Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  PSYCHO-BUSINESS
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

O prowokacji, czystości i uczonych

100%
Brycz H.
Psychologia Społeczna
|
2008
|
vol. 3
|
issue 4(9)
309-312
EN
The main goal of the commentary is to understand and evaluate the authors’ motives hidden behind their publication of the text on psycho-business in the Polish popular magazine “Charaktery”. The text, in fact a controversial provocation, may be evaluated in terms of competence and morality. While trying to understand Witkowski’s and Fortuna’s motives underlying the provocation, I also encourage the Authors to work towards improvement of Polish law concerning psychotherapy.
2

Dyskusja wokół tekstu Tomasza Witkowskiego i Pawła Fortuny „O psychobiznesie, tolerancji i odpowiedzialności, czyli strategie czystych uczonych

100%
Lewicka M., Śpiewak S.
Psychologia Społeczna
|
2008
|
vol. 3
|
issue 4(9)
289-294
EN
The discussion initiated by Tomasz Witkowski and Pawel Fortuna in the key article “On psycho-business, tolerance and responsibility or strategies employed by pure scientists” gathered 14 discussants, both academic psychologists and psychologists interested in practical applications of knowledge. In this paper, which serves as an introduction to the whole discussion, we attempt to identify the main issues brought up by the discussants. They include: (a) diagnosis of the market of psychological services, (b) causes and mechanisms of pseudo-science and of proliferation of the pseudo-psychological business, (c) relationships between academic and applied psychology, (d) methods of counteracting pseudo-science and pseudo-psychological business. In conclusion we encourage representatives of the psychological community in Poland to enter more willingly into the substantially sound discussions concerning the meeting of academic knowledge and psychological practice.
3

Jak psychologowie akademiccy mogą przeciwdziałać szerzeniu się „szamańskich praktyk” na rynku usług psychologicznych?

100%
Smółka P.
Psychologia Społeczna
|
2008
|
vol. 3
|
issue 4(9)
366-369
EN
Academic psychologists can counteract the use of empirically unsupported and potentially dangerous therapeutic practices not only by criticizing them, but also by inspiring practitioners and educating their patients and clients. The “Academe” should propose, as an alternative to “pop-psychological” approaches, empirically validated therapeutic techniques and training programs to practitioners and inspire them to practice in accordance with an evidence-based approach. Moreover, academics should inform and educate people, potential clients of psychological services, about evidence-based, effective, and safe therapeutic and training approaches.
4

O strategiach wobec psychobiznesu

100%
Tadeusz G.
Psychologia Społeczna
|
2008
|
vol. 3
|
issue 4(9)
321-325
EN
The author presents his opinion about prevention of harmful practices in such services provided by psychologists like psychotherapy, rehabilitation, and education. He emphasizes the need to draw from experiences described in publications of the American Psychological Association concerning standards of continuing education, accreditation procedures and social control over various services. Presented are some proposals concerning contents of the core academic curricula incorporating ethical standards that define steps that should be taken in order to correct or minimize the misuses in clinical practice. Another initiative consists in creating a permanent board of experts assigned for the journal “Charaktery” responsible for disseminating popular knowledge about contemporary psychology in the large society. The gap in this paper between research and practice in clinical psychology received substantial attention. Drawing from the views of a number of Polish (Kaja, Kowalik, Zawadzki) and American (Lewin, Kazdin, Marlatt) authors on both practical applications and the theory of psychology, the author claims that the divisions drawn by Witkowski and Fortuna into “pure” scientists and practitioners is unfounded.
5

O psychobiznesie, tolerancji i odpowiedzialności, czyli strategie czystych uczonych

88%
Fortuna P., Witkowski T.
Psychologia Społeczna
|
2008
|
vol. 3
|
issue 4(9)
295-308
EN
The article deals with the relationship between academic psychology, pseudoscience and psycho-business. The first part discusses possible methods of eliminating pseudoscience. Described is the first Author’s provocation carried out in 2007 in the popular science journal “Charaktery”. Its main purpose was to demonstrate that it is possible for pseudoscience to be judged credible by journal editors and its readers. In the next step, reactions of the academic community to the provocation were classified and analyzed. Four basic strategies were described: ignorance, playing down, reorientation, and exploitation. In the further parts of the article there are presented results of a short study in which a group of students was asked to judge how credible and how interesting the therapy described in the provocation was. In readers’ opinions the text was credible. Based on these results the authors conclude that it is relatively easy to introduce a new fake therapy into everyday practice. The authors believe that the indifferent attitude of the psychological community may play a crucial role in this process.
6

Skoro jest tak dobrze, to dlaczego jest tak złe?

75%
Fortuna P., Witkowski, T.
Psychologia Społeczna
|
2008
|
vol. 3
|
issue 4(9)
372-382
EN
The article is an answer to the commentaries on our article On psycho-business, tolerance and responsibility, or strategies of pure scientists. In the first part we summarize and comment upon the few proposals that have been made of how to counteract pseudoscience and psycho-business. In the next part we express our doubts as to the role and tasks of science that have been described by participants in the discussion. An analysis of the so-called junk science produced by the scientific community is presented in justification of our doubts. The subsequent part of the article is devoted to controversies related to differences in understanding of the concepts of pseudoscience, quasi-science and proto-science by the authors of the commentaries. We also analyzed the legal aspect of the provocation and discussed the issue of responsibility for its results, as well as answered the criticisms re: the placebo effect, limiting of the discussion solely to the area of psychotherapy, and the methodology of the research presented in the original article. A part of our article was devoted to answering some individual accusations and doubts expressed by the authors of the discussion. In summary, two points of view were juxtaposed. On the one hand the picture that emerges from the opinions shared by participants of the discussion is that threats presented in the original article were exaggerated and pseudoscience is difficult to define and control. In answer to this point of view, we presented facts that testify to the presence of pseudoscience in many high education institutions as well as in official curricula.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.