These Are The 10 Biggest Myths In Psychology

[FarCenter]

2. There's An Autism Epidemic

Autism is a "disorder of neural development characterized by impaired social interaction and verbal and non-verbal communication, and by restricted, repetitive or stereotyped behavior."

Prior to the 1990s, the prevalence of autism in the United States was estimated at 1 in 2,500. In 2007, that rate was 1 in 150. In March, the CDC announced new, startling numbers: 1 in 68. What's going on?

The meteoric rise in diagnoses has prompted many to cry "epidemic!" Fearful, they look for a reason, and often latch onto vaccines.

But vaccines are not the cause. The most likely explanation is far less frightening.

Over the past decades, the diagnostic criteria for autism have been significantly loosened. Each of the last three major revisions to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM) has made it much easier for psychiatrists to diagnose the disorder. When a 2005 study conducted in England tracked autism cases between 1992 and 1998 using identical diagnostic criteria, the rates didn't budge.

http://www.businessinsider.com/these-are-the-10-biggest-myths-in-psychology-2014-4

[bemildred]

1. Psychology is to science what air guitar is to rock and roll. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Which proves that all of those myths must be true

because it was pseudoscientific psychological studies that "exposed" most of them.

[bemildred]

3. And pseudo-scientific psychology studies that proposed them in the first place. nt

[HERVEPA]

4. Care to elaborate?

[bemildred]

5. No. It's not a theory. nt

[HERVEPA]

9. It's a statement which doesn't make sense to me.

and perhaps implies Psychology is not scientific. Any reason you cannot or won't back that up.
If this were the lounge, I'd understand. But it's not.

[bemildred]

10. Your lack of understanding does not bother me, carry on.

It's just an epigram. As you can see, some people relate to it.

[HERVEPA]

20. Definition of epigram includes witty

Anyhow, your lack of willingness to back up your alleged epigram will no longer bother me.
Nor will your rudeness.

[bemildred]

21. Good. Adios. nt

[sharp_stick]

6. Fair warning

I just might steal that line for future use.

[bemildred]

7. Creative commons licence hereby asserted.

Use it at your own risk.

[Hip_Flask]

11. Is that you Tom Cruise?

[bemildred]

12. Magnolia? nt

[bemildred]

13. Oh I get it, Scientology.

Brilliant.

[RedCappedBandit]

14. The social sciences are not pseudoscience.

Nor are they hard science. Researchers understand that. The problem is irresponsible reporting about that research.

[bemildred]

17. +1. It is used far too much for non-scientific reasons.

For setting social policy for example, or all this fascination with measuring and testing, like it was physics. Math is not the answer to every question.

It it were treated more like the heuristic and uncertain study which it is, it being fundamentally subjective in its nature, I would not complain.

And neuroscience I consider much less problematic, although there is that tendency to want to use it for other reasons too.

[Zorra]

15. I've heard it said that people who believe psychology is useless are

those who would benefit the most from it,

But I don't believe a word of it; I think the truth is that they're totally out to get us. As we both know, everyone here is full on deranged, except for you and me, of course...but I'm not really sure about you.


But I digress...you seem to be having a problem with the applied discipline of the scientific study of mental functions and behaviors. So why don't you just sit right down here on the couch, and show me your palms, after I've finished my pilates, and tell me about it? Relax...I'll be done in a jiffy!


Now, tell me, what seems to be the problem? You seem totally bemildred. Not to worry, you'll be yourself again in no time!

[bemildred]

18. Yeah, it's Catch-22. nt

[Tommy_Carcetti]

8. I wonder if there's a bit of overdiagnosis/misdiagnosis in the high functioning end of the spectrum.

For example, looking back at my own childhood, I could see where a somewhat lackadaisical professional might have diagnosed me with Aspergers or some other high functioning type of autism.

Specifically, I was a smart kid but rather shy and awkward with some of my social skills, and I had several intensely focused interests on particular topics. For example, from ages 7 to 9, I had a fascination with birds and could easily identify the various classes and species of birds as good as any ornithologist. However, I also had a strong grasp of empathy and was very good with imaginative play, which are two characteristics not typically associated with a condition such as Aspergers. And now as an adult, I don't really face the challenges that many diagnosed Aspergers patients have regarding social interactions. So I doubt I ever actually had the condition, despite certainly showing particular traits that might have been associated with it. But a professional who wished to focus on those traits and not the traits that seemed to rule out the diagnosis could have easily slapped the label on me, had it been available to them at the time.

That being said, Aspergers and other forms of high functioning autism are certainly not a myth. I've come across several people who I think clearly seem to fit the diagnosis in all categories. But I do think there might be overdiagnosis or misdiagnosis in those regards.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

16. Just reading an article the other day...

That said that new diagnostic guidelines might cause up to half of persons now diagnosed as autistic to be classified as something else, compared to where they were with the guidance in DSM-5. The new guidelines are far from established, but it does point to the possibility that there are not more people being born with autism, just more people now diagnosed as such.

The bad news is that children who are no longer diagnosed as being autistic will lose out on services that they would have received otherwise. Which places parents in the freakish situation of hoping their kid is diagnosed as autistic. Good grief!

[lumberjack_jeff]

19. False.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/autism-rise-driven-by-environment/

An environmental trigger is at work. The increase in autism diagnoses can't be explained by changing diagnostic criteria alone.

[FarCenter]

22. This Danish study didn't find an increase from 1980 to 2004.

The researchers found the likelihood of a younger sibling being diagnosed with autism when an older sibling had an ASD varied between 4.5 and 10.5 percent, with an average of about 7 percent. There was no clear increasing or decreasing trend during the study period.

For half-siblings, the extra risk of autism was smaller: younger half-siblings who shared a father with an older sibling had a 1.5-times greater risk of ASDs if their sibling also had one, a finding that could have been due to chance.

Children who shared a mother with a half-sibling had a 2.4-times greater risk if their older brother or sister had autism, according to findings published in JAMA Pediatrics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/22/sibling-with-autism_n_3795250.html

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1728998

Of course, Denmark may be cleaner than California -- maybe they do not have brominated flame retardants in all their furniture.

But twin studies, sibling studies, and the half-sibling data in the above study indicate that there is a large component and also something about the maternal environment during pregnancy that are important. Note that the risk for half siblings that share a mother is much greater than ones that share a father. However, sharing both father and mother is an even higher risk.

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. Certainly there's a genetic component, and also increased awareness...

... and changing diagnosis is a factor.

But after correcting for both those things, there remains an increase in autism frequency.

I'd argue that the changes in diagnostic criteria and increased awareness are symptoms of the increased prevalence.

[Archae]

24. Psychologists used to blame the mother for autistic kids.

The "frozen mother" theory who was "cold" to her baby so the child gets autistic.

Now, the latest stupid "cause" being claimed to cause autism is vaccines.