘wrong’ approach, but just that the aim is not necessarily to eradicate them… also we shouldn’t assume that presenting psychotic symptoms will necessarily be the most important issue to address for the person, even if they may seem the most ‘abnormal’ to the observer. For instance, some people will report they can cope with their voices – they may even keep them company – but it’s the despair of waking up each day with nothing to do, having no meaningful, socially valued roles, no relationships, etc. that is the issue. We always need to bear in mind that our role is not to change what is abnormal but what is distressing.

Over the years I’ve witnessed a big shift from diagnosis to formulation, asking what has happened rather than what is wrong. This seems to have found another gear recently.

In psychological work for psychosis it has never made much sense to work within a diagnostic framework – CBTp does not ‘treat’ schizophrenia, it helps people to relate to their psychotic experiences in a less distressing way, and to achieve their goals. These experiences, such as hearing voices, occur in a variety of diagnoses, ranging from bipolar disorder through post-traumatic stress disorder to emotionally unstable personality disorder. The diagnosis will not necessarily provide much helpful information for guiding therapy – what is important is the beliefs they hold about these voices, what the voices say, the relationship they have with them, and how they cope with them. And these factors vary more within than they do across diagnoses.

Plus many people with psychosis will also suffer from depression and anxiety; it is not necessarily helpful therapeutically to think in terms of having to treat three separate ‘disorders’. The affective component is likely to be part and parcel of the psychosis symptoms: fear and low mood drive voices and paranoia as well as being emotional sequelae.

But we must be mindful of the different meaning that receiving a diagnosis has for different individuals.

For many, being told they have ‘schizophrenia’ is incredibly invalidating and stigmatising; but for others it can provide comfort and an explanatory framework.

The important thing is to be respectful of the person’s ‘model of understanding’, even if it clashes with your own model.

54

psy 0319 p52_55 peters int.indd 54

11/02/2019 16:28

the psychologist march 2019 interview Getty Images

Undoubtedly social factors such as abuse, discrimination and poverty have a causal role in all mental health difficulties, including psychosis

How realistic is it, in ‘these austere times’, for applied psychologists to tackle causes, and causes of causes, rather than just bashing away at symptoms like a big whack-a-mole problem?

Well, I get really frustrated with the simplistic dichotomous view – I must say, aired in the letters section of The Psychologist and elsewhere – that CBT locates the fault in the individual rather than the real source of suffering, which are social factors and inequality. Undoubtedly social factors such as abuse, discrimination and poverty have a causal role in all mental health difficulties, including psychosis.

What CBT does is link past experiences and/or present circumstances with current views of the self and the world, as well as psychosis symptoms: e.g. bearing in mind what has happened to you/what is going on right now, no wonder you feel powerless/ hopeless/frightened/paranoid, etc. Or explaining that hearing voices is an entirely ‘natural’ response to extreme stress/trauma. A large part of CBTp is to normalise psychotic experiences and try to make them understandable within the context of the person’s life experiences. But suffering being rooted in social causes doesn’t mean that the person can’t achieve recovery – and to achieve change the important thing is to tackle unhelpful vicious cycles that maintain distress and prevent the person from reaching their valued goals, regardless of what has caused them. This doesn’t mean that progress can’t be hindered by the person’s circumstances, and many times I have wished I could just give people money or grant their asylum status. But it is still worth trying to maximise people’s quality of life through psychological means, despite the limitations set by biological or social factors.

Has your personal view of the psychotic experience changed over the years?

As a therapist, you suffer from the ‘clinician illusion’ – the people you see are, by virtue of the context you are working in, inevitably distressed by their experiences.

psy 0319 p52_55 peters int.indd 55

My other area of research is looking at people in the general population who have psychotic experiences – we’re talking full-blown, persistent experiences: the average duration in my last study was 31 years – but who are not distressed by them, and have no ‘need for care’, in the sense that they have not received a diagnosis, have not sought or been in need of help for their psychotic experiences. In fact, for many, these experiences have enriched their lives. Some describe themselves as psychics or having a clairaudient gift, and they harness these ‘skills’ professionally.

It has been fascinating to investigate these individuals and try to understand what might predict benign from malign outcomes of these experiences – as therapists, we have a lot to learn from them.

They are a very different group demographically, but they also tend to have non-threatening appraisals of their experiences (e.g. spiritual or normalising appraisals), although they are just as likely as clinical groups to make external attributions of their experiences. They also tend to be part of cultural subgroups that provide validation and support for their experiences, and they don’t tend to use unhelpful coping strategies such as avoidance or control.

Has change involved a lot of interdisciplinary work?

I stopped working in multidisciplinary teams about 10 years ago, since I now focus on running a psychological therapies service for psychosis, so I may not be the best person to answer this. I do feel, though, that these days there is less of a chasm between the different disciplines, and that bar a few die-hards on each side we are all thinking more in bio-psycho-social terms.

What continues to drive you, after two decades when you’ve achieved so much?

I am what you would call a ‘second-generation’ CBTp therapist – the first generation, the people who pioneered it, are the ones who achieved so much.

I was privileged to be a trainee on placement with Philippa Garety when she was first developing this work, and to be able to team up with Elizabeth Kuipers a few years later to set up our psychological therapies for psychosis service (PICuP).

I have been running PICuP for nearly 20 years now, and despite austerity and other NHS challenges we have grown from employing one part-time therapist (now Professor Kathy Greenwood), to a team of around 15 therapists, and employing service users to run our peer-support service. At times it does feel like trying to run a business on perpetual brink of financial collapse. What continues to drive me is the fantastic work the therapists do with the clients, who are one of the most marginalised groups in society; and leading a group of dynamic and wonderful staff who all have a sense of shared values. There is nothing I’d rather be doing than fighting the corner for people with psychosis to have access to psychological therapies – it’s the most meaningful thing I do.

11/02/2019 16:28

‘The psychological will always be there… it’s like my skeleton’ Hussain Manawer is a poet, and Honorary Fellow of King’s College London for his campaigning work in mental health.

Debbie Gordon, from The Psychologist team, went along to meet him.

76

psy 0319 p76_79 hussain int.indd 76

Why did you decide that you were going to be a poet?

Because of the lack of inspiration in today’s world.

I couldn’t find people who were talking about the pain I was going through. We have different influences and people who take us through stages of our lives…

I couldn’t find one. I needed to be that person. Surely I couldn’t be the only person whose Mum had just died? I can’t be the only person who hated uni, who’s stressing about his hairline, all of these things.

I wanted to talk about it the best way I knew.

So one day I quit my job – ‘I’m a poet!’ My friends knew I’d been writing from school, so none of my inner circle were surprised, it was when I told the wider world. ‘How can you be a poet?’ ‘Why can’t I be?’ To me, it’s just someone talking about the realities of their lives. I talk about things, give it to the person, and it belongs to them now. That emotion, that’s for you, my job’s done. I know there’s comfort in knowing you’re not the only person.

And did you start out with poems, or diaries, or…

I was a rapper first. When I say rapper… I tried to rap. Because of So Solid Crew’s ‘21 seconds’, then Dizzee Rascal ‘Boy in the corner’, Eminem, all of those artists… Then I was reading Caroline Duffy, Shakespeare, Rudyard Kipling, Michael Rosen…

I really started because of Rosen! I was in Year 6, he had a rap: ‘You may think I’m happy, you may think I’m sad, you may think I’m crazy, you may think I’m mad’… that hooked me, I was performing it in in assemblies and everything.

So that one bit of song changed your life?

100%. And I had two good English teachers. Miss Forbes said ‘You need to write more’, and then a supply teacher one day, Michael Noakes, found a poetry competition and said I should enter. I turned up, no idea what to expect, and there were all these poets doing mad things with words… I had found my tribe.

11/02/2019 16:34

the psychologist march 2019 interview

I got up and did my piece, and then the Slam Championships went round the whole country… from 10,000 people I got to the final 10. I was so overwhelmed with it all. I got to play at the Rise Festival in Finsbury Park.

What were those first efforts like?

Some were amazing, some were trash! One I performed at my biggest ever show, in London. 900 people. I told nobody it was my first piece, and people reacted to it as if it was now. That was interesting. It’s about how you deliver it. But the ones I love the most, the public don’t really warm to. I guess they mean so much to me, as a person… I get to keep all the really personal stuff to myself, and I like that.

Tell me about the One World Summit.

There was a competition – if you could change the world, how would you change it? You could win a trip to space. I’d never won anything in my life before, not even a sticker in school assembly. I entered it… 90 countries, 30,000 people, final stage in Thailand 2015.

I delivered this speech, ‘My name is Hussain’ and I win.

Unfortunately the space trip isn’t happening, the company went bankrupt. The way I see it, Earth needed me more! Also, the day before my Mum passed away – we didn’t know she was going to die, it was a sudden death – she said to me ‘I don’t want you to go to space’. The decision was hers, she took it with her.

Tina Vedrine/www.thevedrines.com/ psy 0319 p76_79 hussain int.indd 77

It’s the same with drug or alcohol problems… if we can look and understand there’s been a level of hurt in their lives, and all they’re trying to do is… …numb the pain. Yes. Society is in a fragmented place.

We glamourise drink and drugs. Look at your social media feed. Every night. Making it look like you’re having a good time. Getting a free pass, because you’re not hiding no more. We’ve got a lot of work to do as a community and society.

I’ve also heard you address the issue of culture in mental health. Why do you think there appear to be barriers for minorities seeking help?

The lack of understanding, and the lack of education given to people as a whole. If we trace this back, in my family, my grandmother would have a bath in a bowl.

Her toilet a hole in the floor, she comes from a farm.

She will not understand what post-traumatic stress disorder is. She did not have the luxury of going to university, reading books, listening to podcasts, really getting an understanding of these things.

My Dad now, after coming to my shows, might talk about anxiety, trauma. For a Pakistani man to do that is a very big deal. On Instagram, thousands of people message me ‘My family don’t understand’. Why aren’t we doing anything to educate the families? I’m not sitting here saying ‘Our parents are dicks’. My Mum and Dad had a different set of worries, as I’m sure yours did. But we need to bring our families in, and start learning as one.

Mental health is a regular theme in your work: Talking of mental health lessons, you did a pretty why is it so important to you? large one…

Because it affects so many people I know. It ruins Yes, I set the Guinness World Record for the world’s lives, destroys homes… it can ostracise people from largest mental health lesson. It got beat last year in their loved ones, because people don’t have time to fact, by a professor in Australia. I was happy… I might understand what people are going through. I think I come back for my title though! have a responsibility to normalise it. There are people Guinness World Records, when in my life I can’t help – you you’re a kid, you’re fascinated by it. don’t listen to the people you’re “I set the Guinness World So I thought we needed one around closest to. But if I carry on mental health, and education. And it helping other people, someone Record for the world’s needs to be set by young people. will come and help the people in largest mental health I went to King’s College and I said ‘let’s my life that need it. lesson… Education and do this together’. Hackney Empire My live show is a poetry gave us the venue for free, Samaritans concert, I have support acts. entertainment will get were on site… we had 19 schools Both of my support acts from you engagement” come down, organised by me and my my last show, I support them in friends. No events company, just us their real life. People undervalue lot in a WhatsApp group. We did well. the word ‘support’. You need to be there the whole way through, but often people don’t All sorts of celebrity guests peppered throughout the audience. On top of that, a psychologist – Professor know how.

Til Wykes – talking to the kids about it. They loved it.

The thing is, people say ‘ask for help’. But how Education and entertainment will get you engagement. are you supposed to ask for something that you don’t get? I’m not a doctor, a healer, a shrink… I’m just Do you think that poetry and music can make a real somebody who raises awareness and uses my platform difference then? to try to make a solution. But when I do see certain things, I think ‘this person may have psychosis’, or ‘this Definitely. The amount of poets coming out of my area of London, doing poetry about this type of stuff… might be post traumatic stress’, and you’re just telling it’s having a ripple effect. It starts conversations. them to get out of bed? It’s deeper. There’s so many A powerful conversation can save somebody’s life. complex layers.

11/02/2019 16:34

We’re part of the scrolling generation, just scrolling through social media, but the moment you see one thing and it hits you… you’ve started a conversation.

We have to look at the poets, writers, artists, journalists, people who are using their skills for the good of the world to guide us through these situations.

We’re all so dangerous to ourselves. There’s one person in my life who took his own life, and when I see his picture or name, it’s ‘Why did I not know? How did I not know?’ There were signs… he uploaded a picture of a tree that had been snapped in half, had Sellotape around it, he wrote ‘Me, trying to hold my life together right now’. We were all like ‘Ha ha real funny yeah me too!’ The next day he killed himself. He was telling us, but we didn’t listen. And he didn’t have the words to speak.

78

psy 0319 p76_79 hussain int.indd 78

I’ve definitely done in my friendship group is normalise a bunch of things.

Let’s talk about the impact of social media.

It can be used as good. But it’s a bad world out there on the internet, and I do fear for young people. 9, 10, 11, 12. Their brains and minds are so innocent, pure, they don’t need to see this stuff. Let them grow in their own time.

You’ve talked before about being from a humble background, yet becoming an ambassador for voiceless youth. What advice would you offer aspiring artists for getting their voices heard?

When you’re young you can make mistakes.

The moment you start listening to other people, you won’t get to where you want to go, you’ll get to where they want you to get to. Trust yourself, trust your heart. That’s something I tell myself every day.

When did you realise you were having mental health struggles yourself?

Probably in university. I hated uni. I was studying for a degree in Quantity Surveying. I just didn’t want to Where next for you? be there. Growing up with all these American movies, There are so many things I want to do. I’m writing ‘oh my god it’s going to be great!’, and then it was the for a big soap this year, as part of their mental worst time of my life. I put an act on, going home and health storyline. I’m doing stuff with some really pretending to my family I was loving it. big organisations. If it’s not going to come from the I finished, got a 2:2, but it was hard. I had so government, I can’t wait for people to come to me, much help from my best friend. But it was hard.

I just need to be doing it.

If I went back, or had the option now, I would 100 per I never really planned to do this with my life, but cent do a Psychology now I’m doing it I want to do it properly. It’s degree. Anthropology a responsibility. I try to remember, ‘conduct as well. I might do “I think what I’ve definitely yourself right… but also be you’. You can easily it, who knows. I’m forget. done in my friendship really fascinated by it. group is normalise a Why we think things, Will the psychological remain with you on the study of people. your journey? bunch of things” Situations, emotions, I think it will always be there… it’s like thoughts, I love it. my skeleton. I’m looking at the avenues of influence, what gets to people, what do they trust and What was the response when you dropped ‘the act’, listen to? It’s the radio, television, the internet. How when you first started speaking about mental health? can I contribute to these with my authentic message?

I think the first time I properly told my friends was in In a thought-provoking and entertaining way? But I a WhatsApp group. They were proper chilled about it: still love doing live stuff too. ‘why didn’t you tell us earlier?’ The most comforting There’s a few people I want to sit down with thing was ‘What can I do?’ and have a conversation, see what we can do.

Leonardo Di Caprio. I watch his movies and can’t You didn’t expect that reaction? sleep. The dedication, everything. Where did you get I don’t expect nothing from nobody. So when my this willpower, how did you build that mind of yours? friends say ‘what can I do to help you?’, that’s enough – So with my podcast, I want it to be one of the knowing that I have you to help me. greatest podcasts that ever existed. ‘Man to Man’ I want to call it.

When you opened up about mental health issues But the psychological will always be there. I get with your friends, did they respond with their own? sent so many books… I need to put my foot down Yes, it made us all closer. So much closer. ‘I love you, now and get in it properly. I made a bit of noise and take care, have a good day’… I’ve known them since people are like ‘oh, who’s this?’ Now I need to do my Year 2. We talk all the time. One of them is so cute… homework. he messaged me, ‘Yo’. ‘Yeah?’ ‘I’m checking in.’ ‘You getting a flight?’ ‘No, I read an interview about you on Online: Find more about Hussain at the internet and you said you like it when your friends www.hussainmanawer.com check in… am I doing it right?’ The most normal guy.

Read the full version of this interview via I’ve done my job, you know? He’s aware. I think what www.thepsychologist.bps.org.uk

11/02/2019 16:34

The only series to be approved by the BRITISH PSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY

BPS Titles in Psychology No other series bears the BPS seal of approval Refreshingly written to consider more than Northern American research, this series is the first to give a truly international perspective.

Every title fully complies with the BPS syllabus in the topic.

Below is a selection of titles on offer. For the full list please go to http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-324340.html

New to the Series:

* For further information and Discounts go to http://psychsource.bps.org.uk/

psy 0319 p80_81 ads.indd 81

11/02/2019 16:35

We dip into the Society member database and pick out…

Alma Au Associate Professor, Hong Kong Polytechnic University One thing psychologists should be proud of It is so inclusive. We can talk about psychology across lifespan and cultures. There is a broad range of therapeutic models stemming from traditions: individual and systems, evidencebased and hermeneutic approaches as well as psychoeducation and psychotherapy.

Life is never dull.

One way the Society is important to me The Society bridges the experience I had studying and working in UK and my life in Hong Kong.

88

One thing I like about working in Hong Kong Life is quick in Hong Kong. All sorts of systems are in place to streamline procedures.

As a clinician, the structure will facilitate you to see more cases for each session. After changing to working at an academic setting, there were more opportunities to initiate both practice and research projects. The

psy 0319 p88 motm.indd 88

coming soon… magic; autism; eating veg; plus all our usual news, views, reviews, interviews, and much more...

One book I like I like reading history books in general and easily spend hours in the large book stores with these sections in UK. In particular, books like The Heritage of World Civilizations by Albert Craig gives a global perspective on the events and processes that have shaped our increasingly connected world. It is amazing to find the concept of ‘dualism’, for instance, may have its roots in the Persian civilisation.

contribute… reach 50,000 colleagues, with something to suit all. See www.thepsychologist.org.uk/ contribute or talk to the editor, Dr Jon Sutton, jon.sutton@bps.org.uk, +44 116 252 9573

One piece in The Psychologist I like Claire Hughes on The Transition to School (September 2015). It succinctly summarised all the core concepts like school readiness and executive function. I particularly like the metaphor explaining ‘like gardeners, parents need to tend their infants with patience, attention and care, but should not expect success at every turn’.

One inspiration While I was studying in the UK for my undergraduate degree, there were all kinds of volunteer activities going on, with various agencies and religious communities. I had the wonderful chance to go visiting people with various challenging conditions, alongside some senior citizen volunteers. While not having any formal training, these senior volunteers were using their life experience to relate to the people to the people they were visiting. I can still remember how perceptive and communicative these volunteers were.

One thing I would like to change Reference to the ageing population is often characterised by negative undertone suggesting inevitable burden. I wish more attention could be given to the potential of older adults. Apart from attention, more tangible opportunities should be made available for older adults to contribute to society with their life-long experience.

comment… email the editor, the Leicester office, or tweet @psychmag to advertise… reach a large and professional audience at bargain rates: see details on inside front cover maybe you missed… …March 2017, Gareth Gaskell, ‘A brave new world of sleep’ …Search it and so much more via www.bps.org.uk/thepsychologist the

psychologist march 2017

march 2017

One piece of music I like Schubert’s Nacht und Träume. It is the about ephemeral nature of dreams and maybe life in general. I especially like the cello version played by Maisky. It is sentimental, reflective but not depressing.

experience working in London has facilitated my work in the community. Apart from more clinically-orientated projects, I’m also working on projects on age-friendly cites and intergenerational learning.

the psychologist

One thing I like working in London I worked as a clinical psychologist in London in the 1990s. It was the time when the NHS was moving into community care. Apart from working in hospitals, there were a lot of opportunities to go to home visits with other disciplines including nurses, social workers, physical and occupational therapists. We really got to understand the hopes and fears of our clients… how they live and are getting along with their neighbourhood.

one on one

A brave new world of sleep?

Gareth Gaskell on memory consolidation

www.thepsychologist.org.uk

psy 03_17 pOFC.indd 1

06/02/2017 13:11

11/02/2019 16:37

President Professor Kate Bullen

Find out more online at www.bps.org.uk

President Elect David Murphy Vice President Nicola Gale Honorary General Secretary Dr Carole Allan Honorary Treasurer Professor Ray Miller Chair, Membership and Standards Board Dr Mark Forshaw Chair, Education and Public Engagement Board Professor Carol McGuinness Chair, Research Board Professor Daryl O’Connor Chair, Professional Practice Board Alison Clarke Chief Executive Sarb Bajwa Director of Communications Rachel Dufton (Interim) Director of Corporate Services Mike Laffan Director of Member Services Annjanette Wells (Acting) Director of Finance Harnish Hadani

society notices Cognitive & Developmental Psychology Sections Joint Conference Stoke-on-Trent, 4-6 September See p.31 Division of Health Psychology Annual Conference Manchester, 10-11 September See p.33 BPS Annual Conference Harrogate, 1–2 May See p.45 BPS conferences and events See p.61

Director of Policy Kathryn Scott

The Society has offices in Belfast, Cardiff, Glasgow and London, as well as the main office in Leicester.

All enquiries should be addressed to the Leicester office (see inside front cover for address).

The British Psychological Society was founded in 1901, and incorporated by Royal Charter in 1965. Its object is ‘to promote the advancement and diffusion of a knowledge of psychology pure and applied and especially to promote the efficiency and usefulness of Members of the Society by setting up a high standard of professional education and knowledge’.

Extract from The Charter

psy 0319 p88 motm.indd 89

11/02/2019 16:37