Friday Factoids: A Look At “When Spring Brings You Down” by Linda Andrews

Posted on April 3, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

 

Spring time is in the air, woohoo! Finally! With the cold weather behind us and the polar vortex no longer a significant threat, it is time to peel off the long winter coat and open the window blinds in your office to let the sun in [given there are windows in your office]. With the spring comes many perks, such as viewing the beautiful landscape of the soft Kentucky bluegrass, the green leaves hanging on the oak trees, colorful flowers, and the fresh smell of daffodils.

 

Sounds fantastic, right!

 

Well, not so fast.

 

In her article, When Spring Brings You Down, Andrews (2012) writes about two issues that are not so welcoming with the change of season. She mentions “seasonal allergies and reverse seasonal affective disorder (SAD).”  Seasonal allergy sufferers are vulnerable to inflammation and infection. As a result, Andrews states that the molecule, cytokines, forms clusters around the infected area (Mandal, n.d.), which has been linked to depression and in severe cases, suicide. An additional reading source by David Dobbs, entitled, Clues in the Cycle of Suicide, provides more information about suicide rates during the spring and into the summer months.

 

Interestingly, Andrews further talks about SAD and the possibility that it is not specific to the winter months, but to the summer as well.  As the DSM-5 begins to take center stage, SAD will no longer be a separate diagnosis. Rather, SAD will take the form of several specifiers for major depressive disorder, recurrent and bipolar I and II disorders (DSM-5; pgs153-154; 187-188).

 

Yes, you may have already noticed that specifiers rule in DSM-5.

 

In the end, however, the spring air, filled with its freshness and good spirits, may not be a time of optimism for some individuals.

 

References:

 

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5).

 

 

Andrews, L. (2012). When spring brings you down. Retrieved from
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/minding-the-body/201203/when-spring-brings-you-  down.

 

 

 

Dobbs, D. (2013).  Clues in the cycle of suicide. Retrieved from http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/clues-in-the-cycle-of-suicide/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0.

 

 

Mandal, A. (n.d.). What are cytokines? Retrieved from http://www.news-       medical.net/health/What-are-Cytokines.aspx.

 

 

 

David Wright, MA, MSW

WKPIC Doctoral Intern

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, Friday Factoids, General Information, Mental Health and Wellness, Resources for Interns | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Article Summary of Risk Factors for Violence in Psychosis: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of 110 Studies

Posted on April 1, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

 

Witt, van Dorn, and Fazel (2013) noted many inconsistencies and varying emphases in the current literature on the association of violence and psychosis. This led the researchers to perform a meta-analyses of the current literature base, essentially combining all current studies on violence risk and psychosis into one helpful summary. The authors noted this task is important to the field for several reasons. First, combining and analyzing this information would hopefully help to develop evidence-based approaches to risk assessment. Next, this information can help focus treatment with relevant populations to the most pertinent risk factors, while simultaneously enhancing protective factors. Finally, consolidating this information can help clinicians and researchers better understand why certain individuals with psychosis have a higher risk of violence.

 

Six major databases were searched from their inception until December 2011. For some databases, this meant going back as far as 1960. Non-English articles were translated by qualified post-graduate students. For inclusion, diagnoses had to be assigned based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria, and more than 95% of study participants were aged 18 or older and diagnosed with either schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, schizoaffective disorder, delusional disorder, schizotypal disorder, psychosis not otherwise specified, and bipolar disorder. It is important to note that psychoses as the result of medical conditions, substance intoxication, or substance withdrawal were excluded from the collected data. Studies were excluded if the focus was on genetic or epigenetic associations with violence, childhood violence, or offender populations. Furthermore, items were only included in the data collection process if the risk factor was included in three or more separate studies, which helped improve the validity of risk estimates. Risk factors were separated by time in that “recent” factors were those that occurred within the past year from the time of the original study, while “history of” factors were those that occurred at some point in the past, more than one year from the time of the original study. Data collected from each study may have been reported in different measurements; therefore, all collected data was converted to an odds ratio (ORs). For each factor identified, ORs, 95% confidence intervals, number of studies, the z score, number of violent participants, and total number of participants were reported.

 

A total of 110 studies that included 73 independent samples met inclusion criteria. This equated to a large number of participants (n=45,533) of whom 18.5% (8,439) were reported to be violent. Just over 85% of participants were diagnosed with schizophrenia, just under 12% were diagnosed with other psychoses, and 0.4% were diagnosed with bipolar disorder. The age of participants ranged from 21.1 to 54.3 years, with the average age of 35.8 years. The data included studies conducted in 27 countries.

 

Overall, the strongest domains associated with violence include the criminal history, substance misuse, demographic, and premorbid factors. When analysis was restricted to inpatient samples, the substance misuse domain was significantly associated with violence, but less so compared to the findings in the overall analysis. Additionally, analysis restricted to inpatient samples found the psychopathology and positive symptom domains were more strongly associated with violence, while the negative symptom, neuropsychological, demographic, premorbid, suicidality, and treatment-related domains were not significantly associated with risk of violence when compared to the overall analysis. The finding of differences in factors associated with violence among inpatient samples versus community samples could lend itself to the field developing different violence risk assessment approaches depending on whether the individual is in inpatient or outpatient treatment currently. A rather interesting finding was the association of previous suicide attempts with violence, especially considering most current and commonly used violence risk assessments do not usually include assessment of suicide. The authors speculate that history of previous suicide attempts was associated with violence, while experiencing suicidal ideation was not, because impulsivity may be a contributing factor to violence toward self and violence toward others. The authors close by identifying the most important factors to attend to during violence risk assessments: hostile behavior, poor impulse control, lack of insight, general symptom scores, recent alcohol and/or drug misuse, psychotherapy non-compliance, and medication non-compliance.

 

The major findings are described below in outline format for easy reference.

  • Demographic Factors
    • Strongly associated with violence:
      • History of being violently victimized
    • Moderately associated with violence:
      • Recent homelessness or history of homelessness
      • Male
    • Weakly associated with violence:
      • Member of ethnic minorities
      • Currently having a lower socioeconomic status
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Received no more than a primary school education
      • Received no more than a high school education
      • Lower family socioeconomic status during childhood
      • Shorter duration of education in years
      • Lacking any formal education qualifications
      • Currently living in an urban environment
      • Currently living alone
      • Unmarried
      • Widowed or divorced
      • Currently unemployed
      • Having children
      • Younger age at study enrollment in years
  • Premorbid Factors
    • Moderately associated with violence:
      • History of childhood physical or sexual abuse
      • Parental history of criminal involvement
      • Parental history of alcohol misuse
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Experienced the death of one parent during childhood
      • Experienced divorce or separation of parents during childhood
      • Raised by a single parent
  • Criminal History Factors
    • Significantly associated with violence:
      • History of assault
      • History of imprisonment for any offense
      • Recent arrest or history of arrest for any offense
      • History of conviction for a violent offense
      • History of violent behavior
      • Hostility during the study period
  • Psychopathological Factors
    • Strongly associated with violence:
      • Lack of insight
      • Poor impulse control
    • Moderately associated with violence:
      • Diagnosis of comorbid antisocial personality disorder
      • Higher total Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) scores
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Diagnosed with bipolar disorder
      • Diagnosed with any subtype of schizophrenia
      • Diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder
      • Diagnosed with psychotic disorder not otherwise specified
      • Younger age of onset in years
  • Positive Symptom Factors
    • Associated with violence:
      • Higher positive symptom scores
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Experienced paranoid thoughts
      • Experienced delusions of any type
      • Experienced auditory hallucinations, including command auditory hallucinations
      • Acutely symptomatic
  • Negative Symptom Factors
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Higher poor attention span scores
      • Diagnosed with comorbid depression
  • Neuropsychological Factors
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Lower Full Scale IQ scores on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
      • Lower Performance IQ scores on the WAIS
      • Lower Verbal IQ scores on the WAIS
      • Lower scores on the Picture Completion subtest of the WAIS
      • Lower total scores on the National Adult Reading Test (NART)
      • Higher perseverative errors on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test
  • Substance Misuse Factors
    • Strongly associated with violence:
      • History of polysubstance misuse
      • Diagnosis of comorbid substance use disorder
      • Recent substance misuse
    • Moderately associated with violence:
      • Recent or history of alcohol misuse
      • History of substance misuse
      • Recent or history of drug misuse
  • Treatment-Related Factors
    • Strongly associated with violence:
      • Psychotherapy treatment non-compliance
    • Moderately associated with violence:
      • Medication non-compliance
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • Not having a prescription of antipsychotic medication of any type
      • Higher antipsychotic dosage
      • Shorter duration of antipsychotic treatment in months
      • Shorter duration of current inpatient admission in months
      • Shorter duration of current outpatient treatment in months
      • Younger age at first psychiatric inpatient admission in years
      • Greater number of previous psychiatric admissions
      • Longer duration of untreated illness in years
  • Suicide Factors
    • Moderately associated with violence:
      • History of previous suicide attempts
    • NOT significantly associated with violence:
      • History of experiencing suicidal ideation
      • History of self-harm

Witt, K., van Dorn, R., & Fazel, S. (2013). Risk factors for violence in psychosis: Systematic review and meta-regression analysis of 110 studies. PLOS One, 8(2), 1-15.

 

Danielle M. McNeill, M.S., M.A.
Doctoral Intern

 

 

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, General Information, Resources for Interns, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: Synthetic Marijuana: Frequently Asked Questions

Posted on March 31, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

 

What is synthetic marijuana?

  • A man-made substance that is allegedly supposed to mimic the effects of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is a cannabanoid and the primary psychoactive ingredient in cannabis.
  • The substance is manufactured and then coated on to dried herbs, which are ingested by smoking the substance.
  • It is now the 2nd most commonly abused illicit drug among high school seniors, behind traditional marijuana, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).
  • Synthetic cannabinoids are significantly more potent than THC, with different effects, and different chemical structures.
  • It can be found in stores labeled as “incense” or “herbal incense,” and often has the label “not for human consumption.”

 

When I hear the term “synthetic drug,” does this mean synthetic marijuana?

  • There are two main forms of synthetic substances—synthetic cannabinoid and synthetic cathinone. Synthetic cannaboinoid is commonly called synthetic marijuana, while synthetic cathinone is more similar to cocaine and often called “bath salts.”

 

What are some common names for synthetic marijuana?

  • Spice, K2, Mr. Nice Guy, Mr. Smiley, Blaze, Black Mamba, Sexy Monkey, Genie, and others

 

You can buy this in the store, is it legal?

  • Yes and no. The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) has classified several synthetic chemicals (JWH-018; JWH-073; JWH-200; CP-47,497; cannabicyclohexanol) as a Schedule I substance. Since banned by the DEA, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will not approve the substance for human consumption.
  • As of March 2011, 20 states have imposed bans on these substances, with additional legislation pending in 37 states.
  • Being a Schedule I substance places these strands of synthetic marijuana in the same category as LSD and heroin. Schedule I drugs have a high potential for abuse, lacks accepted safety standards for use under medical supervision, and provides no currently accepted medical use.
  • Bans on this substance are not only found in the United States, but also in Britain, Germany, Poland, France, and Canada.
  • However, there are challenges in making the substances illegal because there are literally hundreds of formulations. Manufacturers of the substances are changing the ingredients quicker than states and the DEA can classify them as illegal.

 

How is synthetic marijuana similar to regular marijuana?

  • These substances are similar in appearance, consumption method of smoking, and feeling of euphoria after inhalation.

 

What makes this an attractive substance for users?

  • It is readily available in stores and online, and generally low cost. Additionally, synthetic marijuana does not typically show up on traditional urine drug screens.

 

What are the dangers of synthetic marijuana?

  • Research has found that the chemicals in synthetic marijuana are significantly more potent than the THC found in marijuana. Synthetic cannabinoids are full agnoists, meaning they bind to cannabinoid receptors and fully stimulate the receptors. THC, the main psychoactive ingredient in traditional marijuana is a partial agonist, which means THC only partially stimulates cannabinoid receptors.
  • Since synthetic marijuana is a man-made substance, potency can vary per package and per strand. This increases the potential for overdose.
  • Similarly, given the fact synthetic marijuana is a man-made substance, human error and how one batch is mixed is a factor in potency.
  • Also, there are quite a few significant negative effects or side effects.

 

What are the negative effects?

  • Seizures and convulsions, difficulty breathing, racing heart beat, elevated blood pressure, nausea, vomiting, loss of consciousness, stroke, paranoia, muscle twitching, agitation, anxiety, sweating, hallucinations, harmful effects on the cardiovascular and central nervous systems, lack of pain response, and lack of judgment.
  • The experience of paranoia, agitation, and hallucinations is common, even for those with no prior history of mental illness.
  • The impact on judgment and pain response has been associated with increased unpredictable, and dangerous behaviors, such as running into traffic.
  • It is common for users to require medical treatment and intensive care. It is also common for users to be involuntarily committed to psychiatric hospitals, especially when the cause of his or her erratic behavior is unknown.
  • Visits to the emergency room due to use of the substance has increased from 13 in 2009 to approximately 560 by early 2010. By December 2010, approximately 2500 calls related to synthetic marijuana use were made to poison control centers. Even more troubling, calls related to synthetic drugs quadrupled from 2010 to 2011, according to the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC). Approximately 60% of cases involve individuals aged 25 and younger.
  • Use of synthetic marijuana can result in organ failure, kidney failure, respiratory failure, and death. Fatalities are often related to cardiac events, seizures, and hyperthermia.

 

How long can negative effects last?

  • While research is minimal, some studies do indicate there is a concern for possible short- and long-term effects after use.

 

Is it addictive?

  • Research in Germany indicated that the use of synthetic marijuana can lead to symptoms of withdrawal and “addictive behaviors.”

 

Has synthetic marijuana really caused such negative effects in people?

  • There have been reports in the news about male and female adolescents and adults experiencing significant complications after using synthetic marijuana. These instances have occurred in several states and are not limited to geographic region. There have been reports of a teenage female having a series of strokes that left her blind and paralyzed after using the substance. Another report of a teenage male experiencing seizures after use, while another male teen allegedly died by suicide after use, can be found in the news. The reports are not just limited to teenagers. An adult man presented for emergency medical services after an overdose characterized by severe agitation and heart rate around 200 beats per minute (more than twice the normal speed).

 

References


Macher, R., Burke, T. W., & Owen, S. S. (2012). Synthetic marijuana. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 81(5), 17-22.

Van Pelt, J. (2012). Synthetic drugs—Fake substances, real dangers. Social Work Today, 12(4), 12.

 

Danielle M. McNeill, M.S., M.A.
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, Friday Factoids, Mental Health and Wellness, Resources for Interns | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: Open Your DSM-5!

Posted on March 21, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

 

If you have been avoidant of opening your new DSM-5 and reviewing the changes, there is one reason to go ahead to check it out. The DSM-5 includes screening questionnaires in Section III of the book, which are also found on the DSM-5 website (http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/online-assessment-measures) with additional measures not found in the book.

 

The assessments include adult, child, collateral informant, and clinician ratings, depending on the measure. There are general measures, disorder/area specific measures, severity measures, personality measures, measures for level of disability impairment, and cultural measures. These measures can be used to aid in diagnostic clarification, as well as to track changes across therapy sessions. The best part is they are free to use and conveniently available online.

 

Have a client receiving treatment for panic disorder? There is a symptom specific measure that can be given each session and compared to previous administrations to track changes, as well as provide a tangible example for the client showing his or her progress over time. Don’t forget to check out the DSM-5 website (www.dsm5.org) for updates to the manual. There is already a handful of updates available with changes to codes and errors in wording.

 

 

Danielle McNeill, M.S., M.A.
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

 

 

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, Friday Factoids, Resources for Interns | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: Being Patient With Yourself As A New Therapist

Posted on March 7, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

 

If you feel like you don’t know what you’re doing, you’re doing it right!

 
Beginning therapists often struggle with feelings of inadequacy and ineffectiveness when first meeting with clients. Teyber and McClure (2011) offer validation and guidance for these common, and often unacknowledged, experiences for students. The authors state, “…new therapists need to be patient with themselves and appreciate that learning to be an effective therapist is a long-term developmental process” (Teyber & McClure, 2011, p. 4).

 

The authors explain the path to feeling more grounded and confident in therapy can take three to five years. It is important for beginning therapists to realize their feelings are normal. It is also important that new therapists refrain from putting pressure on themselves when they perceive this process is taking too long.

 

Teyber, E., & McClure, F. H. (2011). Interpersonal process in therapy: An integrative model (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

 

Danielle M. McNeill, M.S., M.A.
WKPIC Psychology Intern

 

 

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, Friday Factoids, Resources for Interns | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: Anger Rules and the Anger Thermometer

Posted on February 28, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

One of the most common problems in children with behavioral issues is the anger they experience. Behaviorally disordered children may get angry much easier and quicker than their peers. Therapists working with children are in need of interventions that can help a child to think before he acts.

 

One of the interventions Dr. Tony Sheppard (2012) recommends is the concept of the Anger Rules. The Anger Rules involves a child making a decision regarding his anger or looking at how he handled his anger after the fact. The Anger Rules offer a very simple set of guidelines for checking ourselves when faced with a difficult situation. This concept is discussed in the anger workbook, A Volcano in My Tummy, by Elaine Whitehouse and Warwick Pudney. This workbook teaches there are two general categories of responses to anger: clean and dirty. Clean anger is the type that obeys all of the Anger Rules while dirty anger violates one or more of the Anger Rules. This concept offers a very simple way for the child to check himself with how he has managed his anger. An example involves a lunch line situation in which a child throws a lunch tray at the wall. By using the Anger Rules checklist, the child asks, “Did I hurt others? No. Did I hurt myself? No. Did I hurt property? Yes.” Therefore, throwing a tray at the wall was, in fact, dirty anger.

 

Now if the child thinks before he acts, his anger is rising to the top of the Anger Thermometer because the child behind him is standing too close and bumping into him. The child thinks to himself, “I need to get the teacher or I am going to hit this kid!” The Anger Rules asks: “Will this hurt others? No. Will it hurt me? No. Will it hurt property? No.” Getting the teacher for help before acting is an example of clean anger. Processing situations and looking at clean versus dirty anger can really help a child to think before he acts and figure out the best course of action for that particular situation.

 

Sheppard, T.L. (2012). Parent guide to the anger thermometer and the anger rules. Groupworks Inc.

 

Cindy A. Geil, M.A.
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

 

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, Friday Factoids, Mental Health and Wellness, Resources for Interns | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: Seasonal Affective Disorder

Posted on February 24, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

In the parts of the country currently in the depths of winter, people may be experiencing cases of the “winter blues.”

 

Very often people notice increases moodiness and a lack of energy beginning in fall and lasting through the winter. This may be due to Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD).  Seasonal Affective Disorder most commonly occurs during the winter and fall, but can also be experienced during the summer. According to the Mayo Clinic, the symptoms of SAD (quite an appropriate acronym) that occurs during fall and winter are similar to those of other depressive disorders: depression, hopelessness, anxiety, loss of energy, heaviness in the arms or legs, social withdrawal, oversleeping, loss of interest in once enjoyable activities, weight gain, appetite changes, and difficulty concentrating.

 

Treatment often includes phototherapy, which entails exposure to sunlight, if possible, or light boxes which are specially designed for treatment, filter out damaging UV rays, have been shown by research to be as effective as antidepressants, and exhibit a more rapid onset of effectiveness than antidepressants. SAD appears to be more and more common the further one is from the equator, perhaps as a factor of the amount of sunlight and/or the exposure to longer periods of sunlight. It is no wonder, then, that Hawaii and other locations close to equator are such hot vacation hotspots and that there is a higher cost of living.

 

Going to the beach does sound like a great idea right about now!

 

For more information about Seasonal Affective Disorder, including treatment and prevention, visit the Mayo Clinic’s website.  http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/seasonal-affective-disorder/DS00195

 

Cassandra Sturycz,
Psychology Practicum Student

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Friday Factoids: Seasonal Affective Disorder

Welcome to the 2014-2015 Internship Class

Posted on February 21, 2014 by Susan Vaught

Hooray!

 

 

WKPIC is thrilled to announce that we filled our 3 slots during Round I of Match this year–with awesome students! We extend a hearty welcome to Brittany Best, Faisal Roberts, and Graham Martin. We look forward to working with all of you come September!

 

 

 

Susan R. Vaught, Ph.D.
WKPIC Training Director

Posted in Announcements, Blog, Dr. Vaught, General Information, Intern Photos, Match | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: It IS Possible to Work With Teen Girls

Posted on February 21, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

Many therapists see the same types of issues when working with teenage girls – girls struggle with their self-identity, low self-esteem, body issues, trying to fit in and ensure people will like and accept them.

 

Pipher (1994) in her book, Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls, discusses these issues that adolescent girls deal with in their everyday lives. Pipher (1994) discusses a scene in which she was sitting on a bench outside of her favorite ice-cream store. She saw a mother and teenage daughter stop in front of her and wait for the light to change. She heard the mother say, “You have got to stop blackmailing your father and me. Every time you don’t get what you want, you tell us that you want to run away from home or kill yourself. What’s happened to you? You use to be able to handle not getting your way.” The daughter stared blankly straight ahead, barely acknowledging her mother’s words. The light changed and next she saw a very different scene. Another mother approached the same light with her preadolescent daughter. The mother and daughter were holding hands. The daughter said to the mother, “This is fun. Let’s do this all afternoon.”

 

Something very dramatic takes place to girls in early adolescence. Just as planes and ships disappear mysteriously into the Bermuda Triangle, so do the selves of girls. They crash and burn in a social and developmental Bermuda Triangle taking the happiness away from them. In early adolescence, studies show that girls’ IQ scores drop. Girls lose their assertive, energetic personalities and become more deferential, self-critical, and depressed. They report great unhappiness with their bodies. Girls are often happy and free but then loose themselves in adolescence. They often fall in love with boys and live only for their approval. Girls have no sense of inner direction; rather they struggle to meet the demands of others. Their value is determined only by their approval. A girl once said, “Everything good in me died in junior high.”

 

Pipher then discusses some interventions she uses with these adolescent girls. The most important question she says she asks her adolescent clients is “Who are you?” She says she is not as interested in the answer as in teaching a process that the girl can use for the rest of her life. The process involves looking within to find a true core of self, acknowledging unique gifts, accepting all feelings, not just socially acceptable ones, and making deep and firm decisions about values and meaning. It includes discussion about breaking the cultural rules set out for women and formulating new, healthy guidelines for the self. These girls must figure out ways to be independent from their parents and stay emotionally connected to them. They need to discover ways to achieve and still be loved. They must discover moral and meaningful ways to express their sexuality in a culture that blasts them with plastic, pathetic models of sexuality. They have to learn to respect themselves in a culture in which attractiveness is women’s most defining characteristic. Therefore, it is imperative that girls find, define, and maintain their true selves.

 

Pipher, M. (1994). Reviving ophelia: Saving the selves of adolescent girls. New York: Ballantine Books.

 

Cindy A. Geil, M.A.
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

 

 

Posted in Blog, Continuing Education, Current Interns, Friday Factoids, Mental Health and Wellness, Resources for Interns | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Friday Factoids: What Contributes Most To Success?

Posted on February 18, 2014 by Susan Vaught

 

Intelligence, self-discipline, or chance? What is the strongest contributor to success?

 

This is a complicated question. I think that it is too simplistic to think that the smarter you are, the more successful you will be. We can recall how many times we have completed an intelligence test when applying for a new job or a promotion. This obviously never happens.  More likely consideration for a position is focused on past performance and achievement.

 

The above statement leaves out too many situational factors including perhaps the most important- self-discipline.  Richard Nisbett discusses in his book, Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count, the strong relationship between delayed gratification in the marshmallow experiment with children and their achievement scores in the future.  The marshmallow experiment gives the participant the options of either receiving one marshmallow now or two marshmallows after a set time.  Children who were able to wait longer to receive more marshmallows were more likely to have higher standardized achievement test scores.

 

However, Malcolm Gladwell wrote in his book, Outliers: The Story of Success, that immense success depends primarily on the special advantages one receives that make it possible to reach such success, once expertise has been achieve via the 10,000 Hour Rule. He cited such stories as how Bill Gates developed an affinity for computers and later achieved extreme wealth after he was given access to computers at a time when computers were not widely available.  Gladwell argues that Gates would have likely been a successful professional, but perhaps not a professional worth $50 billion.  Such high levels of success do not depend on raw aptitude and hard work alone.

 

So for now, there is no easy answer for my initial question.  Like many complicated questions, there are many complicated answers.  For more information on intelligence and success or for help forming an opinion of your own on this matter, you can check out the books I have discussed here:

Gladwell, M. (2009). Outliers: The story of success. Penguin UK.

Nisbett, R. E. (2009). Intelligence and how to get it: Why schools and cultures count. New York:  W. W. Norton.

 

Cassandra Sturycz
Psychology Practicum Student

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Friday Factoids: What Contributes Most To Success?