Psychology 101 is now in session.

Arzo, I've read that aversion therapy is controversial for the very reason you've stated as an example. Not only does it sometimes not work, it can even exacerbate the problem.
But I do know a therapist who works with patients who have phobias and she has said that under the right circumstances, aversion therapy does work. She is careful about which patients she uses that kind of treatment for.

To answer your questions:
"Another burning question that I have about psychotherapy – with the basics of psychology being taught at school, and the layman having at least a general idea of how therapy works, I´d believe it possible for a shrewd patient to second-guess his therapist. Does the susceptibility of a patient to treatment decrease in proportion to his knowledge of the matter? (This is assuming that the patient is unwilling)."

First things first. :-)
Psychotherapy is a very specific type of therapy, based on a single set of theoretical principles. Psychotherapy is based solely on Freudian Theory. It is also considered a specialization among therapists and not all therapists are trained in psychotherapeutic technique. Psychotherapy is not appropriate for all types of patients or all types of patient issues. It has been demonstrated to be effective for some patients who suffer from certain kinds of psychological issues.

I would have to disagree with you when you say the layman has a basic idea of how therapy works and that the basics of psych are taught in school. My personal experience has been that most laypeople I know have no idea how therapy works and have never taken a Psychology class. The most common reaction I get from people when I simply say my degree is in Psychology is, "I hope you're not analyzing me!" and "I'll never need therapy." It seems like there is more trepidation about therapy than understanding.
Of course, your mileage may vary. My own experience has been the opposite of what you say.

"I´d believe it possible for a shrewd patient to second-guess his therapist. Does the susceptibility of a patient to treatment decrease in proportion to his knowledge of the matter?"

I have to answer this question in two parts:

First, regarding a patient who is truly seeking therapy for help with an issue:
My own experience has been that it doesn't matter how much a patient knows about therapy. I have even asked therapists about this, as I see a therapist on an as-needed basis when I am struggling with something. I always warn the person that I am studying psychology and very therapy savvy.
The reason it doesn't really matter is that the therapist is not manipulating the patient during therapy or controlling them. The session is spontaneous and based on what the patient needs to talk about that day. The therapist is trained to gently guide the patient into discovering more about himself during the session, then to help close up any emotional wounds that have been opened before the session before letting the patient leave the office. There is no second-guessing the therapist because often the therapist doesn't know what is coming next any more than the patient does. The difference is, the therapist is trained to handle whatever comes up in the session and hopefully lead it to some resolution.

Second, the caveat. If a patient is not in therapy for help with a problem, then yes- the patient’s knowledge of psychology and therapy can be a problem. I am referring, specifically, to patients who are being evaluated for legal purposes.
Let’s use an example of a patient who is being tried for murder. He wants to plead insanity. Obviously, it would be in his best interest to understand how the psychological evaluation will be conducted so that he can achieve the results he wants. This is known as Malingering.
Depending on the person performing the evaluation, they may or may not be trained to detect malingering. There are very specific techniques that can be used to tell whether a patient is trying to manipulate an evaluation. They are actually really cool techniques. I interviewed a neurophychologist for a paper I wrote earlier this year and he showed me some of the tricks he uses to detect malingering. They are quite ingenious, really.

But, interestingly, those techniques were not mentioned in my textbook chapters about how to perform assessments. I don’t know if this is because the psychological community doesn’t want the average layman to have easy access to knowledge about malingering and the detection techniques or whether those techniques are not commonly taught to all practitioners. Hopefully I will find out the answer to that in grad school!

Wow, Cuin- you ask some challenging questions. I will take a stab at them but I want you to know that I am NOT qualified to diagnose and I have not taken my diagnostic classes yet. So, I am going to use a combination of what my profs have told me, what I’ve read in my textbooks and what I can find on the intertubes to respond to your questions.

“First, because my learning is so out of date, I still call it Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD). You said earlier that it is now called Dissociative Identity Disorder. What is the difference? Is MPD merely one form of DID or has MPD grown so much from its original definition that MPD doesn't adequately describe the phenomenon any longer?”

Let’s see….I have had two professors tell my class that MPD is a “Hollywood term” that first appeared in the movie Sybil and was never an actual clinical term. I don’t know if that is actually true or not and I can’t find anything to confirm or refute it. So take that FWIW, I guess.

As far as there being a difference, there isn’t any. They are just different terms for the same condition.

“Also, is the correlation between physical/sexual abuse and MPD/DID still as strong as it was in the 90's?”

From what I learned in classes and a quick web/psych database search just now, yes- it would seem so. I can check my Abnormal Psych. textbook at home this weekend if you want more info.

“Second, the latest addition of the DSM I've read is the DSM IV. Is there a newer version? I've done a google search, but I can't find anything newer.”

This I know. The DSM-V is in the process of being updated/written/compiled as I write this. I first heard that the DSM was being update about a year & a half ago. The estimated publication date is May 2012.
IMO, this is a long time coming (too long). They take all of the research that has been conducted since the last publication and review it. Then they use that information to redefine diagnostic criteria as needed.
I found this official site (not very informative, though): www.psych.org/dsmv.asp
And here is the free online version of the DSM-V Research Agenda book: www.appi.org/book.cfm

“Third and finally, the DSM IV came out in 1994, which is when I took my final Psychology class. Looking back, that's 14 years (HOLY CRAP!). What significant advancements have been made in the field of psychology since then?” and “What innovations have there been?”

The biggest thing I have been told by profs and also by psychologists I have interviewed for assignments is the advances being made in the field of neuropsychology that is making huge strides tying together nature and nurture. Newer technologies have allowed researchers to “watch” the brain without invasive surgery and even to longitudinal studies to follow participants and observe their brain development via regularly schedules scans and assessments.
This is very exciting for me, as I am particularly interested in the relationship between neurochemical development and Attachment Theory.

But this also depends on your field of study. The neuropsychology stuff is my favorite thing, but if you asked someone in a different field of psych, like Organizational Psychology, they will give you a totally different response about what the biggest advances have been.
I am an APA member (American Psychological Association) and have noticed the past two years that when I receive my peer-reviewed journals each month, there are more and more published studies about Organizational Leadership. This also seems to be true for Psych. conferences- more lectures about Org. Leadership. To me, that stuff is BO-RING and I don’t read much of it, so I can’t even speak about it.

Some people seem to think the new hotness is EMDR therapy (Eye Movement Desentitization & Reprocessing). I don’t agree. But like I said before, the answer to your question will depend on who you ask and what their interests in the field are.
EMDR info: www.sciam.com/article.cfm

I would invite you to check out the 2008 APA Convention presentation lineup. It gives a good idea of the types of current areas of study being highlighted: www.apa.org/convention08...gramming.html


“Who are the new movers and shakers of the field today (the last I remember was Erik Erikson's Complete Life Cycle).”

Dr. Phil (ROFLMAO)
Well, Francine Shapiro is getting a lot of attention lately as the “creator” of EMDR.
And I have read a lot about Elizabeth Loftus’ work in the field of memory. She is at UC Irvine now, I think. Her work is fairly controversial but sometimes I think controversy is good because it makes people THINK.

“What is the "cutting edge" of psychology?”
My opinion: Neuropsychology. I think it’s the path of the future of Psychology. It ties medical science directly into psychology, which lends credibility to the field and gives us more precise data to study. In fact, I feel this way so strongly that I selected my undergrad university specifically because they offered a Neuropsychology course. A big part of my choice for grad school was for the same reason- I chose the only school in my area that offers both Neuropsycholgy and Neuropsychological Assessment courses. I personally feel that if an emerging Psychologist doesn’t have a strong working knowledge of neurochemistry and neuropsychology going forward in this field, they are going to find themselves left behind. That’s just my personal feeling.

A couple of other really intriguing areas are Social Psychology and Adolescent Psychology. The reason for this is the internet! Suddenly, in less than a decade, the world is at our fingertips for the first time. This is changing how we interact and communicate. It’s affecting our culture (Western culture) and it’s also affecting how the current generation of young people are learning about their environment. Psychology is running to catch up! I think that the online world is going to redefine the social fabric of Western culture in coming years and childhood social development models are going to need to be updated!

Sounds to me like a bad match. Personally, I would find another therapist. Just based on what you wrote, it sounds like it may simply not be a good fit.
If that is not an option, I would tell him exactly what you told us. That you would like to do more talking and that you don't appreciate him trying to discourage your ambitions. If you had wanted a career coach, you would have gone to one.
You might ask him to give you specific reasons why he thinks you shouldn't pursue writing. Maybe it's as simple as him thinking that you should get some personal issues straightened out before pursuing the writing jobs. That would make sense to me, but perhaps he is not being clear.
He cannot change what he is not aware of. So tell him. The worst thing that will happen is he might disagree or suggest you see someone else.

I have a friend who asks me once in a while about her therapist and I don't want to interfere but I always tell her this:
Therapy is about YOU. Therapy is not about the therapist or what they think you should do with your life. You are the expert on you. Their job is to gently guide or coach you into discovering the healthiest ways to express yourself.
From what I have been told, therapists are rarely ever supposed to tell you what you should or should not do. They can give you suggestions but never tell you what to do- unless they think you are going to harm yourself or another person. Then they legally have to tell you what to do in some cases (like put you in a psych ward if you say you are going to kill yourself).

I hope that helps!!

The way I read the definition given of "undoing" there's no way it can be seen as an apology. And the difference between the two things is really reasonability, and who takes the action.

Example: Bill pushes Jill into a tree. Jill says, "hey, dick, don't push people into trees." Bill says, "It's good that you reprimand me for doing that." – That's undoing.

Example 2: Bill pushes Jill into a tree. Jill says, "hey, dick, don't push people into trees." Bill says, "I'm sorry, I shouldn't have pushed you into a tree." – that's an apology.