Get ready to test your reflexes. In this air hockey game you will need to compete with the computer to shoot the disc into each other's base and avoid the other side from doing so. Both of you will hit the disc by using a round pad so the direction of the disc may not be easily controlled.
Psychologists can find rewarding opportunities to work with other disciplines within NIH's major research initiatives
Several major initiatives welcome a transdisciplinary perspective, even if on the surface they don't sound terribly psychological. Among them are the All of Us/Precision Medicine Initiative, the Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative, Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) and the Big Data to Knowledge (BD2K) program.
"There are lots of opportunities, if the medical side becomes aware of the skills and content knowledge we psychologists have," says psychologist Leonard Bickman, PhD, a research professor of psychology at Vanderbilt University.
His research, focusing on how to encourage people to participate in clinical trials, receives funding from the NIH Clinical Translational Science Awards Program through Vanderbilt University Medical Center's Recruitment Innovation Center.
"If you're interested in applying theory, it's a wonderful world to work in," he says.
Among the initiatives where psychologists are finding opportunities is the All of Us program, which offered $55 million in awards in fiscal year 2016 to build the partnerships and infrastructure to get the program off the ground. All of Us is recruiting its million-plus participants and plans to release funding announcements once the project is launched. Those participants, representing a diversity of ages, races and backgrounds, will share biological samples, genetic data, lifestyle information and health records. Ultimately, those data will help researchers advance a more personalized approach to medicine by identifying biological markers for disease, identifying why people respond differently to medications, developing new ways to measure disease risk and creating a platform to test new targeted therapies.
The project will also collect large amounts of data on factors relevant to psychology, including stress, mood states, health risk behaviors and family and social network dynamics, says William Riley, PhD, director of the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research at NIH.
"As this builds up to over a million participants, there will be a lot of opportunities for behavioral and social scientists to access those data. They'll also be able to apply to add other variables of interest to them," he says. "The longitudinal nature and sheer size of the sample will make a big difference for behavioral research."
Another important initiative for psychology research will be the BRAIN initiative, Riley says. BRAIN began funding researchers in 2014 and continues to accept new applications, awarding more than $70 million to research teams at 60 institutions in fiscal year 2016. The first stages of the project have mostly been focused on building tools that enable scientists to map the connectivity and circuitry of the brain.
"But all of that work is ultimately to understand behavior," Riley says. "As we move into the next five years, the goal will be to take some of those tools and map that circuitry onto specific behaviors. I expect we'll be seeing even more things coming out of BRAIN that have increasing relevance to psychology."
Sterling Johnson, PhD, a clinical neuropsychologist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, has funding from BRAIN for a project that aims to develop better methods to detect small but meaningful structural changes in the brains of healthy adults that could predict the onset of Alzheimer's disease. He's also funded through the large BD2K initiative for another project that applies computational neuroscience to Alzheimer's disease. Launched in 2012, BD2K aims to develop tools to integrate data science and vast data sets (often called "Big Data") with biomedical research.
Those projects are succeeding thanks to the close collaboration between the Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center and the University of Wisconsin's Department of Computer Science, he says. "This kind of research is much more powerful when you can do it in a multidisciplinary way," he says. "It's not a new concept to do team science, but initiatives like BRAIN really incentivize thinking about a problem from multiple angles, and really allow for high-impact science."
Speak a common language
Leslie Leve, PhD, who trained as a developmental psychologist and is now a professor in the College of Education at the University of Oregon, is also beginning to reap the benefits of transdisciplinary research, thanks to her work with Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO). Launched in 2016 with $157 million in awards, the seven-year initiative will study the effects of a broad range of early environmental influences on child health and development.
The program was a perfect fit for Leve, who for more than a decade has followed birth and adoptive families in an effort to separate the effects of genes and parenting on child development. Under a new grant from ECHO, Leve and her colleagues will enroll new children to build upon their existing data.
In the process, she's collaborating with psychologists, physicians, psychiatrists, social workers, geneticists and environmental scientists. "Everyone is coming from different philosophical backgrounds. In the end, that produces really novel, innovative science," she says.
Yet it can be challenging, too. Openness to ideas and willingness to learn from others is key to succeeding, Leve says. "We're learning to speak a common language and find the best way forward. You have to be willing to hear other perspectives, other paradigms and consider them in your research methodology."
It's not the right path for everyone. In addition to good communication and willingness to learn, thriving in this space requires patience, Bickman says. "It's so much easier to run a study with college students, hand out a questionnaire and be done in a semester. These large-scale projects often don't bear any fruit for years," he says. "It's a very different career path, and it has to be considered carefully." But for the right personality, the rewards can be significant, he adds.
Interested in diving in? Riley, Johnson and Leve all recommend starting by learning the basics of other fields relevant to your research interests. Read up on basic genetics. Learn to use electronic health records. Talk to computer scientists and learn their lingo. "Do some initial work to set yourself up to be competitive for a project like this," Riley says.
You probably don't have to go far to make those connections, Leve adds. "It's a tight-knit science world. Most likely, I know somebody who knows somebody who's an expert in a particular discipline, whether at my own institution or elsewhere."
She recommends building those connections in natural ways, by collaborating on a paper or sharing a draft of a grant you're working on to get the perspective of someone from a different field. "Those things can provide a really good training ground for this kind of experience," she says.
Ultimately, if you want to be a part of a major research initiative, you have to be willing to look beyond the traditional boundaries of psychology to collaborate and innovate in bold new ways, says Johnson. "It's hard to get funded by NIH these days doing individual lab research. NIH is looking for high-impact science that's really going to move the needle," he says. "They're looking for things with clear translational relevance that are going to make the world a better place."
The BRAIN Initiative
Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes Program
Big Data to Knowledge
By Kirsten Weir
This article was originally published in the June 2017 Monitor on Psychology
Did you find this article useful?
A new APA report recommends ways to boost women's status and pay
Even as women have come to dominate psychology in terms of numbers within the educational pipeline, workforce and APA, they continue to lack equity with their male colleagues when it comes to money, power and status, according to a new report from APA's Committee on Women in Psychology (CWP).
"The Changing Gender Composition of Psychology: Update and Expansion of the 1995 Task Force Report" reviews the data and offers recommendations in such areas as education and training, employment and professional activities.
What's most surprising about the findings is how little has changed in the more than two decades since the first report, says lead author Ruth Fassinger, PhD.
While female psychologists have made gains in some areas, they have seen increasing disparities in other areas, such as salaries (see chart), which the report suggests could be partly due to the influx of young women joining the workforce for the first time.
"Women [in psychology] are still experiencing inequity," says Fassinger, a professor emerita at the University of Maryland's College of Education. "You see it everywhere: in training, in the jobs that women have and the patterns of workforce participation, and in APA itself."
Drawing on data from APA's Center for Workforce Studies (CWS) and a literature review and analysis Fassinger conducted as a visiting scholar at APA, the report notes the dramatic growth of women's representation within psychology that began in the 1970s and 1980s. Take psychology education. Of the 70,311 students enrolled in psychology graduate programs in 2014, according to CWS data, 75 percent were women. And up to 80 percent of students in training programs focused on health service provision are women. But by the time they finish their training, the report notes, female doctoral students are already at a disadvantage, with significantly higher debt levels than their male peers, according to a CWS analysis of pooled data from 1997 to 2009.
As women psychologists enter the workforce, they encounter lower salaries than men regardless of subfield. The average wage gap in starting salaries for recent doctoral grads is almost $20,000, the report points out, citing National Science Foundation (NSF) data from 2010.
One bright spot is jobs at government agencies, where women psychologists predominate and the wage gap is much smaller than in other settings. According to the NSF data, women with psychology PhDs who were working in government in 2010 made almost 92 percent of what their male counterparts made. But even that sector has seen a drop in equity along with other sectors; in 1993, women's government salaries were 94 percent of men's.
"The fact that women are accruing greater debt yet are being paid less is alarming," says Alette Coble-Temple, PsyD, chair of APA's CWP and a professor of clinical psychology at John F. Kennedy University in Pleasant Hill, California. Women who are ethnic and racial minorities and women with disabilities can face even greater disparities, she adds. Minority students finish their doctoral training with significantly more debt than white students, for example. The difference is especially pronounced among PsyD students, the report notes, citing data from 1997 to 2009 that show an average $95,000 debt for minority PsyD recipients versus $84,000 for white PsyD recipients.
Women in academia face particular challenges, the report emphasizes. It typically takes women a year longer to achieve tenure than men, for example. And even though women are flooding into the discipline, they are still underrepresented as associate professors, full professors and institutional leaders.
According to CWS data, 46 percent of all male psychology faculty in the academic year 2013–14 were full professors compared with 28 percent of female faculty, for instance. Just 16 percent of male academics were assistant professors compared with almost 28 percent of female academics. Women were also overrepresented among adjunct, nontenure-track lecturer and other temporary positions, with almost 17 percent of female faculty in these roles compared with 11 percent of male faculty. These patterns have held steady over the last two decades despite the influx of women into psychology departments.
The inequities play out within APA itself. Women now make up 58 percent of APA's membership and hold more than half of governance positions. Yet women are underrepresented when it comes to the association's top honors, participation in divisions and editorial roles. While 40 percent of those involved in the review process of APA journals are women, for instance, most are ad hoc reviewers. Just 18 percent of editors of APA journals are women.
The report acknowledges that women's choices account for some of the disparities. Women are more likely to seek PsyDs, for instance, and graduates of these programs accumulate almost twice as much debt as those of PhD programs. In addition, women practitioners are more likely to work part time, limiting their income. But, says Fassinger, these choices must be viewed within a sociocultural context that constrains women's options. "It's almost impossible to talk about things as free choice when you have all this socialization that propels people into certain directions," she says, noting that women may choose part-time work because of child-rearing obligations.
To address the disparity, the Committee on Women in Psychology recommends in the report that APA work to raise awareness and advocate for equity, pushing policies that encourage salary transparency and monitoring progress.
The report also calls for researching students' decision-making processes and interventions that could influence their decisions, such as making students at all levels aware of the wide range of meaningful careers beyond health service provision so that they can take advantage of other employment sectors where there are opportunities. Other recommendations include continuing to advocate for federal funding for trainees and early career psychologists, creating a task force to identify barriers to advancement within academia, and facilitating more mentorship for women.
The report should spur research exploring the factors that make psychology careers less attractive to men, says Paola Michelle Contreras, PsyD, of APA's CWP and an assistant professor of counseling at William James College in Newton, Massachusetts. "This is a good take-off point to get more data and learn more about the nuances," she says.
To read the full report, visit www.apa.org/women/programs/gender-composition/index.aspx.
By Rebecca A. Clay
This article was originally published in the July/August 2017 Monitor on Psychology
Did you find this article useful?
Too few psychology training programs offer guidance on the nuts and bolts of opening and running a practice, such as how to find office space, choose an electronic records system and protect against malpractice claims. “Practice Management Insights” seeks to fill those knowledge gaps by giving psychology practitioners the support they need to provide high-quality services in today’s increasingly competitive marketplace.
Did you find this booklet interesting or useful?
It is human nature to turn to people in our inner circle when we are in trouble.
But what if that trouble occurs 128 million miles from Earth while you are hurtling toward Mars in a spacecraft? And what if the person you most need is the one you least trust?
These questions are at the center of new research by APA member Dorothy Carter, an assistant professor of industrial/organizational psychology at the University of Georgia (UGA). Just one year after completing her Ph.D., Carter snagged a $1 million NASA grant to research team dynamics during long-duration space exploration missions.
The three-year, collaborative study, called Project FUSION (Facilitating Unified Systems of Interdependent Organizational Networks), aims to help NASA successfully complete a mission to Mars by the year 2030 by accelerating knowledge of multiteam systems (MTSs).
“Astronauts on a mission to Mars are very likely to run into challenging and unexpected situations,” explains Carter. “The people involved—on Earth and in outer space—may have the natural human inclination to turn to similar others, such as teammates. However, in order to save lives of the people on the mission, NASA personnel may need to be prepared to seek help from dissimilar others.”
MTS research is a growing area of psychology that deals with intergroup dynamics in complex organizational settings. These networks of interdependent teams work on proximal goals in service of a common, overarching goal—like disaster-response efforts, global healthcare initiatives, and even pharmaceutical launches.
The human pitfalls of such tentacled organizations are obvious: potential competition among teams, inadequate communication and collaboration, hierarchical obstacles, and leadership challenges, to name a few.
NASA’s task in putting together an MTS for the Mars mission will be complicated. Not only will astronauts operate at the intersection of multiple teams doing highly specialized tasks, membership in those teams will rotate over time.
Additionally, “communication with family and coworkers on Earth will be severely limited and conducted entirely via technologies that have inherent communication delays,” Carter says.
To pinpoint what Carter’s research proposal terms the “hard truths and inherent complexities about teamwork,” Project FUSION is building a sophisticated agents-based mapping system that predicts the social networks that are likely form among MTS members across a variety of situations during space missions.
This computer-modeling approach allows Project FUSION to program a set of behavioral rules for stand-in human “agents” to see how their relationships play out in different circumstances. Who will interact with whom? Who will be trusted? Who will accept influence from whom? What are the basic human tendencies that will lead them to behave in a particular way?
“We call these explorations ‘virtual experiments’ . . . and it’s how we are speeding up the science,” says Carter. “We want to be able to identify the different factors that are going to have the most impact on the formation of affective, behavioral and cognitive relationships. And we don’t have the luxury of being able to study this for the next 100 years.”
The project has processes to ensure they are accurately feeding NASA-specific information into the models. They use qualitative interviews with NASA personnel, such as managers, mission control members and former astronauts from the International Space Station, to get a better handle on common disconnects that occur, as well as instinctive responses to unexpected events.
Project FUSION also is conducting laboratory studies at UGA and Northwestern University that include role-playing sessions between student subjects and professionals at HERA , NASA’s analog-simulation habitat for studying and training humans for extreme space environments.
“The students act as mission control,” says Carter. “Hopefully the professionals who are in HERA for several months will play our game three or four times with ‘mission control.’”
Ultimately, the project is expected to identify likely patterns of group dynamics and behavior and help NASA develop best practices for optimal team functioning during many situations that can go right—and very wrong—during long-distance space exploration.
Carter’s launch into teams and leadership research—and into academia at all—followed a unique trajectory.
Originally from Houston, Carter desired to be a ballerina. She left high school to be part of a professional dance training program, completing her degree through correspondence. After pursuing dance professionally for several years, she decided to go to college at age 21.
“My initial plans did not involve college,” she says. “I ended up at Wright State University (WSU) in Ohio where they had an open-door policy. I walked in a week before classes started and signed up. . . . However, this was one of the best decisions of my life. As an undergrad, I received fantastic one-on-one mentoring in research from the faculty at WSU.”
Excited by the psychology classes she took, Carter was encouraged by her mentors to pursue research. She says was drawn to study leadership and MTSs to some degree because of her background in dance.
“Large groups of people, made up of different teams, having to coordinate their behaviors to achieve a common goal. Hmmm . . . sounds like a ballet company!” she exclaims.
Once she got to graduate school at Georgia Institute of Technology, Carter was able to work with Leslie DeChurch a leader in MTS research, with whom she copublished several articles on the topic. Her award-winning dissertation research, advised by DeChurch, leveraged social network approaches to understand leadership in MTSs.
Her work on the FOCUS grant builds on this prior research, as well as other NASA projects led by members of the Project FUSION research team.
“We’re expanding on these previous projects that I had the pleasure of working on in grad school,” Carter says. “It’s not like, ‘Oh Dorothy Carter independently developed all these ideas by herself and got a million dollar grant just out of grad school!’ Project FUSION is a collaboration across a big team of incredible researchers who are at both senior as well as more junior stages in their careers.”
“I think my personal experiences reflect the way that science is actually conducted these days,” she reflects. “It’s a group effort across multiple laboratories. Understanding multiteam functioning doesn’t just apply to the organizations we’re studying, it applies to the researchers ourselves. A lot of scientists work in MTSs, so science itself can be advanced by this research.”
Did you find this article interesting?
Beat the computer and get out of the maze first! You are the green player, and the computer is the red. Finish the maze as fast as you can because when the red player gets to the flag first, then the game is over. Train your eye to track down all dead ends and avoid them as swiftly as you can to save time and so that you can get to the flag quicker. Remember that the number of points incurred, upon reaching the flag, depends on how far the red player is from the finish line.
- Click on start with mouse and cursor to begin the game.
- Direct your green ball to the flag using the arrow keys. Holding them down will make your ball travel farther in one move.
- Find the shortest path and outrun the red ball. You win if you reach the flag first. Look out for walls that block your path!
- The further distance the red ball is from the flag when you reach the flag, the more points you will get.
- If the red ball gets to the flag first, your game is over!