What is the No. 1 leading cause of stress for you? Hint: It's not family; NPR, October 22, 2024

Katia Riddle , NPR; What is the No. 1 leading cause of stress for you? Hint: It's not family

"Every year the American Psychological Association takes a look at the leading causes of stress in the U.S., and publishes an annual report. This year the report shows all the usual suspects like money, health and family are still wearing people down, but one issue is dominating – politics.

Seven out of 10 adults say the future of the nation is a significant source of stress in their lives and the issue crosses party lines: 80% of Republicans rated it a top stressor, so did 79% of Democrats and 73% of Independents. Lynn Bufka, a clinical psychologist and APA’s deputy chief, professional practice, says she was surprised by the findings...

The report – called Stress in America 2024: A Nation in Political Turmoil — details the results of a survey conducted by the Harris Poll on behalf of the APA. More than 3,000 U.S. adults aged 18 and older were surveyed between August 1st and 23rd, 2024...

A majority of respondents are also concerned about misinformation and disinformation — 82% said they are worried that people are basing their values and opinions on false or inaccurate information.

Bufka says one of the problems is Americans are not seeing the things that matter to them represented in the political discourse...

There is some positive news in the report. Three out of five people felt hopeful about the election results. Stress can also galvanize people into action; 80% of survey respondents say they do intend to vote in the Presidential election."

Peer-review activists push psychology journals towards open data; Nature, March 1, 2017

Gautam Naik, Nature; 

Peer-review activists push psychology journals towards open data

"An editor on the board of a journal published by the prestigious American Psychological Association (APA) has been asked to resign in a controversy over data sharing in peer review.

Gert Storms — who says he won’t step down — is one of a few hundred scientists who have vowed that, from the start of this year, they will begin rejecting papers if authors won’t publicly share the underlying data, or explain why they can’t.

The idea, called the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative, was launched by psychologists hoping to increase transparency in a field beset by reports of fraud and dubious research practices. And the APA, which does not ask that data be made available to peer reviewers or shared openly online, seems set to become an early testing ground for the initiative’s influence. With Storms’ situation still unresolved, the society’s council of editors will discuss whether it should change its policies at a meeting in late March."

U.S. Psychologists Urged to Curb Questioning Terror Suspects; New York Times, 7/30/15

James Risen, New York Times; U.S. Psychologists Urged to Curb Questioning Terror Suspects:

"The board of the American Psychological Association plans to recommend a tough ethics policy that would prohibit psychologists from involvement in all national security interrogations, potentially creating a new obstacle to the Obama administration’s efforts to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects outside of the traditional criminal justice system.

The board of the of the A.P.A., the nation’s largest professional organization for psychologists, is expected to recommend that members approve the ban at its annual meeting in Toronto next week, according to two members, Nadine Kaslow and Susan H. McDaniel, the group’s president-elect. The board’s proposal would make it a violation of the association’s ethical policies for psychologists to play a role in national security interrogations involving any military or intelligence personnel, even the noncoercive interrogations now conducted by the Obama administration. The board’s proposal must be voted on and approved by the members’ council to become a policy."

Why Ethics Codes Fail; Inside Higher Ed, 7/21/15

Laura Stark, Inside Higher Ed; Why Ethics Codes Fail:

"Last week, an independent investigation of the American Psychological Association found that several of its leaders aided the U.S. Department of Defense’s controversial enhanced interrogation program by loosing constraints on military psychologists. It was another bombshell in the ongoing saga of the U.S. war on terror in which psychologists have long served as foot soldiers. Now, it appears, psychologists were among its instigators, too.

Leaders of the APA used the profession’s ethics policy to promote unethical activity, rather than to curb it. How? Between 2000 and 2008, APA leaders changed their ethics policy to match the unethical activities that some psychologists wanted to carry out -- and thus make potential torture appear ethical...

The APA’s current ethics mess is a problem inherent to its method of setting professional ethics policy and a problem that faces professional organizations more broadly. Professions’ codes of ethics are made to seem anonymous, dropped into the world by some higher moral authority. But ethics codes have authors. In the long term, the APA’s problems will not be solved by repeating the same process that empowers a select elite to write ethics policy, then removes their connection to it.

All ethics codes have authors who work to erase the appearance of their influence. Personal interests are inevitable, if not unmanageable, and it may be best for the APA -- and other professional groups -- to keep the link between an ethics policy and its authors. Take a new lesson from the Hippocratic oath by observing its name. The APA should make its ethics policies like most other papers that scientists write: give the code of ethics a byline."