7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
Hello!
I'm finishing up my dissertation now and am on the US post-doc market in clinical psychology so I'd appreciate any leads.

My interests are reinforcement sensitivity, depression/anxiety, and LGBTQ+ mental health.

Shameless thread of recent accomplishments below:

First of all, feel free to visit my website at
https://t.co/DK3AaqgRJ4 for my CV and online lectures and articles. Here are twitter threads about some of them from this past year

Here's a meta-analysis on bipolar disorder and reinforcement sensitivity


Here's a meta-analysis on depression, anxiety, and reinforcement sensitivity


Here's a new tool for implicitly measuring
One thing I really notice in friends who haven't done any therapy is a lack of conflict resolution skills. So I figure hey, let's do a mini lesson on conflict resolution right here in this thread.

One philosophy for conflict resolution within psychology is that there are three main priorities you can have in a conflict: respecting yourself, maintaining a good relationship with the other person, or getting a task done. (Reference: these DBT skills
https://t.co/C7CAlDaE5A )

Most people want to do all three, and you can, but the idea is it can be unrealistic to get all three goals accomplished perfectly-- maybe it's worth thinking about which goals matter most to you right now, in this scenario and relationship, and which you're willing to sacrifice.

To respect yourself, these are good guidelines to prioritize:
1 Keep fairness strongly in mind.
2 Be wary of apologizing. Think hard before offering any apology-- do you really need to say sorry here?
3 Keep in mind what you value.
4 Stick to being truthful, even if you're angry.

To maintain a relationship, keep these in mind:
1 Be gentle, not aggressive.
2 Ask questions, be actively interested in their opinions.
3 Actively validate the way they feel.
4 Have an easy manner. Watch your tone of voice & body language. It's not all about what you're saying.
Retracted, with a note that says "we believe that all the key findings of the paper with regards to co-authorship between junior and senior researchers are still valid". Isn't it important to discuss the many points on which the paper is incorrect?


1. The gender analysis was "only meant to be exploratory” and used techniques that “cannot be claimed to establish causality” but causal inferences were made anyway.

Causal claims were justified by pointing out that other people do it too. "While this technique does not establish the existence of a causal effect, it is commonly used to infer causality from observational data."