Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Psychological Issues

Unit 1 Biological Issues

YES: National Institute on Drug Abuse, from “The Science of Addiction,” Drugs, Brain, and Behavior: The Science of Addiction, rev. ed. ( National Institutes of Health, 2007)

NO: Sally Satel and Scott O. Lilienfeld, from “Singing the Brain Disease Blues,” AJOB Neuroscience (January 2010)

A publication from the National Institute on Drug Abuse argues that addiction is a brain disease and that scientific information is available about the nature, prevention, and treatment of this disease. Psychiatrist Sally Satel and psychologist Scott O. Lilienfeld object to the brain disease characterization of drug addiction, asserting that addiction is an activity whose course can be altered by its foreseeable consequences.

YES: Qazi Rahman, from “The Neurodevelopment of Human Sexual Orientation,” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (October 2005)

NO: Stanton L. Jones and Alex W. Kwee, from “Scientific Research, Homosexuality, and the Church’s Moral Debate: An Update,” Journal of Psychology and Christianity (Winter 2005)

Professor of Psychobiology Qazi Rahman claims that the current research on the biology of homosexuality supports prenatal biological determination and refutes learning models of sexual orientation. Professor of Psychology Stanton L. Jones and Clinical Psychologist Alex W. Kwee claim the current research on the biology of homosexuality provides no firm evidence for biological causation and leaves room for learning models of sexual orientation.

YES: Glenn Geher, from “Evolutionary Psychology Is Not Evil! (...And Here’s Why...)” Psychological Topics (December 2006)

NO: Edwin E. Gantt and B rent S. Melling, from “Evolutionary Psychology Isn’t Evil, It’s Just Not Any Good,” (An Original Essay Written for This Volume, 2009)

Evolutionary psychologist Glenn Geher maintains that evolution provides the best meta-theory for explaining and understanding human psychology. Theoretical psychologists Edwin Gantt and Brent Melling argue that an evolutionary account of psychology omits many important and good things about humans.

Unit 2 Research Issues

YES: Gerald J. Haeffel, Erik D. Thiessen, Matthew W. Campbell, Michael P. Kaschak, and Nicole M. McNeil, from “Theory, Not Cultural Context, Will Advance American Psychology,” American Psychologist (September 2009)

NO: Jeffrey J. Arnett, from “The Neglected 95%, a Challenge to Psychology’s Philosophy of Science,” American Psychologist (September 2009)

Haeffel and his colleagues believe that psychological studies of American people often generalize to people of other cultures, especially when basic processes are being studied. Jeffrey Arnett, psychological research professor, argues that culture is central to the functioning of humans and thus to psychological findings.

YES: APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice, from “Report of the 2005 Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice,” American Psychologist (May/June 2006)

NO: Brent D. Slife and Dennis C. Wendt, from “The Next Step in the Evidence-Based Practice Movement,” APA Convention Presentation (August 2006)

The APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice assumes that a variety of traditional empirical methods is sufficient to provide evidence for psychological practices. Psychologist Brent D. Slife and researcher Dennis C. Wendt contend that traditional empirical methods are guided by a single philosophy that limits the diversity of methods.

YES: Kathleen D. Vohs and Jonathan W. Schooler, from “The Value of Believing in Free Will: Encouraging a Belief in Determinism Increases Cheating,” Psychological Science (vol. 19, no. 1, 2008)

NO: Eddy Nahmias, from “Why ‘Willusionism’ Leads to ‘Bad Results’: Comments on Baumeister, Crescioni, and Alquist,” Neuroethics (July 31, 2009)

Marketing professor Kathleen Vohs and psychology professor Jonathan Schooler attempt to demonstrate that a scientific belief in determinism (that humans lack free will) leads to a host of bad behaviors such as lying, cheating, and stealing. Eddy Nahmias, a philosopher with the Neuroscience Institute at Georgia State University, counters the claim that such scientific beliefs cause bad behavior by arguing that laypersons fail to understand what scientists are actually saying about determinism.

Unit 3 Development Issues

YES: Jean M. Twenge, Sara Konrath, Joshua D. Foster, W. Keith Campbell, and Brad J. Bushman, from “Egos Inflating Over Time: A Cross-Temporal Meta-Analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory,” Journal of Personality (August 2008)

NO: Kali H. Trzesniewski, M. Brent Donnellan, and Richard W. Robins, from “Do Today’s Young People Really Think They Are So Extraordinary? An Examination of Secular Trends in Narcissism and Self-Enhancement,” Psychological Science (February 2008)

Psychologist Jean Twenge and colleagues argue that the evidence suggests that young people are more egocentric than the previous generation. Professor Kali Trzesniewski and colleagues maintain that the evidence shows there is no change in the over-all level of narcissism since the previous generation.

YES: Lauren Donchi and Susan Moore, from “It’s a Boy Thing: The Role of the Internet in Young People’s Psychological Wellbeing,” Behavior Change (vol. 21, no. 2, 2004)

NO: Patti M. Valkenburg and Jochen Peter, from “Online Communication and Adolescent Well-Being: Testing the Stimulation Versus the Displacement Hypothesis,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (vol. 12, issue 4, 2007)

Psychologists Lauren Donchi and Susan Moore report that adolescent males who rate online friendships higher than face-to-face friendships are more likely to be lonely and experience low self-esteem. Professors of communication Patti M. Valkenburg and Jochen Peter maintain that online relationships actually enhance an adolescent’s face-to-face peer relations and psychological wellbeing.

Unit 4 Cognitive–Emotional Issues

YES: Julia K. Boehm and Sonja Lyubomirsky, from “The Promise of Sustainable Happiness.” In The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology, 2nd ed. (Oxford University Press, 2009)

NO: Laurel C. Newman and Randy J. Larsen, from “How Much of Our Happiness Is Within Our Control?” An original article written for this text (2009)

Health researcher Julia Boehm and psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky argue that empirical research has established that people can use multiadaptive strategies to increase their levels of happiness. Psychologists Laurel Newman and Randy Larsen challenge the external validity and sustainability of the effects of these strategies, arguing that most of what influences our long-term happiness is outside our control.

YES: John D. Mayer, Peter Salovey, and David R. Caruso, from “Emotional Intelligence: New Ability or Eclectic Traits?” American Psychologist (September 2008)

NO: Edwin A. Locke, from “Why Emotional Intelligence Is an Invalid Concept,” Journal of Organizational Behavior (January 2005)

Psychologists John Mayer, Peter Salovey, and David Caruso maintain that some individuals have a greater emotional intelligence (EI), a greater capacity than others to carry out sophisticated information processi ng about emotions. Social science professor Edwin A. Locke argues that “emotional intelligence” is not a form of intellectual ability.

Unit 5 Mental Health Issues