![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 56 to 80 of 164. Go back in thread:
Posted by seldomseen on November 9, 2008, at 7:04:22
In reply to Re: Research project, posted by Extreme on November 9, 2008, at 6:40:40
My contention is that since they are here for support and education, then how are they different from any participant in Babble?
How does our role change at all?
It's like a phlebotomist drawing labs for a clinical study. Do they know the specifics of the study? NO! They just know that someone needs their blood drawn so they do their jobs.
It's just another person.
For us, it's just another person at Babble.
Posted by Extreme on November 9, 2008, at 7:31:41
In reply to My contention. » Extreme, posted by seldomseen on November 9, 2008, at 7:04:22
> My contention is that since they are here for support and education, then how are they different from any participant in Babble?
>
> How does our role change at all?
>
> It's like a phlebotomist drawing labs for a clinical study. Do they know the specifics of the study? NO! They just know that someone needs their blood drawn so they do their jobs.
>
> It's just another person.
>
> For us, it's just another person at Babble.I have no further comments on this... I just changed my own policy. Please understand, seldomseen.. I am not angry with you or something like that.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 9:00:26
In reply to My contention. » Extreme, posted by seldomseen on November 9, 2008, at 7:04:22
My guess is that part of the problem is that the participants will know what's going on, while the existing posters won't. There is a potential for existing posters to feel like they do when someone changes their posting name. Like they're entering into a relationship without as much information about that relationship as the other party. That leads to anxiety.
Have you ever heard the expression "You have the advantage over me."? It comes up when one party speaks to another and obviously knows their name and who they are, while the other doesn't. And there is truth behind the conventional phrase.
I think the difference between this and a lab technician is that a lab technician is paid to draw blood samples. That's his job. He assumes his employer tells him what he needs to know to be safe in doing so. We're not being paid to do something relatively routine. We're participating here in forming relationships. (Well, that may be less true on the meds board where people may come to disseminate and receive information.) Certainly anyone who comes here at any time may be less than candid. But this is a contrived situation that puts us, in the sense of that expression, at a disadvantage.
Also, while this is less of a concern for me because everything I know about Dr. Bob shows that Babble is something he does for the benefit of Babblers in terms of support and education, I recognize that there have always been those who are concerned about the involvement of Babble in his presentations and papers. I don't share that underlying concern, but I do respect that it is a reality for many.
People react differently to authority, to secrets, to concerns about many of these issues. People have differing levels of familiarity with research and what it may or may not entail.
I hope that Dr. Bob, and those who aren't anxious about one or all issues involved, are at least respectful of those who do feel anxious and fearful. We aren't foolish or silly. We're just different, with different tolerance for change, secrecy, lack of an even playing field, unilateral actions by authority, etc. We're respectful of other differences on Babble. Hopefully we can be respectful of this one too.
Which is not to negate the responsibility of those of us who are anxious to express those concerns and whatever anger we feel in terms that are respectful of Dr. Bob as well as others. And needless to say to be welcoming and polite to newcomers who may or may not be involved and who may have perfectly innocent reasons for being here and who may be perfectly sincere in all they do.
I always tell my son that what others do is what others do. My actions on babble to other posters will be the same as they always are. And I have every confidence that they should be, that Dr. Bob would not allow anything that would make fools of us or hurt us. But even if I'm wrong, what difference does it make? If someone else behaves dishonorably, that doesn't negate the fact that I behaved with kindness and honor. Not that I'm at all saying that anyone has or would behave dishonorably. It's just a world view. So I'm not going to refuse to post on Babble, and I'm not going to be reserved around newcomers unless and until I discover that reserve would be prudent with any given newcomer. No different than now.
But I do understand, and I empathize. I too dislike being placed in difficult situations. And I expect those who place me in the difficult situation to do what they can to make it less difficult.
Dr. Bob? Please do what you can to make things less difficult for those who have supported Babble and are feeling anxious about the unknown and the known.
Posted by raisinb on November 9, 2008, at 10:10:25
In reply to Re: My contention., posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 9:00:26
As Dinah so eloquently put it, every one of us will have individual reactions, from not being concerned to being extremely upset and anxious. I think it's important for us to respect everyone's reaction.
Whatever the reaction, I can't brainstorm any situation in which current babble members won't indirectly be part of a study, relationship, or research that we were not asked to give informed consent to. If we're at least informed of the dates of the study, we can choose whether we want to continue posting during that period, based on the information we have currently. If we're told more about the scope/purpose of the study and our role in it, that may allay anxiety for many babble members, and they may choose to remain when otherwise they wouldn't.
I'm not usually too worried about how information about me is used. But I'm not overstating the case when I say that what I post on Babble is the most intimate, personal, vulnerable stuff I have. So without knowing more about what's going on, my reaction is to simply opt out of Babble until the whole thing is concluded.
But the point is that none of us really need to justify our own reactions. The parameters of our participation here are going to be changing, perhaps radically, and for many of us, it's natural to react strongly. The point is that any such project needs informed consent--whatever individual reactions are.
Posted by twinleaf on November 9, 2008, at 10:49:19
In reply to Re: Research project » twinleaf, posted by seldomseen on November 9, 2008, at 6:31:02
I think that our roles will inevitably change to some degree. Now, we re all here for the same spectrum of reasons, although with different emphases- some people like the fun and support of Social the best, others need information from Medications, still others find understanding and support on Psychology. We all got here the same way: we found the board ourselves and wanted to be part of it. Because we know this about one another, we can become very trusting and can confide a great deal in one another. I would not be able to feel the same common bond with members of a research study who got here, not because of personal desire, but because it is a requirement of their participation in the study.
We don't know what the study is, but just to imagine one among many possibilities: the participants may be studied to see if the degree of their emotional participation here correlates with the degree of improvement in their personal psychotherapies. Interacting with people who are knowingly being studied is not the same as interacting with self-selected babblers. We are here because we gain something valuable from being here. They will be here because that is a condition of their study participation. It's possible that they will be paid a small amount.
We all know that Dr. Bob's principal professional interest is exploring the roles that the new communication technologies may have in psychotherapy. A valuable spin-off of that interest has been Babble. Up to now, anecdotal material from babblers has undoubtedly been used by Dr Bob in his teaching; we knew this was happening, and no-one minded, as far as I know. But this is different; the nature of Babble itself is being somewhat altered so that it can serve as a study vehicle. I do not want to be part of a study in which I do not even know what is being studied! Those of us who have been here a long time are going to be "inferior citizens" compared to the study members, because they will have know much more than we do.
Posted by Racer on November 9, 2008, at 11:21:25
In reply to Re: Research project » seldomseen, posted by twinleaf on November 9, 2008, at 10:49:19
>
> They will be here because that is a condition of their study participation.
>
>Those of us who have been here a long time are going to be "inferior citizens" compared to the study members, because they will have know much more than we do.I don't think we have enough information to draw these conclusions. Many of the people on this thread have far more knowledge than I about this sort of research, but just based on the bit that I do know, and based on my experience of Dr Bob's careful use of language, I don't think that we can be sure of anything more than this: some new posters may be participants in a study, and they may or may not tell us if they are.
We don't know that the participants will be told much more than we have -- they're part of a study which in some way involves Babble.
We don't know that participation is a requirement of that study.
As for the question of when the study begins and ends, I have a question to ask about that, too: what if some -- or even all -- of the participants who do participate here find that they receive such valuable support and information here that they choose to remain after the study period ends? Surely we would want to accept them, just as we ourselves were accepted here? Surely we wouldn't want them to feel like second class citizens?
Obviously, we are all having different emotional reactions to this news. Mine just happens to be excitement, rather than fear. I think it's because I do trust Dr Bob, and I believe absolutely that he would not be doing anything he thought would jeopardize this community, or anyone in it. That's been my experience with him so far, and until he violates that trust in some way, I'll continue to believe that.
Peace.
Posted by twinleaf on November 9, 2008, at 12:40:59
In reply to Re: Research project » twinleaf, posted by Racer on November 9, 2008, at 11:21:25
I guess we will just have to have a friendly disagreement on some of these points.
Unfortunately, we all have a recent example of Bob causing pain to this community. Several posters have pointed out how careful and parsimonious Bob is with his words. This is certainly true, but, to me this is not a source of reassurance. During the extremely painful and stressful rupture which occurred here in March '08, when some long-time members began to attack and hurt others members, Bob was begged for help. He did not respond for several weeks. When he finally did, it was in a two-line reply about some tiny detail. There was never a word about what had happened, nor any guidance or leadership. There was no recognition of the fact that a few people had gotten abused verbally. The reason the crisis resolved was because a number of Babblers worked together to calm things down. While I realize that most of the responsibility was ours, I do think a few calming, thoughtful words from Bob would have helped a lot. A number of people were so badly hurt that they left (some have probably returned with new names). In that instance, I felt that Bob avoided responsibility altogether. Since then, he has always seemed to me to hide behind small sentences which impart little to no information. And, if he has already avoided his responsibility to us once, he may well do so again. I am not implying that he acted in such a way as to purposefully hurt anyone; I am sure he did not mean any harm. it's just that he has a rather silent, minimalist style of communication which he apparently cannot alter even if circumstances clearly require a different set of responses.
You are right that, strictly speaking, we "don't know enough to draw any any conclusions".(that's my principle objection!) .But, in the absence of any details, we have to make the best estimates we can about what is going to happen. Each of has to do that- it's part of taking good care of ourselves). I do think that it is reasonable to assume that, if the study involves Babble, at least some of the study participants will have to be here. It's reasonable, also, that there could be a control group who will not be here. If this weren't the case, why would he make an announcement about it? If the study involved reading Babble, or studying the archives,(a unique source of wonderful case histories- much better than what you usually find in journals) there's no need to say anything.
I guess I should have spoken for myself only. I will feel like a second-class citizen of Babble if I have to deal with study members who know things that I don't know about the study.
I agree completely on one point- if the study members eventually find Babble a valuable resource , that would be wonderful. I don't think there's ever been a problem about welcoming anyone here. We all need one another and are enriched by knowing everyone who chooses to share parts of their lives here.
Posted by Sigismund on November 9, 2008, at 12:41:18
In reply to My contention. » Extreme, posted by seldomseen on November 9, 2008, at 7:04:22
>For us, it's just another person at Babble.
It *is* just another person on Babble, but from now on any new person I meet I will assume might be part of whatever it is, which changes things a bit.
Posted by rskontos on November 9, 2008, at 13:23:47
In reply to Re: My contention., posted by Sigismund on November 9, 2008, at 12:41:18
So many of you have great points. I think in the end I agree with Sigismund. This is all very unsettling during a time when I am the most unsettled. Leave it Dr. Bob to dump and run.
I might just opt out for a while and lurk. I will probably be like Sigismund and assume newbies are participants and see how they behave.
I feel this does change things. Time will only tell what the change will mean. And right now my frame of reference doesn't not allow me to assume good is the outcome of change.
And it just seemed like Babble was slowly recovering from the march 08 rupture.
Again, I think Dr. Bob cannot leave well enough alone.
rsk
Posted by lucie lu on November 9, 2008, at 13:31:34
In reply to Research project, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2008, at 2:22:01
To me, the analogy of the blood samples falls short because the samples exert no effect on one another. The Psych board, in particular, has psychosocial elements that distinguish not only from the blood sample model but also from other boards as well. While not all Psych Babblers share some degree of trauma history and associated interpersonal trust and attachment issues, a significant number have. Many or most are in long-term therapy and have deeply meaningful, often confusing and emotionally intense, relationships with their mental health clinicians. Many find themselves unable to discuss these relationships or issues anywhere else, often not even in the therapy room; in fact, the introduction of new, sensitive material into therapy often follows prior discussion with other Babble members. While the anonymity of Babble facilitates self-disclosure, the emotional safety of the community drives it. A sense of safety is provided by mutual interactions between participants, who have shared very intimate material and provided support and feedback to one another. New members are warmly welcomed and frequently have lurked on the board for some time before actually posting. Thus new members are likely to already know the dynamics and tone of the board before beginning to participate, and they join because of some sense of commonality and shared purpose. This self-screening feature is bypassed by those who join the group from ulterior motives, such as participation in an experiment.
None of the concerns stated on this thread should come as a surprise to anyone familiar with group behavior. A therapeutic community works because it provides safety within a supportive community that encourages productive introspection and interpersonal connections based on a common theme. While an established group can assimilate a few new members at a time, an influx or steady stream of new members destabilizes the group and destroys the existing community altogether. Another group can coalesce from old and new members, but the original community is gone. The loss of the Psych sense of community would be profound for its participants; I am not sure it would be so with most other boards. While the Psych board is not formal group therapy, I believe it shares many of the same group properties and fits the description of a therapeutic community. I believe that a significant subset of Babblers, particularly but not exclusively those with trust issues, will be loath to self-disclose if the intentions of new members are suspect, as they will be in the context of an experimental study. I find it hard to see how the existing community could fail to be significantly impacted by the study conditions, which would indeed seem to defeat its purpose. Not to mention the "do no harm" injunction: although we are not patients and technically not "covered" by this principle, I belive it still should guide responsible actions toward others.
Posted by Wittgensteinz on November 9, 2008, at 13:43:34
In reply to Re: My contention., posted by rskontos on November 9, 2008, at 13:23:47
I just want to apologise for my last message to this thread. I think it was rather insensitive of me and might have played on peoples' anxieties. This wasn't my intention but in retrospect my choice of example of who these 230 participants might be was poorly thought out. I hope I didn't upset anyone.
Already this topic is affecting me - there are things I would like to post about on psychology but I don't feel as comfortable to do so now.
This does all seem rather unsettling.
Take care everyone - for those who are happy about this and comfortable, I'm happy for you, that's great - for those who feel a bit like me or even more alarmed, we'll get through this as a community. Babble has existed for a long time and got through a lot of things. Hopefully Bob will be able to offer some reassurance too.
Witti
Posted by fayeroe on November 9, 2008, at 14:00:51
In reply to Re: Research project, posted by Ricker on November 8, 2008, at 14:01:58
> Look forward to chatting with them, not sure why it's causing soo much concern? Dr. Bob's notice was out of respect for us. These "new" memebers have the right to post, seek support, share experience, and perhaps help "us"!
It causes concern because we've been "research" before and never known exactly what was going on. If Bob was all about "respect" I believe that he would have been open about what the research is for and who the "helpers" will be and where they are from.....I am a long time member here and I've extremely wary of these research projects that Bob does.
>
> I get the feeling some have claimed this site as "theirs"?? Well, it's the internet, so unless this site becomes a closed door, hand-picked members only club, I say welcome.If Bob didn't have the posters that are here, there would be no Babble. Of course we feel concerned when a big change is taking place. I seriously doubt that any one of us feels that the site is "ours". But if you have alot invested here, as many do, then Bob could explain what he is doing with us. There are members here who have been here longer than I..and I've been here since 2002.
Hope this helps explain to you why some posters are less than happy about the research..
Pat
>
>
Posted by fayeroe on November 9, 2008, at 14:31:33
In reply to Re: Research project » Ricker, posted by fayeroe on November 9, 2008, at 14:00:51
I am thinking that the study may have started by Bob posting what he did and our reaction is part of the research. I know that I've certainly considered that in the past. Bob has a history of starting something and then disappearing.
I won't post to this thread again. My response is to be extremely suspicious of "new posters"....and that will affect how much I disclose in my postings. Very little from now on....Pat
Posted by lucie lu on November 9, 2008, at 15:09:17
In reply to When? » fayeroe, posted by fayeroe on November 9, 2008, at 14:31:33
> I am thinking that the study may have started by Bob posting what he did and our reaction is part of the research. I know that I've certainly considered that in the past. Bob has a history of starting something and then disappearing.
I was wondering the same.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:13:01
In reply to Re: When? » fayeroe, posted by lucie lu on November 9, 2008, at 15:09:17
This may be just as cynical on the other side, but I don't think Dr. Bob thinks that much about Babble. He probably had it on his to do list to announce it, announced it, and then promptly forgot about it and went about his business.
I think it's more likely he's spending time on Facebook than studying our reaction, and if anyone has any urgent questions for him it's still probably better to email him. Or go to Facebook and ask him. :(
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:18:33
In reply to Re: When?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:13:01
Although that may be some personal feelings leaking through... The discussion has been wonderfully polite and respectful overall. I really respect Babblers for that. But either he gives Babblers a lot of credit, or he didn't think things through carefully enough to be on hand after announcing what he announced.
I apologize if I'm not giving Dr. Bob enough credit.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:24:53
In reply to Re: When?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:18:33
Besides, he specifically said that current posters would not be the subject of the research, so he couldn't be studying our reactions.
Not only do I trust Dr. Bob not to actually lie outright, but I'm pretty sure he couldn't use any research he obtained by baldfaced lying.
My experience is him is that yes, he can be less than forthcoming. In fact that's one reason it's so safe to tell him just about anything. But I've known him to go to extreme lengths not to actually lie.
Posted by rskontos on November 9, 2008, at 15:45:52
In reply to Re: When? » fayeroe, posted by lucie lu on November 9, 2008, at 15:09:17
>> I am thinking that the study may have started by Bob posting what he did and our reaction is part of the research. I know that I've certainly considered that in the past. Bob has a history of starting something and then disappearing.>>
I, too, thought something along these lines when I first read his annoucement and all the responses.
rsk
Posted by fayeroe on November 9, 2008, at 15:49:38
In reply to Re: When?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:24:53
Posted by rskontos on November 9, 2008, at 15:51:06
In reply to Re: When?, posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:24:53
Dinah, I appreciate your absolute trust in Dr. Bob, however, I believe you have had more experience in dealing with him directly than most of us. From my somewhat limited experience, he tends to dump and run. So from my point of view actions speak so much louder than words. I will admit my reactions tend to be colored from my skewed view of the world, which is why I am in therapy, and doing not so great at the moment, but that is more to the point of why Babble is so important to me, and its consistency without change is even better. And for a while, it has been more consistency. Alas I suppose I should not thought it was permanent.
I just wished Dr. Bob would not mess with things unless he is more upfront with his disclosure since he knows firsthand how fragile some of us are.
sigh,
rsk
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 15:54:23
In reply to I didn't say he was lying. (nm), posted by fayeroe on November 9, 2008, at 15:49:38
I'm just working it through in my head.
If he was studying our reaction, he couldn't be telling us the truth about our not being studied.
Therefore, that can't be a possibility, because my belief in him aside, it wouldn't fly professionally.
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 16:00:20
In reply to Re: When? » Dinah, posted by rskontos on November 9, 2008, at 15:51:06
> From my somewhat limited experience, he tends to dump and run.
It would appear so. :( It's just that my interpretation of dumping and running is that it reflects his absence, not his presence.
And while I do trust him to be who I know him to be, it doesn't hurt to trust and verify. The fact that he couldn't use research obtained by lying to us about being research subjects does help me believe my own impressions.
> I just wished Dr. Bob would not mess with things unless he is more upfront with his disclosure since he knows firsthand how fragile some of us are.
Me too.
Posted by BayLeaf on November 9, 2008, at 16:33:18
In reply to Research project, posted by Dr. Bob on November 8, 2008, at 2:22:01
Given more time to think, maybe I am over-reacting. Perhaps this is the only way Bob can get 230 new posters? He is forcing the poor kids to come here by creating a research requirement! :-)
Maybe he hopes some will stay and boost the population here.
We have a choice. We can boycott, protest by leaving, or we can accept it. Those die hard Babblers who are remaining after all the chaos over the years have shown by past behavior that they will likely accept whatever Bob throws their way. They have apparently found that the pro's (supportive friends) outweigh the con's - or found change just too hard.
I think the Psychotherapy board on PsychCentral has really improved over the years. That's where I feel safest. And it's a research-free zone.
Bay
Posted by Dinah on November 9, 2008, at 16:52:20
In reply to Re: Research project, posted by BayLeaf on November 9, 2008, at 16:33:18
> Given more time to think, maybe I am over-reacting. Perhaps this is the only way Bob can get 230 new posters? He is forcing the poor kids to come here by creating a research requirement! :-)
>
> Maybe he hopes some will stay and boost the population here.:-)
That did come to my mind. I've been fussing forever about the declining posting rates on Babble (though Psychology has picked up lately). I guess I should be more careful about how I word my complaints. The fates are always listening.
lol. No, I'm not quite delusional. But it sure does seem like the fates like to trick me into being sorry I ever complained about anything.
Posted by Lou Pilder on November 9, 2008, at 16:58:06
In reply to Re: Research project, posted by BayLeaf on November 9, 2008, at 16:33:18
> Given more time to think, maybe I am over-reacting. Perhaps this is the only way Bob can get 230 new posters? He is forcing the poor kids to come here by creating a research requirement! :-)
>
> Maybe he hopes some will stay and boost the population here.
>
> We have a choice. We can boycott, protest by leaving, or we can accept it. Those die hard Babblers who are remaining after all the chaos over the years have shown by past behavior that they will likely accept whatever Bob throws their way. They have apparently found that the pro's (supportive friends) outweigh the con's - or found change just too hard.
>
> I think the Psychotherapy board on PsychCentral has really improved over the years. That's where I feel safest. And it's a research-free zone.
>
> BayBay,
You wrote,[...He is forcing the (deleted by respondent) to come here by creating a research requierment...].
I would like to kmow if there is an authority that you used to make that statement. If there is, could you post it here? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
You wrote,[...we have a choice...](you gave two choices)
Could there be more than 2 choices?
Lou
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.