Docstoc

Altered States of Consciousness SEMINAR

Document Sample
Altered States of Consciousness SEMINAR Powered By Docstoc
					Altered States of Consciousness:
          SEMINAR

          Antti Revonsuo
             May 2010
Sending you out on an exploration...
... Into the jungles of science and
        scientific publication
I hope you will find your way safely and
   come back with good results and
              evidence...
               ASC-Seminar tasks:



           Literature Search Task
          & Seminar Presentation



Essay on Principles of Scientific Publication
          ASC-Seminar tasks:



     Literature Search Task
    & Seminar Presentation
              (group task)




Essay on Principles of Scientific
          Publication
            (individual task)
  Literature Search & Presentation Task

- in groups of 3 people (7 groups / day)

- Each group attends only one seminar day 25/5-28/5
                    Essay task

• An essay based on today’s lectures

• So... PAY ATTENTION!!
            Literature Search Task

* Systematic literature search is the first stage
  of ANY research!

     >> essential skill in any academic studies
     >> in the C-uppsats (and other assignments)
  you'll have to show you have this skill
     >> start practising NOW!
              Literature Search Task



* How to find evidence-based information
   >> scientific publications, articles in scientific journals
   >> databases that contain only scientific sources

* How to conduct searches in scientific databases
1) ”Hunting for Science”
          * How does the publication of new scientific results take place?

2) Sources of non-scientific information
          * typical features of non-scientific or pseudoscientific information

3) ”Peer Review”: The quality control system of scientific
   publication
          - How to Get Published: the peer-review process
          - peer-reviewed journals, how to find them and evaluate their quality


4) The Literature Search Task & Seminar Presentation: Find, Summarize and
   Present New Studies on ASCs


5) Essay on Scientific Publication
  ASCs are currently a hot topic in psychology and
               cognitive neuroscience..

* How to keep up with what is really going on in the
   scientific research of any given ASC?

  ... or ANY other topic, too!
   ASCs are currently a hot topic in psychology and
                cognitive neuroscience

* how to find the latest scientific studies and research
   results concerning ASCs?

* how to find the original scientific publications in
   which new studies are first published?

* how to ascertain that the information is trustworthy
   and fulfills the appropriate scientific standards?
* how to find the latest scientific studies and research results concerning ASCs?

* how to find the original scientific publications in which new studies are first published?

* how to ascertain that the information is trustworthy and fulfills the appropriate scientific standards?




                             >> we need to figure out...


      how the publication of new research
         results takes place in science!
                Hunting for Science:
                 The Literature Search Task

>> using the same search strategy, you can yourself
  check the latest scientific facts on basically any
  topic!


  * psychology, neuroscience, biomedicine etc.
  * diseases, medications, nutrition, vitamins, the health effects
  or the risks of this or that substance / behaviour etc.
Br J Sports Med. 2009 Mar;43(3):159-62. Epub
  2008 Apr 18. Is your prescription of distance
  running shoes evidence-based?
Br J Sports Med. 2009 Mar;43(3):159-62. Epub 2008 Apr 18. Is your
   prescription of distance running shoes evidence-based?

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the current practice of
  prescribing distance running shoes featuring elevated
  cushioned heels and pronation control systems tailored to the
  individual's foot type is evidence-based.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1950-May 2007), CINAHL (1982-May 2007), EMBASE (1980-May 2007), PsychInfo (1806-May 2007), Cochrane Database
     of Systematic Reviews (2(nd) Quarter 2007), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (2(nd) Quarter 2007), SPORTSDiscus (1985-May
     2007) and AMED (1985-May 2007). Review METHODS: English language articles were identified via keyword and medical subject headings
     (MeSH) searches of the above electronic databases. With these searches and the subsequent review process, controlled trials or
     systematic reviews were sought in which the study population included adult recreational or competitive distance runners, the exposure
     was distance running, the intervention evaluated was a running shoe with an elevated cushioned heel and pronation control systems
     individualised to the wearer's foot type, and the outcome measures included either running injury rates, distance running performance,
     osteoarthritis risk, physical activity levels, or overall health and wellbeing. The quality of these studies and their findings were then evaluated.
     RESULTS: No original research that met the study criteria was identified either directly or via the findings of the six systematic reviews
     identified.

 CONCLUSION: The prescription of this shoe type to distance
  runners is not evidence-based.
Inflammopharmacology.
   2008 Oct;16(5):230-4.
   Tea polyphenols
   benefit vascular
   function.
Inflammopharmacology.
   2008 Oct;16(5):230-4.
   Tea polyphenols
   benefit vascular
   function.
Inflammopharmacology. 2008 Oct;16(5):230-4. Tea polyphenols benefit vascular
    function. Yung LM, Leung FP, Wong WT, Tian XY, Yung LH, Chen ZY, Yao XQ,
    Huang Y. Institute of Vascular Medicine and Department of Physiology,
    Chinese University of Hong Kong Shatin, NT, Hong Kong.

Tea, the most popular beverage worldwide, is consumed in three basic forms;
   green tea, black tea and oolong tea. Tea contains over 4,000 chemicals
   some of which are bioactive. In recent years there has been a mounting
   interest in understanding the cardiovascular and metabolic benefits of
   polyphenolic flavonoids in tea, which can be used as a supplement among
   patients. Diverse cardioprotective effects of consuming tea or tea
   polyphenols have been described on pathological conditions, e. g.
   hypertension, atherosclerosis, diabetics, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, and
   are attributed to antioxidative, anti-thrombogenic, anti-inflammatory,
   hypotensive and hypocholesterolemic properties of tea polyphenols. This
   review focuses on cardiovascular benefits of tea polyphenols based on in
   vitro and in vivo studies on experimental animal models and on studies of
   human subjects in four areas: (1) vasorelaxant effect; (2) protective effect
   against endothelial dysfunction; (3) antioxidant effect and (4) hypolipidemic
   effect. We will briefly discuss the effects of tea on atherosclerosis and
   hypertension.
Circulation. 2009 Mar 17;119(10):1433-41. Cocoa and cardiovascular
   health. Corti R, Flammer AJ, Hollenberg NK, Lüscher TF.
   Cardiovascular Center, Cardiology, University Hospital, Raemistrasse
   100, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland. roberto.corti@usz.ch
   Epidemiological data demonstrate that regular dietary intake of
   plant-derived foods and beverages reduces the risk of coronary
   heart disease and stroke. Among many ingredients, cocoa might be
   an important mediator. Indeed, recent research demonstrates a
   beneficial effect of cocoa on blood pressure, insulin resistance, and
   vascular and platelet function. Although still debated, a range of
   potential mechanisms through which cocoa might exert its benefits
   on cardiovascular health have been proposed, including activation
   of nitric oxide and antioxidant and antiinflammatory effects. This
   review summarizes the available data on the cardiovascular effects
   of cocoa, outlines potential mechanisms involved in the response to
   cocoa, and highlights the potential clinical implications associated
   with its consumption.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Jul;88(1):58-63. Acute dark
 chocolate and cocoa ingestion and endothelial
 function: a randomized controlled crossover trial.
                      Acute dark chocolate and cocoa ingestion and
Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Jul;88(1):58-63.
     endothelial function: a randomized controlled crossover trial. Faridi Z, Njike
     VY, Dutta S, Ali A, Katz DL. Yale Prevention Research Center, Derby, CT, USA. BACKGROUND: Studies suggest cardioprotective

                        OBJECTIVE: This study examines
     benefits of dark chocolate containing cocoa.

     the acute effects of solid dark chocolate and liquid
     cocoa intake on endothelial function and blood
     pressure in overweight adults. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, single-
     blind crossover trial of 45 healthy adults [mean age: 53 y; mean body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 30]. In phase 1, subjects were
     randomly assigned to consume a solid dark chocolate bar (containing 22 g cocoa powder) or a cocoa-free placebo bar
     (containing 0 g cocoa powder). In phase 2, subjects were randomly assigned to consume sugar-free cocoa (containing 22 g
     cocoa powder), sugared cocoa (containing 22 g cocoa powder), or a placebo (containing 0 g cocoa powder). RESULTS:
     Solid dark chocolate and liquid cocoa ingestion improved endothelial function (measured as flow-mediated dilatation)
     compared with placebo (dark chocolate: 4.3 +/- 3.4% compared with -1.8 +/- 3.3%; P < 0.001; sugar-free and sugared cocoa:
     5.7 +/- 2.6% and 2.0 +/- 1.8% compared with -1.5 +/- 2.8%; P < 0.001). Blood pressure decreased after the ingestion of dark
     chocolate and sugar-free cocoa compared with placebo (dark chocolate: systolic, -3.2 +/- 5.8 mm Hg compared with 2.7
     +/- 6.6 mm Hg; P < 0.001; and diastolic, -1.4 +/- 3.9 mm Hg compared with 2.7 +/- 6.4 mm Hg; P = 0.01; sugar-free cocoa:
     systolic, -2.1 +/- 7.0 mm Hg compared with 3.2 +/- 5.6 mm Hg; P < 0.001; and diastolic: -1.2 +/- 8.7 mm Hg compared with 2.8
     +/- 5.6 mm Hg; P = 0.014). Endothelial function improved significantly more with sugar-free than with regular cocoa (5.7 +/-
     2.6% compared with 2.0 +/- 1.8%; P < 0.001).
                      Acute dark chocolate and cocoa ingestion and
Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Jul;88(1):58-63.
     endothelial function: a randomized controlled crossover trial. Faridi Z, Njike
     VY, Dutta S, Ali A, Katz DL. Yale Prevention Research Center, Derby, CT, USA. BACKGROUND: Studies suggest cardioprotective

                        OBJECTIVE: This study examines
     benefits of dark chocolate containing cocoa.

     the acute effects of solid dark chocolate and liquid
     cocoa intake on endothelial function and blood
     pressure in overweight adults. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, single-
     blind crossover trial of 45 healthy adults [mean age: 53 y; mean body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 30]. In phase 1, subjects were
     randomly assigned to consume a solid dark chocolate bar (containing 22 g cocoa powder) or a cocoa-free placebo bar
     (containing 0 g cocoa powder). In phase 2, subjects were randomly assigned to consume sugar-free cocoa (containing 22 g
     cocoa powder), sugared cocoa (containing 22 g cocoa powder), or a placebo (containing 0 g cocoa powder). RESULTS:
     Solid dark chocolate and liquid cocoa ingestion improved endothelial function (measured as flow-mediated dilatation)
     compared with placebo (dark chocolate: 4.3 +/- 3.4% compared with -1.8 +/- 3.3%; P < 0.001; sugar-free and sugared cocoa:
     5.7 +/- 2.6% and 2.0 +/- 1.8% compared with -1.5 +/- 2.8%; P < 0.001). Blood pressure decreased after the ingestion of dark
     chocolate and sugar-free cocoa compared with placebo (dark chocolate: systolic, -3.2 +/- 5.8 mm Hg compared with 2.7
     +/- 6.6 mm Hg; P < 0.001; and diastolic, -1.4 +/- 3.9 mm Hg compared with 2.7 +/- 6.4 mm Hg; P = 0.01; sugar-free cocoa:
     systolic, -2.1 +/- 7.0 mm Hg compared with 3.2 +/- 5.6 mm Hg; P < 0.001; and diastolic: -1.2 +/- 8.7 mm Hg compared with 2.8
     +/- 5.6 mm Hg; P = 0.014). Endothelial function improved significantly more with sugar-free than with regular cocoa (5.7 +/-
                           CONCLUSIONS: The acute ingestion of
     2.6% compared with 2.0 +/- 1.8%; P < 0.001).
     both solid dark chocolate and liquid cocoa improved
     endothelial function and lowered blood pressure in overweight
     adults. Sugar content may attenuate these effects, and sugar-
     free preparations may augment them.
              Sources of information


>> the scientific method produces information that tends to be
   more reliable than other sources of information

>> unless you know exactly where to look for scientific
   information, you will be mostly exposed to information sources
   that are not as reliable as scientific information

>> sometimes the difference between scientific and non-
   scientific sources may be difficult to tell
   Sources of non-scientific information

1) Personal beliefs, experiences, convictions, gut feelings,
   intuitions, testimonials, opinions

2) Web-pages and blogs

3) Rumours, urban legends, quotations out of context

4) Overpopularized or oversimplified science journalism

5) “New age" and other pseudoscientific beliefs, “alternative”
   medicine products, practitioners and treatments
Personal beliefs, experiences, convictions, gut feelings, intuitions,
    testimonials, opinions



  * personal conviction vs empirically tested evidence


  * the strength of personal conviction is no
  guarantee of the accuracy of the beliefs held
* psychology has revealed several cognitive-
   emotional mechanisms that tend to lead us to be
   highly convinced about something although the
   objective evidence may not support our
   convictions


>> “confirmation bias”
>> “cognitive dissonance”
>> self-justification…
Cognitive
Dissonance
   Cognitive
   Dissonance

L. Festinger
   (1957):
   Studied an
   UFO cult that
   had made a
   doomsday
   prediction
Cognitive Dissonance

L. Festinger (1957): Studied an UFO cult that had
   made doomsday predictions

• The faithful would be picked up by a flying saucer
  and elevated to safety on December 20 at
  midnight

• What happened??
Cognitive Dissonance

Is an unpleasant state of tension that occurs
   whenever a person holds two cognitive states (e.g.
   beliefs, ideas, opinions) that are psychologically
   inconsistent

            “Smoking is a dumb thing to do because it could kill me”
                          & “I smoke two packs a day”


>> motivation to reduce the dissonance by trying to convince oneself
   that smoking is not really so harmful, or by saying it is worth the risk
   because it helps to relax etc.
Cognitive Dissonance


The more costly a decision in terms of time,
  money, effort, or inconvenience, and the more
  irrevocable its consequences, the greater the
  dissonance and the greater the need to reduce it
  by overemphasizing the good things about the
  choice made (Tavris & Aronson 2007, p. 22)
The Challenger Study

        Neisser et al. 1992.: Flashbulb memories
        - 106 students wrote down how and when
           exactly they had heard about the
           explosion
        - 2,5 yrs later: only 10% remembered it
           exactly and correctly, 25% gave a
           completely different account.
        - When confronted with their own
           handwritten accounts, many expressed a
           high confidence that their false
           recollections were correct


              ”That’s my handwriting,
                   but that’s not
                 what happened”
In On Being Certain, neurologist Robert
    Burton challenges the notions of how we
    think about what we know. He shows that
    the feeling of certainty we have when
    we "know" something comes from
    sources beyond our control and
    knowledge. In fact, certainty is a mental
    sensation, rather than evidence of
    fact. Because this "feeling of knowing"
    seems like confirmation of knowledge,
    we tend to think of it as a product of
    reason. But an increasing body of
    evidence suggests that feelings such as
    certainty stem from primitive areas of the
    brain, and are independent of active,
    conscious reflection and reasoning. The
    feeling of knowing happens to us; we
    cannot make it happen.
Most of us find it difficult, if not
  impossible, to say: ”I was wrong, I made
  a terrible mistake”... All of us share the
  impulse to justify ourselves and avoid
  taking responsibility for any actions that
  turn out to be harmful, immoral, or
  stupid” (p. 2)

Most people, when directly confronted with
  proof that they are wrong, do not change
  their point of view or course of action,
  but justify it even more. (p.2)
- mechanisms that are
  specialized in producing
  uncritical justifications or
  confabulated explanations:

* the left-hemisphere interpreter

* interpretive introspection
      Personal beliefs, experiences,
          testimonials, opinions

 * products that have no scientific evidence to back
 up their claimed beneficial effects are usually
 advertised by referring to people who are (saying
 that they are) highly convinced that it works

personal testimonials, opinion polls of user
 experiences, recommendations by famous or
 authoritative persons, scientific-sounding obscure
 terminology etc.
"I Lost 53 Lbs In 2 Months By Trying Out Dr
  Oz & Oprah Recommended Products"
 * products that have no scientific evidence to back up their claimed beneficial effects are usually
 advertised by personal testimonials, opinion polls of user experiences, recommendations by famous or
 authoritative persons etc.




* by contrast, in science, personal
  conviction is not enough: anyone who
  puts forth a statement has the burden
  of proof to produce the scientific
  evidence of its accuracy
       Sources of non-scientific information


Web-pages and blogs

  * anyone can post anything to their webpages

  * even if the page comes up first when googling a keyword, it
  is no guarantee of the accuracy of the information

* even seemingly reliable web-sources (like Wikipedia) are not
   acceptable sources to refer to when the original scientific
   information is required as a source
       Sources of non-scientific information


Rumours, urban legends, quotations out of context

* things that e.g. Einstein is supposed to have said
       Sources of non-scientific information


Rumours, urban legends, quotations out of context

* things that e.g. Einstein is supposed to have said


  “We use only 10% of our brain's total capacity"
      Sources of non-scientific information


       “We use only 10% of our brain's total capacity"

>> if the original quote can be traced back at all, it
  usually turns out to be a misinterpretation

>> even if a famous scientist has actually said
  whatever, it may still be totally false (Newton &
  alchemy!)
            Sources of non-scientific information

                                     “We use only 10% of our brain's total capacity"

>> if the original quote can be traced back at all, it usually turns out to be a misinterpretation

>> even if a famous scientist has actually said whatever, it may still be totally false (Newton & alchemy!)




>> in science, what matters is not WHO
  has stated something, but only whether
  the statement is backed up by
  convincing evidence
      Sources of non-scientific information


Overpopularized or oversimplified science journalism

- sensational mass media: tabloid newspapers and
   magazines
   Sources of non-scientific information

* reporters and journalists are not scientists!

* their primary interest is to make money with the
  magazine they write for
   Sources of non-scientific information

* reporters and journalists are not scientists!

* their primary interest is to make money
  with the magazine they write for

>> they over-simplify and try to dramatize, they may
   misunderstand or exaggerate what the scientists
   really have said or found
     Sources of non-scientific information

* reporters and journalists are not scientists!

* their primary interest is to make money with the magazine they write for

>> they over-simplify and try to dramatize, they may misunderstand or exaggerate what the
     scientists really have said or found


* by contrast, scientists do not get any money by
   scientific publication (they are not paid by the
   journal they publish their results in).

* The purpose of scientific communication is the
  accurate transfer of reliable information, not
  drama or money or sensation etc.
      “New age" and other pseudoscientific beliefs

* pseudoscience tries to pose itself as scientific without
   actually being so (to get the credibility of real science)

* (mis)use of concepts that sound scientific, often mixed up
   with or connected to unscientific, mystical, religious etc
   concepts

  "energy" "quantum" "magnetic field" "alpha waves" "higher frequences"
                              connected with
  "holistic", "healing", “aura” , "precognition", "collective consciousness",
                   "archetypes" ,"chakras" ,"astral body" etc.
* How exactly does a new idea or
  finding become properly accepted as
  "scientific"?



* What constitutes "evidence-based"
  information?
>> how exactly does a new idea or finding become accepted as "scientific"?




             >> scientific publication!

    * the strictly controlled publication of new ideas or
    findings that are backed up by proper scientific
    evidence
* What indicates that some finding or
  statement is “scientific” as opposed to mere
  opinion or hearsay?

     >> it has been originally published in a
     “scientific” source
* What indicates that some finding or statement is “scientific” as
   opposed to mere opinion or hearsay?
        >> it has been originally published in a “scientific” source



* How exactly does scientific publication differ
  from other types of publication and
  information in the media or the internet?
”Peer review”

The quality-control
 system of scientific
     publication
                           ”Peer Review”
   The quality-control system of scientific publication


* all findings in science are first published in “peer-
   reviewed journals”

* all scientific journals that publish original research
   results, use the peer review system when selecting
   and deciding what to publish


Peer = "a person of the same age, status, or ability as another specified person"
   (Oxford Dictionary)
         scientists                     scientists
scientists

               Peer-reviewed,
         original scientific literature
         * the vast database of evidence-based
                 scientific knowledge




                                         scientists
                                    scientists
         scientists                     scientists
scientists

               Peer-reviewed,
         original scientific literature
         * the vast database of evidence-based
                 scientific knowledge




                                         scientists
                                    scientists

                           Academic
                           Textbooks
             students!
                                scientists                      scientists
                     scientists

                                      Peer-reviewed,
                                original scientific literature
                                * the vast database of evidence-based
                                        scientific knowledge




                                                                 scientists
                                                              scientists

                                                               Academic
                          journalists, reporters...            Textbooks
The General Public     Science journalism:
                       - popular science books, TV-programs
                                                                students!
                       - science news in the media
                       - popular science magazines
                                                    scientists                      scientists
                                         scientists

 Nonscientific literature:                                Peer-reviewed,
   biographies,fiction, sci-fi, fantasy             original scientific literature
                                                    * the vast database of evidence-based
                                                            scientific knowledge

Nonscientific           pseudoscientific
  Internet                literature
   sources
                       "new age", astrology
                       "holistic" medicine "Bad" science
                       parapsychology                                                scientists
                       psychoanalysis, NLP                                        scientists
                       graphology

                                                                                   Academic
                                              journalists, reporters...            Textbooks
     The General Public                    Science journalism:
                                           - popular science books, TV-programs
                                                                                    students!
                                           - science news in the media
                                           - popular science magazines
                                                    scientists                      scientists
                                        scientists

 Nonscientific literature:                                Peer-reviewed,
   biographies,fiction, sci-fi, fantasy             original scientific literature
                                                    * the vast database of evidence-based
                                                            scientific knowledge
        ASC              ASC
Nonscientific           pseudoscientific                          ASC
  Internet                literature
   sources
   ASC                 "new age", astrology   ASC
                       "holistic" medicine "Bad" science
                       parapsychology                                                scientists
                       psychoanalysis, NLP                                        scientists
                       graphology

                       ASC                                                         Academic
                                                                                   Textbooks
                                              journalists, reporters...
                                                                          ASC
     The General Public                    Science journalism:
                                           - popular science books, TV-programs
                                                                                    students!
                                           - science news in the media
                                           - popular science magazines
                    ”Peer Review”
  The quality-control system of scientific publication

* original research reports: written by the scientists
   who have themselves made the study
                            vs
popularized science news and stories (typically
   written by science journalists):




Popular-science magazines: Illustrerad Vetenskap, Psychology
  Today, Scientific American, National Geographic, New
  Scientist…
Popular-Science Magazines
  (NOT original peer-reviewed research!!)
Popular-Science Magazines
  (NOT original peer-reviewed research!!)
                 ”Peer Review”
  The quality-control system of scientific publication



* peer-reviewed journals that publish original
  research are NOT for sale at the newsstand!

>> Only found in University libraries, electronic
  databases, homepages of scientific
  publishers
                ”Peer Review”
The quality-control system of scientific publication




         How, exactly, does it work??
                            ”Peer Review”
          The quality-control system of scientific publication


1) Writing of manuscript
2) Submission to Journal (Editor)
3) Initial editorial evaluation
4) External review
5) Reviewer’s reports
6) Editorial decision
     Writing and submitting a manuscript


* The scientists write a manuscript (a research report)
   where they describe in detail the research question, the
   methods, the subjects, the results, and the interpretation
   and implications of the results.
     Writing and submitting a manuscript


* The scientists write a manuscript (a research report)
   where they describe in detail the research question, the
   methods, the subjects, the results, and the interpretation
   and implications of the results.

* The manuscript must be written and formatted according
   to the strict rules and guidelines of the journal (e.g.
   Publication Manual of APA)
           APA style for scientific manuscripts

-the writing style guidelines which are
developed, maintained, and periodically
revised and updated by the American
Psychological Association (APA)

- The APA's writing style is documented
in its manual entitled:
Publication manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th ed.)
(2001). Washington, D.C.: American
Psychological Association.



>> more about this in later courses!!
     Writing and submitting a manuscript




* The manuscript is sent ("submitted") to the Editor or
   the Editorial Office of a scientific journal that
   publishes papers in that area of research
      >> instructions for submission found at homepages of journals
                     The Review Process

The journal editor first checks the manuscript for
  topical suitability for the journal and overall quality.



     >> rejected without review
Or
     >> sent to external reviewers >> "peer review"
                        The Review Process

The editor first checks the manuscript for topical suitability for the journal and
   overall quality.


>> If it is found suitable, then it will be reviewed by
  external experts (“peers”). If not, it will be
  immediately rejected, without review.
                         The Review Process

The editor first checks the manuscript for topical suitability for the journal and
   overall quality.

>> If it is found suitable, then it will be reviewed by external experts (“peers”). If
    not, it will be immediately rejected, without review.


>> The editor sends the manuscript (or, first, a request to
  review the manuscript) to 2-5 independent experts
  working in the fields of research that the manuscript
  handles
                 Reviewer’s Report

The task for each of the Reviewers / Referees of the ms is
  to read and evaluate it in detail, and then to write a
  reviewer’s report, including a recommendation to the
  editor
                          Reviewer’s Report

The task for each of the Reviewers / Referees of the ms is to read and evaluate it in
   detail, and then to write a reviewer’s report, including a recommendation to the editor


In the reviewers report, the study is first described briefly,
   and then its strengths and weaknesses critically
   analysed: quality, novelty, originality, contribution to the
   field etc. Suggestions or demands for revision are
   given.
                          Reviewer’s Report

The task for each of the Reviewers / Referees of the ms is to read and evaluate it in
   detail, and then to write a reviewer’s report, including a recommendation to the editor


In the reviewers report, the study is first described briefly,
   and then its strengths and weaknesses critically
   analysed: quality, novelty, originality, contribution to the
   field etc. Suggestions or demands for revision are
   given.


>> the purpose of the Reports is to help the
  Editor reach a publication decision
            Reviewer’s recommendation
The recommendation to the editor (and the Editor’s decision) is
  usually chosen from a predefined set of alternatives:


Reject

Reject with encouragement to resubmit after major
  revisions or additional research

Revise

Accept with minor revisions
Accept as is
                 Editor’s decision
The editor then considers the overall picture to reach a
  decision, sometimes the recommendations may be
  in conflict with each other

The Editor sends the decision along with the
  (anonymous) Reviewers’ Reports to the author
Rejection Letter
Revise- letter
                 Getting published


* Nearly every ms goes through 1-3 revisions before it
   is accepted.

* A study is often first rejected by some journals and
   then sent to some other(s), and finally accepted for
   publication.
                                    Getting published


* Nearly every ms goes through 1-3 revisions before it is accepted. It might also be first rejected by some journals and
     then sent to others.



* The review process usually takes 2-12 months,
   sometimes even longer. A ms is very rarely accepted
   right away as is.
                  Getting published


* After the paper is accepted, its abstract (brief summary)
   is immediately published in scientific databases

* the whole paper may quickly become electronically
   available through the journal's webpages: articles “in
   press” or “epub ahead of print”

* if old-fashioned paper journal >> takes 6-18 months
    before published in print
               Peer-review journals

There are thousands of peer-reviewed scientific
  journals

They publish over 1 million scientific articles per year.

They form the official archive of original scientific
 literature
                Peer-review journals

The official archive of original scientific literature

>> a record of research results “filtered” through the peer-
  review process

>> findings, observations, ideas backed up by scientific
  evidence and therefore worthy of serious attention
Review -papers and Meta-analyses
      Review -papers and Meta-analyses


>> they draw together the results of a number of
  different studies

>> they give the ”bigger picture” and look at the totality of
  the evidence
             >> converging evidence from several different studies?
Reviews and Meta-analyses are regarded as
giving the best overall idea of the strength
              of the evidence
 How to find the research published in peer-
              review journals?

There are scientific databases (e.g., MEDLINE, PubMed,
  PsychInfo) that publish the abstracts of hundreds of
  journals in a specific area.

* The abstracts are freely available
 How to find the research published in peer-
              review journals?


The abstracts give a brief summary of the study, and the
  full reference to the original journal where it was
  published.

Also some journals and full-text articles are freely available
  in the web, but many are not.
    Always go back to the original source!

Whenever a statement is made somewhere that
 “research has shown this” or “research has shown
 that”, one should always be able to go back to the
 original source:
                                                    scientists                      scientists
                                        scientists

 Nonscientific literature:                                Peer-reviewed,
   biographies,fiction, sci-fi, fantasy             original scientific literature
                                                    * the vast database of evidence-based
                                                            scientific knowledge
        ASC              ASC
Nonscientific           pseudoscientific                          ASC
  Internet                literature
   sources
   ASC                 "new age", astrology   ASC
                       "holistic" medicine "Bad" science
                       parapsychology                                                scientists
                       psychoanalysis, NLP                                        scientists
                       graphology

                       ASC                                                         Academic
                                                                                   Textbooks
                                              journalists, reporters...
                                                                          ASC
     The General Public                    Science journalism:
                                           - popular science books, TV-programs
                                                                                    students!
                                           - science news in the media
                                           - popular science magazines
    Always go back to the original source!


*to check where and when the finding was published

* to read what the actual experiment was like, what the
   results and conclusions were

* to check whether the result has ever been replicated
   by others or cited in the scientific literature
    Always go back to the original source!


If you cannot find the original source in a peer-
   reviewed journal or if the result has never been
   replicated…
    Always go back to the original source!


If you cannot find the original source in a peer-
   reviewed journal or if the result has never been
   replicated…


then you should be particularly sceptical
  of the research or the statements
  made!
      Always go back to the original source!


If you cannot find the original source in a peer-reviewed journal or if the result
    has never been replicated, then you should be particularly sceptical of the
    research or the statements made


* some published results that at first seem striking,
   later fade away from the scientific literature because
   of failures to consistently replicate them!
How to convince the scientific community of the
           reality of a new finding?
 How to convince the scientific community of the reality of a
                    new phenomenon?




- if a proposed new phenomenon is real:

>> then it should appear repeatedly in the same types
  of data (=reliability)
   How to convince the scientific community of the reality of a
                      new phenomenon?




- if a proposed new phenomenon is real:

>> then it should appear repeatedly in the same types of data (=reliability)



>> we should gradually learn how to measure or observe
  it better and better and by using different kinds of
  methods (=validity)
   How to convince the scientific community of the reality of a
                      new phenomenon?




- if a proposed new phenomenon is real:

>> then it should appear repeatedly in the same types of data (=reliability)
>> we should gradually learn how to measure or observe it better and better and by using different kinds of methods
     (=validity)



>> the same phenomenon will be observed (as predicted)
  also in different labs in measurements made by
  different people, using different methods


>> “converging evidence”
 How to convince the scientific community of the reality of a
                    new phenomenon?


Conversely…

If the quality of observations and the precision of
    predictions does not improve with time, if the data and
    the theory does not get any better…
  How to convince the scientific community of the reality of a
                     new phenomenon?

Conversely…

If the quality of observations and the precision of predictions does not improve
     with time, if the data and the theory does not get any better…


>> then the data (and theory) may not reflect
  any real phenomenon after all!
    How does scientific publication work?

>> Even if a new result gets published in a scientific
   journal, it does NOT mean that the result thereby
   automatically becomes “a scientifically proven fact”
        How does scientific publication work?

>> when a new result gets published in a scientific journal, it does not mean that the result thereby
    becomes “a scientifically proven fact”


>>It only means that it is an observation worthy of
   further attention by the scientific community - it
   should be replicated and studied further

>> only if it stands several independent, critical tests
   will it gradually be accepted by the scientific
   community
Look at the totality of evidence and evaluate
          the quality of evidence!
Look at the totality of evidence and evaluate
          the quality of evidence!
* The “Cherry-Picking Error”:
Look at the totality of evidence and evaluate
          the quality of evidence!
* The “Cherry-Picking Error”: To selectively pick only such studies
   that show the desirable or the expected result, and to ignore the
   ones that do not
        >> systematic reviews/meta-analyses vs. individual studies
Look at the totality of evidence and evaluate
          the quality of evidence!
* The “Cherry-Picking Error”: To selectively pick only such studies
   that show the desirable or the expected result, and to ignore the
   ones that do not
         >> systematic reviews/meta-analyses vs. individual studies



* To give equal weight to poorly conducted and to well-conducted
   studies
         >> studies with methodological flaws are not to be trusted to the same
   extent as studies with proper methodology

         >> if you cannot evaluate the quality by yourself, then pay attention to the
   quality of the journal where the study was published
Quality and reputation of scientific journals
Quality and reputation of scientific journals

Journals have a division of labour and a “status
  hierarchy”:

>> there are specialized journals and general journals
 Quality and reputation of scientific journals

>> there are “top” journals, “good” journals, and
  journals that receive very little attention or that are
  not very highly respected

Nature
Science
Journal of Neuroscience
Brain
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Consciousness and Cognition
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
Journal of Parapsychology
Quality and reputation of scientific journals

“Impact Factor” (IF) of a journal:

* describes the average “effect” to the scientific
   community of an article published in the journal
 Quality and reputation of scientific journals

“Impact Factor” (IF) of a journal:

>> based on the number of citations per year received by
  the articles published in the journal

>> the higher the IF, the larger the impact and the more
  prestigious the journal >> and the more difficult to
  get your paper published in it

* Journal Citation Reports, published by the Institute for Scientific
   Information (ISI)
Academic Textbooks (and monographs)

Academic textbooks are based on simplified
  summaries of research that has originally been
  published in peer-review journals
Academic Textbooks (and monographs)

Academic textbooks are based on simplified summaries of research that has originally
   been published in peer-review journals


They are published by academic publishers, who use
  the peer-review system also in book publishing
Academic Textbooks (and monographs)


>> When a finding or a theory reaches the
  mainstream textbooks, it is considered to be
  already well-established, a part of the
  “mainstream” of research

>> textbooks are never fully up-to-date!
>> At least 3-5 years behind the latest research results!
Learn to be an ”informed consumer” of the
            results of science!
 Learn to be an ”informed consumer” of the
             results of science!

You should be able to…

1) identify and find evidence-based research

  * “separating the wheat (the good stuff) from the chaff ”
 Learn to be an ”informed consumer” of the
             results of science!
You should be able to…

1) identify and find evidence-based research
   * “separating the wheat (the good stuff) from the chaff ”


2) understand, review and summarize it
       * reading original sources and integrating the main results

3) present an overview of the latest findings for non-scientists and
   other non-experts:
        * popularizing and simplifying complex findings
        * oral presentation skills and techniques
            The Seminar Presentation:

your task is to search and identify scientific research
  related to ASCs…


* give a prepared power-point
  presentation

  …on what you have found and how you evaluate the
  findings
                     Your task is this:


- Form groups of 3 people who work together on this task


- Choose one topic for the group (from the list of topics)
- Topics are related to ASCs

* every group who present on the same day should have a different
topic!
                     Your task is this:




- if needed, REFINE the topic and your search
/keywords

       >> try to focus on studies that are closely related by topic
       >> find first one review paper and then check its reference
list
                                                     Topics


1) MEDITATION                                             6) NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL
                                                          DISORDERS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
Choose only one of the following:                         Choose one of the following:
            1a) Meditation, attention and cognition       >> prosopagnosia, anosognosia, somatoparaphrenia,
            1b) Meditation and brain, neural correlates   unilateral neglect, delusional beliefs and paranoia,
            of meditation                                 confabulation
            1c) mindfulness meditation and pain
                                                          7) IMPAIRED AND ALTERED
2) HYPNOSIS                                               CONSCIOUS STATE IN BRAIN INJURY
             - hypnosis and brain, neural correlates of   >> consciousness and vegetative state, minimally
             hypnosis and hypnotic suggestion             conscious state, locked-in syndrome

3) DREAMING, NIGHTMARES                                   8) CONSCIOUSNESS AND
             - dreaming and the brain                     ANESTHESIA
                                                          >> anesthesia dreaming, anesthesia awareness,
                                                          intraoperative awareness, neural correlates of
4) ALTERED CONSCIOUSNESS IN                               consciousness and anesthesia
SLEEP DISORDERS (PARASOMNIAS)
- dreams in patients with sleep disorders
- dreams during sleepwalking and sleep terrors
                                                          9) suggest your own topic!

5) NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCES (NDE)                           >> Should be a topic related to ASCs about which
                                                          there exists a reasonable amount of recent peer-
                                                          reviewed articles!
                       The task

search the peer-reviewed literature for…

  * new studies on the chosen ASC, published preferably
  within the last 5 years (but if none are found then use
  older ones)
                          The task

search the peer-reviewed literature for…

  * the studies should preferably belong to the scope
  of cognitive neuroscience (and/or psychology):

      >> connecting a mental phenomenon to its biological basis
      >> using the methods of cognitive neuroscience (and/or
  psychology)
                                 The task

* avoid purely biochemical, medical etc.
  studies that have little or nothing to do
  with cognitive neuroscience or
  psychology!
      >> if a study uses a lot of terminology and methodology that
 you have never heard of and cannot understand at all, then the
 study is probably outside cognitive neuroscience and psychology (or,
 the alternative explanation is that you have forgotten everything from your previous
 courses…)
                           The task

• Try to find at least one REVIEW –article on the topic
• In addition, try to find 2-3 closely related ORIGINAL studies on
  the same topic
• copy their abstracts and the full reference (author, journal,
  publication year, page numbers) to your slides
• try to get the full-text articles and read them
• compare and summarize the studies
• evaluate the quality of the studies (methods, the journal where
  published)
             How to find full-text articles?

* some journals are freely available, but most are not

* check the journal homepages and the author’s homepages

* check the HIS library and electronic library

* email the author of the study and ask to send a pdf of the study

* ask a friend in a different university to check its electronic library
   access and save & send a pdf copy to you

* google the reference to the study, some papers might be posted
   somewhere in the net
                           The task

* try to evaluate the research reported in the papers
   according to the following criteria:

  - what are the newest, "hot" findings about this ASC?

  - where is this area of research at the moment? Is it an active
  are of research (lots of new publications) or not?

  - are the different articles and findings consistent or
  inconsistent with each other?
                             The task

* try to evaluate the research reported in the papers according to
    the following criteria:



- what is the quality of the published research?

       * quality of the journal? Impact factor?

       * quality of the design and methods?
                      How To Search?

Learn how to use effective keywords, how to refine
  your search etc.

Use (for example) PubMed, a free service provided by the
  U.S. National Library of Medicine and the National
  Institute of Health

- you may use other databases as well: ScienceDirect,
   PsychInfo, WebOfScience, MEDLINE, etc.
  >> you may ask the University library staff for help to find databases
  and to access publications
                            How To Search?

Learn how to use effective keywords, how to refine your search etc.

Use at least PubMed, a free service provided by the U.S. National Library of Medicine
   and the National Institute of Health


Google: Entrez PubMed

PubMed is a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine that
  includes over 16 million citations from MEDLINE and other life
  science journals for biomedical articles back to the 1950s. PubMed
  includes links to full text articles and other related resources.
          Report on the Literature Search

Report in your slides:

* how you conducted the search
* what kind of abstracts / articles you found

* Answer the following questions:
        Report on the Literature Search

1. The search

- what database(s) did you use?
- what keywords did you use?
- how did you refine the search?
         Report on the Literature Search

2. The results

- how many studies did you
find?                              - how many were research
- how many of them were            reports, how many reviews?
relevant for your topic, and how   -in how many of the relevant
many seemed irrelevant or          studies were full-text articles
incomprehensible?                  available?
- how many were new                -where were the full-texts
(published during the last 2-3     available: the University library,
years)?                            the web, the authors home pages,
                                   the journal home pages, etc.?
        Report on the Literature Search

3. Evaluation of the chosen studies

- describe the relevant new studies at a general level:

•what are the newest, "hot" findings about this ASC?
•are the findings consistent or inconsistent with each other?
•what is the quality of the published research?
    –Impact factors of journals, the research methods that were
    used, have the results been replicated etc.
        Report on the Literature Search



* print out and copy your slides as a paper
  handout (4-6 slides per page) for Antti!

* Put the names of everyone in your group in the first
   slide!

* The slides and the handout will be evaluated. Only
   those whose names are on the slides earn the
   points.
        Report on the Literature Search

* a couple of examples from last year’s courses are
   given (the slides)

     >> check them out to get an idea what is
  expected to be reported on the slides
 Literature Search
  Visual Hallucinations in the
Charles Bonnet Syndrome (CBS)
              Seminar Presentation

* you should bring your slides to the seminar

* you should have a handout copy of your slides for
   Antti

* your group has max 15 minutes for your presentation
                   Seminar Presentation

* you should bring your Seminar Paper to the seminar
* you should have a copy for everyone in the group
* you have 15 minutes to present your ”findings”


* your group should give a PREPARED
   PRESENTATION that fits into the 15 minutes

* bring the powerpoint files to the seminar on a memory stick or cd, or
   bring your own computer
              ASC-Seminar Groups


               The seminar groups

- we divide into the groups now after the lectures
                     The seminar groups


- Max 7 groups / day                        Seminar days:

- we start at 9:15 every day
                                     Tuesday 25 May
- about 45 min per group:
                                     Wednesdsay 26 May
>> including preparations,
presentation, discussion, feedback   Thursday 27 May

                                     Friday 28 May
                                         Evaluation

Presentation

1) Results of the Literature Search (have relevant articles been found?) (0-10p)

2) Content of the slides (have the articles been well analysed and summarized?)
(0-10 p)

3) The presentation: Outlook of the slides and the quality of the presentation
(clarity of communication, timing)
(0-10 p)

* Max 2 extra points can be given for active participation in the discussion and feedback for other presentations


Essay

4) Individual essay
(0-10 p)
                                         Evaluation

Presentation
1) Results of the Literature Search (have relevant articles been found?) (0-10p)
2) Content of the slides (have the articles been well analysed and summarized?)
(0-10 p)
3) The presentation: Outlook of the slides and the quality of the presentation (clarity of communication,
timing)
(0-10 p)

* Max 2 extra points can be given for active participation in the discussion and feedback for other presentations

Essay
4) Individual essay
(0-10 p)


* To pass, you need min 15 points from the presentation and
min 5 points from the essay

* The presentation points are the same for all the 3 group
members, the essay points are individual
                 The Seminar Paper

* each student summarizes the information in these
   (Antti’s) slides and the accompanying paper on Peer-
   review



* The topic of the essay:

”What is Scientific Publication?”
Check out the pdf:s on Peer-Review
          (at the course website)
Check out the pdf:s on Peer-Review
          (at the course website)
                    The Seminar Paper
* The content of the essay: Define with your own words...

1) How scientific publication differs from other types of
   publication

2) What is the ”peer-review” system and how does it work

3) How to evaluate the quality of published studies and different
   scientific journals

4) How to find scientific publications.

5) Finally, summarize briefly what you have learnt by doing the
   seminar task and searching for scientific publications by
   yourself.
                    The Seminar Paper
* The length: No limits, but the essay must include all the 5 issues
   defined above, and it must be written in a clear and well-
   organized manner

The format: Front page: Title, your name, course name.

Format should be clear and easy to read, no other formal
  requirements (it’s like an essay you would write in an exam).

Language: English or Swedish

Deadline: Email your essay to Antti (revonsuo@utu.fi) at latest
  Friday 28 May
    Sending you out on an exploration...
GOOD LUCK hunting for science..!

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:18
posted:10/28/2011
language:English
pages:155