![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 65 to 89 of 89. Go back in thread:
Posted by Mitchell on January 19, 2003, at 10:04:04
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Mitchell on January 19, 2003, at 9:23:58
I quickly searched the web to validate my long held impression that most psychology tutorials are academically oriented. The tutorials are designed to help people pass classes, so they can get a credential then improvise techniques from what they have learned.
http://psych.hanover.edu/Krantz/tutor.html
Of these on-line academically oriented tutorials, Eliza is the classic, IMO.
http://www-ai.ijs.si/eliza/eliza.htmlThe Eliza computer system is about as stupid and uncaring as is the worst therapist, but the very nature of the language returned by the therapeutic software can evoke therapeutic thought. Practice with Eliza might help self-appointed peer counselors learn to use evocative questions rather than provocative comments.
My take is that most published psyche techniques are either directed at an academic professional audience, are dumbed down and sugar coated to improve book sales of popular authors or reflect the culture of the current federal health regime (as in the DHHS clinical protocols).
Others advance unique techniques (for example http://www.rc.org/ ; http://www.mindbodyconsult.com/protocols/ ) but the interests of their individual authors cloud the techniques. Some web resources are on-line summaries of classroom lessons ( http://learn.sdstate.edu/share/Module2Section4.html ). In most cases, to learn conversational skills to help our neighbors and calm our communities we still must buy into some sort of religious or pop-psyche sect or pay good money to authors who probably earn far more than many of us.
I don't find on the web a well-informed tutorial of therapeutic techniques based on meta-analysis of research investigating a variety of therapeutic conversational techniques. In a culture flooded with both information and with psychological distress, I find that beyond sad. It is no wonder that we divest our power to the greedy and self-serving. In a nation equipped with weapons of mass destruction and which has used chemical weapons against its own people, the lack of credible conversational training for non-enrolled students is tragic.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 20, 2003, at 7:14:24
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques (folo), posted by Mitchell on January 19, 2003, at 10:04:04
> I quickly searched the web to validate my long held impression that most psychology tutorials are academically oriented.
> http://psych.hanover.edu/Krantz/tutor.html
> http://www.rc.org/
> http://www.mindbodyconsult.com/protocols/
> http://learn.sdstate.edu/share/Module2Section4.html> I don't find on the web a well-informed tutorial of therapeutic techniques based on meta-analysis of research investigating a variety of therapeutic conversational techniques.
Thanks for looking. Meta-analyses are going to tend to be academically oriented... :-) I did a quick search, too:
How to teach and facilitate discussion online: Respond to difficult situations
http://web2.uvcs.uvic.ca/ltg/nursweb/DISCUSS/DISCUS10.htmFacilitating a successful support group
http://www.christiancaregivers.com/dgfacilitating.htmlHow to be an effective team leader
http://www.effectivemeetings.com/teams/leader/effective2.aspWhat do you think of those?
Bob
Posted by jay on January 21, 2003, at 10:53:18
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Dr. Bob on January 20, 2003, at 7:14:24
Dr. Bob:
I have plenty of information on brief-treatment (client-centered, or also called person-centered) skills (to tie into your Rogerian ideas) and their required listening skills (I have picked up in social work...and these are the current, front-line tools used in all of social work) , as well as group facilitator skills, ethics, confidentiality (however it pertains to here), and intervention skills that I would be happy to either email to you, or possibly develop as a guide for the resource library, from my social work experience.
I am not quite so sure about getting into deeper Psychoanalytic skills, because I think folks need specific training on how to use them well and properly. (As you know..it takes a *lot* of training to use many of the more complex theories and models.) If you would like me to email you further, please let me know. Thanks!
Jay
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 21, 2003, at 21:33:48
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques » Dr. Bob, posted by jay on January 21, 2003, at 10:53:18
> I have plenty of information ... that I would be happy to either email to you, or possibly develop as a guide for the resource library, from my social work experience.
Developing as a guide sounds good! Maybe others here could work with you on it?
Bob
Posted by jay on January 21, 2003, at 21:40:04
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Dr. Bob on January 21, 2003, at 21:33:48
> > I have plenty of information ... that I would be happy to either email to you, or possibly develop as a guide for the resource library, from my social work experience.
>
> Developing as a guide sounds good! Maybe others here could work with you on it?
>
> Bob
Absolutely! I think it can be a good learning experience for us all. If others are interested..could we get a way to let folks know...and maybe some of us can even exchange an email addy for this 'project'?Jay
Posted by Mitchell on January 21, 2003, at 22:30:58
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques » Dr. Bob, posted by jay on January 21, 2003, at 10:53:18
> Dr. Bob:
>
> I have plenty of information on brief-treatment (client-centered, or also called person-centered) skills (to tie into your Rogerian ideas) and their required listening skills (I have picked up in social work...and these are the current, front-line tools used in all of social work) , as well as group facilitator skills, ethics, confidentiality (however it pertains to here), and intervention skills that I would be happy to either email to you, or possibly develop as a guide for the resource library, from my social work experience.
>
> I am not quite so sure about getting into deeper Psychoanalytic skills, because I think folks need specific training on how to use them well and properly. (As you know..it takes a *lot* of training to use many of the more complex theories and models.) If you would like me to email you further, please let me know. Thanks!
>
> Jay
>Thanks, Jay. Your experience might already reflect some integration of meta-review in front-line clinical practices. Psychoanalytic stuff does not score well as an intervention tool, but the word "brief" appears very high on the list of favored approaches, suggesting brief interactions can offer some of the best verbal medicine. I'll set up and share an e-mail addy with you in case there is anything else I can contribute to your effort. Looks to me like you might know where to go with this.
Posted by Dinah on January 22, 2003, at 8:49:45
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Mitchell on January 21, 2003, at 22:30:58
I must confess that I don't have a really good grasp about what you guys are talking about, but the whole conversation is making me nervous.
Would you mind telling me what concrete effects this project would have on PB posters, or what requirements it might bring them?
Just exactly what, in plain English, are you proposing for Babble participants.
Posted by Mitchell on January 22, 2003, at 16:39:46
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Dinah on January 22, 2003, at 8:49:45
Dinah wrote:
> Would you mind telling me what concrete effects this project would have on PB posters, or what requirements it might bring them?Researchers cannot say what concrete effects this board has on participants. It would be even more difficult to say what effects a specific training aid will have. It is easier to say what effects it might have. It might help people learn to better help each other.
When doctors talk to us about our problems, we benefit from their training in how to talk to people. But in self-help groups, people often want to help don't know how. Unless the doctors' training is worthless, the same training might be useful for lay people who try to help each other. Some of the techniques are as simple as knowing when to give information and when to ask for information.
The only requirement I imagine is that if people want to read the page about ways doctors have learned to talk to clients about problems, they would be required to click a link leading to the page. My concern is that access to that kind of training now involves too many requirements, like paying for a book or a class. I am suggesting the information may be freely distributed without cost.
One concrete effect would be people who read such a guide would receive free training, on demand at their leisure, in brief therapeutic techniques without having to tell anyone that they had studied the subject. I am not the one to write such a guide. My suggestion is that writers with access to the best science could write a useful guide.
Flesch reading ease: 69.5
Flesch-Kincaid grade level: 7.9
Posted by jay on January 23, 2003, at 3:33:17
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Mitchell on January 21, 2003, at 22:30:58
Hey..thanks Mitchell. This sounds like it could be interesting..and maybe you could bring to the table info..I will do the same...and we will see if others want to get involved. My email addy is:
jay_ghostrider@yahoo.caLets talk!
Jay :-)
Posted by jay on January 23, 2003, at 3:57:18
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques, posted by Dinah on January 22, 2003, at 8:49:45
Hi Dinah:
Well..for once I feel useful around here..heh. I am a college grad social worker, with plenty of experience (not bragging..just for reference).
See, when people talk to each other, there are many, many was to answer as a 'helper'. A lot involves listening skills..being able to empathize with a person..and allowing them to make their decision, rather then just giving advice. I know of a whole slewful of therapies and techniques that work, from my personal practice. It may be fun to get the whole board involved, and I think we can learn a lot about each other.
A good focus is the Rogerian based person-centered counselling, which emphasizes working on problems in the 'here and now'. There are other different, and even fun therapies, like the "Im ok..Your ok Therapy" which is used in a type of therapy called Transactional Analysis.
It's not so much a matter of teaching therapies..because that would take far too long, and requires extensive expertise to do them right. I've only been working for 8 or so years, and am now honing my skills in particular therapies.
Basically...what we can do is to help us help ourselves...and in turn the PB community. We can make it simple and easy. Even things like...listening skills...when *not* to offer advice...true empathy. Listening skills are far more complex than people think. So, we can hopefully expand on that, and even find it useful outside of the board.
If interested..or suggestions..please feel free to email me at: jay_ghostrider@yahoo.ca
I hope that clears things up a bit...and am always open to all comments and suggestions. It would be nice to get a group of us to work on this.
Sincerely,
Jay
Posted by Dinah on January 23, 2003, at 9:06:17
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques » Dinah, posted by jay on January 23, 2003, at 3:57:18
The nervousness I referred to earlier was about a possible sense of elitism that it might convey. That posters who already feel unsure about adding their comments and support might feel more so if they felt that there were people on the board who had special techniques. I guess it could work the opposite way. People would have access to the techniques and thus feel more competent to post, but perhaps they wouldn't feel that they had mastered the techniques as well as others. Perhaps this nervousness comes from my recent concern on the board with making newcomers feel welcome.
Plus, I keep having the old stereotype of a college student who is taking a few psychology classes. That we may get so stuck on technique that we lose the genuineness that currently is one of the best things about this board. Not to mention that my dear departed grandma could offer a few tips to many mental health professionals I have come in contact with on how to listen and be supportive. She never learned a technique in her life, but she cared about how others felt. And she cared about making others feel comfortable and accepted.
Finally, I remember being extremely turned off by the twelve step programs and Recovery, Inc. by their groupspeak. I tend to run screaming into the night when confronted by groupspeak. And I would hate to have phrases used in techniques amount to that.
I guess how I would feel about any such project would depend a lot on implementation. If it was just something like the tips section, that people could read about new skills if they wished to, that wouldn't bother me. (I'm not sure you can "learn" these skills through reading. Don't people who are trained in these skills receive a lot of supervision in them?) If it became an expected or preferred way of relating on the board, I don't think I'd like it at all.
Just my 2 cents, for what it's worth.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 23, 2003, at 19:22:31
In reply to Re: therapeutic conversational techniques » jay, posted by Dinah on January 23, 2003, at 9:06:17
> The nervousness I referred to earlier was about a possible sense of elitism that it might convey. That posters who already feel unsure about adding their comments and support might feel more so if they felt that there were people on the board who had special techniques.
Hmm, good point. It's like my reservation about adding a spell checker...
Bob
Posted by ShelliR on January 28, 2003, at 22:00:17
In reply to Re: unsure about adding their comments, posted by Dr. Bob on January 23, 2003, at 19:22:31
> Hmm, good point. It's like my reservation about adding a spell checker...
>
> BobHuh?
Posted by OddipusRex on January 31, 2003, at 17:29:57
In reply to Re: where to draw the line, posted by Dr. Bob on January 18, 2003, at 16:16:45
Posted by OddipusRex on January 31, 2003, at 18:19:21
In reply to Offensive post » Dr. Bob, posted by OddipusRex on January 31, 2003, at 17:29:57
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030125/msgs/138029.html
"I have this problem, I seem to think that porn stars are are the rednecks (whitetrash, delinquents) of the media world. Does anyone else agree???"
Just to clarify, I think whitetrash is an unacceptable term. I'm not offended by porn stars being put down. Of course that doesn't mean some of your other readers might not be. :)
Posted by shar on January 31, 2003, at 23:54:06
In reply to Re: Offensive post clarification, posted by OddipusRex on January 31, 2003, at 18:19:21
> Just to clarify, I think whitetrash is an unacceptable term. I'm not offended by porn stars being put down. Of course that doesn't mean some of your other readers might not be. :)
......O.R.--this is curious to me, that you are not offended by porn stars being put down (if it was you that wrote that, sometimes I get confused when a post contains comments from two or more people).
.....It would seem that someone who believes groups shouldn't be targeted for put-downs would include all groups, even porn stars.
Shar
>
>
>
Posted by OddipusMustDie on February 1, 2003, at 7:06:08
In reply to Re: Offensive post clarification » OddipusRex, posted by shar on January 31, 2003, at 23:54:06
Posted by OddipusRex on February 1, 2003, at 9:31:16
In reply to Re: Offensive post clarification » OddipusRex, posted by shar on January 31, 2003, at 23:54:06
I SHOULD have been offended. I guess I just wasn't thinking. I don't know anything about porn stars firsthand but I have known teenagers who prostituted themselves and I think there's sort of a parallel. And I know they felt like trash of whatever colour. And I know they werent'. I know they were risking their lives because they didn't have anywhere to go and they needed drugs to be able to stand their lives and they needed money. But they also wanted the recognition, the clothes, the attention. They wanted to stop feeling like trash for a little while. I think there are probably porn stars with similiar motivations. That doesn't mean all of them or even most of them. I have no way of knowing but I should have objected to them being all painted with the same brush. I object now. Thanks for pointing it out to me.
>
> .....It would seem that someone who believes groups shouldn't be targeted for put-downs would include all groups, even porn stars.
>
> Shar
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 1, 2003, at 23:37:39
In reply to Offensive post » Dr. Bob, posted by OddipusRex on January 31, 2003, at 17:29:57
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 27, 2003, at 8:33:12
In reply to More anti-Semitism from this person AGAIN « JenR, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2003, at 3:15:14
[Posted by ayrity on February 26, 2003, at 20:05:08
In reply to http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20030203/msgs/200836.html]
> Sheesh, I've never encountered this on any other board, nor seen it tolerated as much. I've learned a lot here at PB, but this is hard to stomach.
>
> Yes, I'm Jewish. No, I'm not a bully. In fact, I was the target of bullying most of my childhood.
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 27, 2003, at 14:17:10
In reply to again with the anti-semitism? « ayrity, posted by Dr. Bob on February 27, 2003, at 8:33:12
ayrity,
Thank you for posting your obsevations and objections to the posts here that use anti-Semitic language, for it is my beliefe that it is our {duty} in a community to object to that type of language, rather than [take an easyier position such as ignoring it or leaving to go somewhere else, and I commend you for voicing your concern here. I am jewish also and also object to that type of language to be allowed to be posted here and I also object to other defamation posted here to others regardless whether they are jewish or not.
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 20, 2011, at 20:38:57
In reply to Re: posting in a non-racist manner » Dr. Bob, posted by Noa on January 15, 2003, at 17:54:07
> Dr. Bob,
>
> Worsmithing is totally beside the point. It isn't your job or ours to editorially finesse the wording of the posts in question so that they are somehow acceptable.
>
> But I believe it is your job to point out to people who may use offensive language to refrain from doing so. It is then up to them to find a way to express themselves without resorting to the use of hateful language, if they want to post here.
>
> I also feel you are looking at the words much too concretely and separately, and ignoring the gestalt of the phrases used, with all the meaning loaded in them because of how such hateful phrases are used, and how hurtful and offensive they are to the target group.
>
> There are people on this board, myself included, who have firsthand experience in being the target of racist language, harrassment, vandalism, and violence. And when words are used that are obvious "catch-phrases" well known to most speakers of the language, it doesn't matter as much what each individual word means all by itself, when you separate them out and look at them literally and concretely. The phrase as a whole is loaded with unfounded hate toward a group of people. It also stops mattering that the poster was using the language to describe individuals in his life. He used a slur that I believe he knew to be racist (I base this belief on his description of himself as racist). It then becomes *not* about those individuals, but about a whole group of people.
>
> And I don't beleive this has anything to do with political correctness. Or walking on eggshells.
>
> I cannot tell anyone what to believe. If a person wants to think racist thoughts and believe racist beliefs, that is beyond the control of others. And what people say in their own private speech is their business. I may wish they thought and spoke without the hatred, but that is just a wish--I cannot control that.
>
> But we all know that there are things we choose not to say in "mixed company" or in certain settings because of how it might affect other people, and that we expect such discretion and choice from others as well. We don't *have* to choose accordingly, but in certain settings we do, because we agree to a kind of social contract of civility.
>
> On this board, I think it is highly reasonable and appropriate to expect that the civility rules would include the understanding that it is not acceptable to use slurs like the ones in question, which are completely loaded with hurtful meaning for many, even if the story line is about individuals.
>
> If I have a story about my bad experiences with an individual, it is not ok for me to use racial or ethnic slurs to describe that individual here on this board.
>
> It isn't the person that is unacceptable, it is the comments. Just leave them at the gate when entering. And I believe that you, Dr. Bob, are the gatekeeper.Noa,
This may come up in your email. If so, could you post more concerning your perspective in this situation here?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on February 18, 2011, at 16:24:09
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--Rex » Noa, posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 16:55:48
> > I have revised the subject title, if that helps.
>
> Yes it does. I think that's a lot clearer.
> >
> > To me, I am willing to give any poster the benefit of the doubt, and think of the comments as an error in judgement, an "oops" that with a reminder from Dr. Bob, would not be repeated. No big deal at that point.
> >
> > But to me the bigger deal is Dr. Bob's error in judgment about the impact of the comments, or his assessment of them as being "gray area", which I disagree with, and that is where I felt I needed to comment.
>
> ~~~~I don't consider anti-Semitism civil, but at the same time I think there can be gray zones. For example, someone might put down particular members of a group without putting down that whole group...~~~~~~Quote from Bob
>
> Noa do you think it is ever possible to put down particular members of a group without putting down the whole group? Should the phrases hypocritical Christian or pedophile priest or drunken Irishman or Black drug dealer or white lynch mob or treacherous female be forbidden too? How would you word a rule on forbidden phrases? Were you offended that his tormenters were identified as Jewish or just the particular insulting phrases used?
>
> Actually I cringed when I read the post too but I've cringed at other things posted on Babble too.OR,
If this comes to your email, I would like for you to email me. Also, since your obsevation concerning this ongoing situation, which is IMHO plainly visible, could help Jewery now, could you bring up the admin board and look at the threads that are concerning this situation? You see, I am in great fear now of being a victim of antisemitic violence and IMHO other Jews and non-Christians that do not accept the claim that is posted here on the admin board as being {OK} by Mr. Hsiung, could be targets of those that take mind-altering drugs that could induce a mind-altered state to want to kill themselves and/or others. And if they read antisemitic liturature or visit sites where statements that could put down/accuse Jews are allowed, I think that there is the potential for that person to target a Jew. If you could forward this to your friends that you think could be helpful in this situation, I would appreciate it.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 18, 2012, at 11:09:59
In reply to Re: More anti-Semitism from this person AGAIN « JenR, posted by Phil on January 13, 2003, at 6:42:34
> I agree. Why not..These two guys made my life miserable.
> Talk about a whole group being put down. It also happens to be the most generous people that exists.
> If they were Christian, would he have said, these two Christian guys...
> I think not.
> It would be doing him a favor to point it out. I'm not Jewish but I'm offended.
>
> PhilPhil,
You wrote,[...I'm not Jewish but I'm...].
I am wondering if you could go through the outstanding requests from me here to Mr Hsiung and post from your perspective in those threads. If you could, then I could post my reply to you there.
Lou
Posted by Phil on October 18, 2012, at 12:57:04
In reply to More anti-Semitism from this person AGAIN » Phil, posted by Lou Pilder on October 18, 2012, at 11:09:59
Are you saying I'm anti-Semitic when I said that the Jews were the most generous people on the planet and my best friend id Jewish?
Am I missing something?
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.