User talk:Psydoc
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome.
Contents |
[edit] electroencephalogram
Omegatron, would appreciate your response to my recent discusssion at electroencephalogram. Psydoc 07:49, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
- I replied there, if you didn't notice. - Omegatron 01:57, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] OpenEEG
I took a look at their page and I'm glad you are advising them on hardware. Keep digging earnestly before they hook anything to people (or the poor animals either.)
I have had at least one client referred to me after they had treated themselves with neurofeedback, even obtaining much advise from an anonimous (!!!) perported clinician online. Getting them out of trouble was an arduous task.
To put it simply, the brain is emensely complex, and EEG operant conditioning is a very powerful intervention that permanently changes brain function, and thus probably micro-structure. EEG training can produce many undesired effects if applied with ignorance.
The old hackneyed phrase serves here: "I do this full time". I have 30 years of experience in neuropsychology and clinical psychology, study it constantly with other professionals, use numerous sophisticated diagnostics, and I find that often I must enter untested ground to solve a person's problem.
Partly the OpenEEG project entices me to hope for an open source contribution. But more salient is the serious concern I have for those who explore this unaware. I have met several professionals who set about treating themselves and the process went ugley. Sort of like the assessment of the man who represents himself in court: he has a fool for a client. Trouble is, we judge ourselves based on our perceived deviation from baseline, and some processes, like drugs and neurofeedback, move the baseline.
Be well. Psydoc 03:38, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
- From what I understand, lots of people have already built them and plugged themselves in. The first edition of the hardware has been around for a while. You should join the mailing list. - Omegatron 13:32, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Electroencephalography
Hi Tom, please allow me to explain some formatting issues on electroencephalography. The way you are presently providing references (externally linked PubMed abstracts), as well as "recent bibliography", makes the article quite cluttered.
In similar articles with a scientific reference system, two variant forms of providing references are used:
- Using named references (e.g. De Wolff et al 2004) and providing a list of references at the bottom of the article.
- Using the footnote system ({{ref|DeWolff2004}} and {{note|DeWolff2004}}), which provides endnotes. This is further explained on Template talk:Ref.
As for "current bibliography" etc - I think this is unnecessary. Could you possibly provide one external link at the bottom of the article? JFW | T@lk 19:59, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi Dr.Wolf. You know, I just put in a 15 hour day at the office and then checked in at Electroencephalogram. What a mess. There and in the discussion I find some serious polemic being offered by one person who has a link that doesn't work, and another with no evidence of any substantive knowledge on the subject at all. I have invested a few hours in Wikipedia to offer some simple facts. I am disappointed in the tone of this matter. Rather than carry on a thoughtful airing of views, there is a rampant editing toward bias. Disgusting and a waist of my time. I think any serious professional would reach the same conclusion.Psydoc 06:55, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Psychology Wiki
Hi Tom,
I noticed that you are a professional psychologist, and thought you might be interested in this project which I am involved in, The Psychology Wiki.
I won't say too much, as I'd like you to judge it for yourself, but you should find that it is different from Wikipedia, because approximately 90% of our contributors so far are psychologists, either professionals like yourself, academics, or students and trainees.
Its hosted by a company called Wikia, which was founded by Jimmy Wales and Angela Beesley. There are Google Ads on the site, but we dont make money from the project, they're just to pay for the bandwidth, storage and technical support that Wikia give us.
Have a look and see what you think
Mostly Zen 23:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
PS I think you may feel more at home in our project, as we are 90% psychologists, our standards are higher and there is less chance of your work being edited by people that are not trained in psychology. We are very friendly too! :) Mostly Zen 23:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
