The term “quality of life” has many definitions. The definitions vary and are determined in a broad range, depending on the interpreter. A good understanding of this concept would be a measure that considers both the components and determinants of health and well being. This includes an emphasis on an individuals' physical, psychological, and spiritual functioning, their connections with their environment, and opportunities for maintaining and enhancing skills.
There are three major areas to consider when dealing with this concept: a person’s spiritual, physical, and psychological well-being. At the lowest level, physical comfort should be considered. This includes physical health, personal hygiene, nutrition, exercise, grooming, clothing, and general physical appearance. In addition to having these needs met, the ability to perform them without assistance is just as important. A person could have all of these needs met with assistance, but not feel the quality of life. Independence is the key to fulfilling this area of need. If a person is not self-sufficient in this area, the quality may not be met. A person’s ability to take care of their basic needs without assistance is tied into the physical, as well as the psychological aspects of well-being.
Psychological well-being is the next level of importance of the overall health of an individual. Psychological aspects include health and adjustment, cognitions, feelings, self-esteem, self-concept, and self-control and they are an all-encompassing part of the psychological area. If the individual is able to perceive a decline in any of these areas, the well-being in this area will be affected. For example, in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease, a gradual decline in memory is perceived and the individual, knowing that this situation will only decline, is affected in the psychological sense. “Up to 70 percent of people who have Alzheimer's disease also have symptoms of depression. They gradually lose the ability to participate in activities they once enjoyed and may eventually withdraw from all activities” (www.mayoclinic.com). Knowledge of any existing disease can have a major psychological effect on an individual’s need to continue their normal activities of daily living. Understandibly, as stated, knowledge of any existing disease may cause an individual to “give up” life and, consequently, a decrease in their normal activities will also decrease.
Last, but not least, the spiritual side of an individual’s well-being is an important aspect of the individual as a whole. Depending on the individual, this may be the most important, but this varies from person to person. Any individual with a sense of higher purpose will consider this aspect to be the most important and least affected by physical ailments. Although, a life-threatening ailment may alter the significance or enhance this area of need. When any person encounters an illness that may suggest an end to life, spirituality is often an area that is in focus. Questions of the afterlife and what happens to a person’s spirit are often on a person’s mind in this scenario. Many ask the question, “Where will I go when I die?”
If a person is secure enough in their faith at the time then, normally, they are secure in the answer to this question. But, if they are not secure in this area of question, then more questions than answers arise and their spiritual well-being is in chaos. At this point, professional clergy is sought and, hopefully, some of the dilemmas are put to rest.
When a person becomes dependant on another, many aspects of a relationship come into play. First and foremost is trust. Depending on the relationship of one another, the aspects may be mostly trust issues, if any. Often, family members take on the care giving that is needed, but with this comes family dynamics. Dynamics also differs from one relationship to another, but without trust, dependency with always be an issue. With professional dependency, however, in a case of home health nursing, for example, the trust is based on professionalism rather than family cohesiveness.
This is a perfect time to consider what “quality of life” means to our aging population. The “Baby Boomers” of this country are aging rapidly at this point and this will be an issue for all of them, eventually. With the busy lifestyle that we have created in this country, we need to reevaluate whether we are worrying about the “important” things in life. If we don’t take care of our loved ones and set a good example for our youth, who will take care of us when we are in need? No one considers a nursing home lifestyle to be the ultimate goal. Most agree that the nursing home is not the favorable destination, due to its quality. But, most agree that having family incorporated into a daily schedule is conducive to a “well-being” lifestyle.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
Biases
Since we are all living in a bias society, I thought everyone could benefit from the following information. We know we are all guilty, no matter how hard we try.
Social Biases
As a species, humans have a tendency to treat others differently than those that are not included in their own group. People belong to many groups and some are intentional, while others are not. People that have a bias tendency toward their own group have difficulty with identifying with those that are not included into this group. This tendency can be called a bias towards those with which they identify. The following paragraphs will discuss specific biases, such as stereotyping and discrimination, and varying degrees of bias, such as blatant and subtle. The impact of this concept will also be discussed, as well as possible strategies that may be used to for individuals and groups to overcome social biases.
Many types of social biases exist in today’s society, but none as prevalent as prejudice and discrimination toward an individual or group. As with any behavior, a cognitive and an emotional element are present that influence the behavior of the individual. The cognitive component of prejudice is stereotyping (Huffman, 2004). “Stereotyping is a set of beliefs about the characteristics of people in a group that is generalized to all group members” (Huffman, 2004, p.566).
Thoughts and beliefs of this nature have an emotional factor associated with them and in the case of stereotyping, it is called prejudice. Prejudice is a learned attitude toward towards members of a group and this attitude is usually negative (Huffman, 2004). Once the thought and feeling about a group of people is established, the possibility of discrimination increases.
Discrimination is the behavioral component of this tripod of thoughts, feelings, and actions and is defined as negative behaviors directed toward a group of people. This action portion of the trio is always negative in some respect. The individual that is affiliated with this group of people is denied the same treatment or privileges by a person or other group that inaccurately perceives this person to be different or less of a person in some way.
Stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination are all viewed as negative concepts that can have negative consequences, but there are varying degrees of these social biases. Subtle and blatant biases are just two categories on each end of a severity spectrum, but there are other concepts to consider that some might view as somewhere in the middle of this spectrum.
Blatant biases are usually what are conjured up in a person’s mind when thinking about the concept of prejudice and discrimination. This is the more severe or overt degree of social bias and can yield negative behaviors, such as harming another simply because they are a member of another group (Fiske, 2004). These extreme actions derive from extreme thoughts and emotions associated with the out-group and can be fueled by in-group activity and validation. People that demonstrate blatant bias are not afraid to express their prejudice towards another group and at times may appear to be proud of this demonstration.
Subtle biases are less intentional and less overt, but can be just as harmful. With recent social views of racism and prejudice surfacing and being viewed as unacceptable, people that want to be acceptable in their society will follow this concept, but still hold emotional and cognitive components that affect their behavior. Although many people believe that prejudice and discrimination are wrong, this can often be an automatic response to a situation. Although an individual from a perceivably undesirable group may outwardly appear to be accepted, they are not honestly and fully accepted by the discriminating group in the case of subtle bias.
The impact of social biases can be detrimental to both the recipient and the instigator. To the instigator, the impact may affect the person or group on a more extrinsic level than an intrinsic one. For example, if a business owner or company chooses to discriminate against a potential employee without just cause (criminal record, lack of education), the growth and future of their business can possibly be affected. This scenario could affect the company or owner’s actions or discrimination, but more importantly would not affect their cognitive or emotional component.
The recipient of the social bias is almost always affected more than the instigator because this effect can produce emotional pain and cognitive changes. For example, using the scenario above, the potential employee being discriminated against would be affected emotionally and could possibly become prejudice based on this negative experience. He or she may believe that all people in this group behave this way and treat others in this group with the same distain with future encounters.
The above scenario is just one probable case of discrimination, but thousands of people from all groups are challenged with social biases every day. It is difficult to pinpoint all the damage social bias can cause, as it has a tendency to affect more than just the people directly involved. Fortunately, there are strategies that exist to help combat or possibly over come some of these biases.
Overcoming social biases is difficult, but not impossible. As mentioned above, an emotional and cognitive component is involved with this biased concept. Starting in these two areas will eventually affect the behaviors that cause the damaging results. One aspect that divides people is differences and lack of experience with or contact between different groups.
One study that was conducted in 1966 showed that division among groups can promote prejudice, as well as diminish it, given the right circumstances (Huffman, 2004). The study first divided a group of adolescent boys at a summer camp into different cabins and assigned them different tasks so that they were competing with one another. This created feeling of group identity and eventually strong negative feelings toward the other groups with which they were competing. This lead to name-calling, fights, and others behaviors that could be labeled as prejudice.
Following this, the researchers then created a minicrisis, or superordinate goals, that required labor, expertise, and cooperation from both groups to overcome this new situation. As they worked together, the hostilities began to subside, all to conquer the goal of all groups involved. At the end of this summer camp, there was no preference towards members of common groups, demonstrating integration from the superordinate goals they worked to achieve together.
As demonstrated by the study above, varying circumstances that divide people can also bring different groups of people together. This same strategy can be used to overcome social biases. For example, if a manager at a company has employees with social biases, the manager can encourage the employees to attend a workshop or create a project together that produces the need for cooperation from all individuals involved in order to complete the given task or goal.
Social biases can create hate, anger and discontent among everyone involved. Some people have the desire to overcome these biases, while others do not. Those that seek a positive change still have many obstacles to overcome, including their own subconscious. People that fit into this category need to take every opportunity to educate themselves on these differences and acknowledge that any change, whether it’s a perspective or behavior, begins with them. These concepts help to explain implications and assumptions that many people have about out-groups and may help them to unite by understanding the very thing that seems to divide them.
References
Fiske, S. (2004). Social beings. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Huffman, K (2004). Psychology in action. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Social Biases
As a species, humans have a tendency to treat others differently than those that are not included in their own group. People belong to many groups and some are intentional, while others are not. People that have a bias tendency toward their own group have difficulty with identifying with those that are not included into this group. This tendency can be called a bias towards those with which they identify. The following paragraphs will discuss specific biases, such as stereotyping and discrimination, and varying degrees of bias, such as blatant and subtle. The impact of this concept will also be discussed, as well as possible strategies that may be used to for individuals and groups to overcome social biases.
Many types of social biases exist in today’s society, but none as prevalent as prejudice and discrimination toward an individual or group. As with any behavior, a cognitive and an emotional element are present that influence the behavior of the individual. The cognitive component of prejudice is stereotyping (Huffman, 2004). “Stereotyping is a set of beliefs about the characteristics of people in a group that is generalized to all group members” (Huffman, 2004, p.566).
Thoughts and beliefs of this nature have an emotional factor associated with them and in the case of stereotyping, it is called prejudice. Prejudice is a learned attitude toward towards members of a group and this attitude is usually negative (Huffman, 2004). Once the thought and feeling about a group of people is established, the possibility of discrimination increases.
Discrimination is the behavioral component of this tripod of thoughts, feelings, and actions and is defined as negative behaviors directed toward a group of people. This action portion of the trio is always negative in some respect. The individual that is affiliated with this group of people is denied the same treatment or privileges by a person or other group that inaccurately perceives this person to be different or less of a person in some way.
Stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination are all viewed as negative concepts that can have negative consequences, but there are varying degrees of these social biases. Subtle and blatant biases are just two categories on each end of a severity spectrum, but there are other concepts to consider that some might view as somewhere in the middle of this spectrum.
Blatant biases are usually what are conjured up in a person’s mind when thinking about the concept of prejudice and discrimination. This is the more severe or overt degree of social bias and can yield negative behaviors, such as harming another simply because they are a member of another group (Fiske, 2004). These extreme actions derive from extreme thoughts and emotions associated with the out-group and can be fueled by in-group activity and validation. People that demonstrate blatant bias are not afraid to express their prejudice towards another group and at times may appear to be proud of this demonstration.
Subtle biases are less intentional and less overt, but can be just as harmful. With recent social views of racism and prejudice surfacing and being viewed as unacceptable, people that want to be acceptable in their society will follow this concept, but still hold emotional and cognitive components that affect their behavior. Although many people believe that prejudice and discrimination are wrong, this can often be an automatic response to a situation. Although an individual from a perceivably undesirable group may outwardly appear to be accepted, they are not honestly and fully accepted by the discriminating group in the case of subtle bias.
The impact of social biases can be detrimental to both the recipient and the instigator. To the instigator, the impact may affect the person or group on a more extrinsic level than an intrinsic one. For example, if a business owner or company chooses to discriminate against a potential employee without just cause (criminal record, lack of education), the growth and future of their business can possibly be affected. This scenario could affect the company or owner’s actions or discrimination, but more importantly would not affect their cognitive or emotional component.
The recipient of the social bias is almost always affected more than the instigator because this effect can produce emotional pain and cognitive changes. For example, using the scenario above, the potential employee being discriminated against would be affected emotionally and could possibly become prejudice based on this negative experience. He or she may believe that all people in this group behave this way and treat others in this group with the same distain with future encounters.
The above scenario is just one probable case of discrimination, but thousands of people from all groups are challenged with social biases every day. It is difficult to pinpoint all the damage social bias can cause, as it has a tendency to affect more than just the people directly involved. Fortunately, there are strategies that exist to help combat or possibly over come some of these biases.
Overcoming social biases is difficult, but not impossible. As mentioned above, an emotional and cognitive component is involved with this biased concept. Starting in these two areas will eventually affect the behaviors that cause the damaging results. One aspect that divides people is differences and lack of experience with or contact between different groups.
One study that was conducted in 1966 showed that division among groups can promote prejudice, as well as diminish it, given the right circumstances (Huffman, 2004). The study first divided a group of adolescent boys at a summer camp into different cabins and assigned them different tasks so that they were competing with one another. This created feeling of group identity and eventually strong negative feelings toward the other groups with which they were competing. This lead to name-calling, fights, and others behaviors that could be labeled as prejudice.
Following this, the researchers then created a minicrisis, or superordinate goals, that required labor, expertise, and cooperation from both groups to overcome this new situation. As they worked together, the hostilities began to subside, all to conquer the goal of all groups involved. At the end of this summer camp, there was no preference towards members of common groups, demonstrating integration from the superordinate goals they worked to achieve together.
As demonstrated by the study above, varying circumstances that divide people can also bring different groups of people together. This same strategy can be used to overcome social biases. For example, if a manager at a company has employees with social biases, the manager can encourage the employees to attend a workshop or create a project together that produces the need for cooperation from all individuals involved in order to complete the given task or goal.
Social biases can create hate, anger and discontent among everyone involved. Some people have the desire to overcome these biases, while others do not. Those that seek a positive change still have many obstacles to overcome, including their own subconscious. People that fit into this category need to take every opportunity to educate themselves on these differences and acknowledge that any change, whether it’s a perspective or behavior, begins with them. These concepts help to explain implications and assumptions that many people have about out-groups and may help them to unite by understanding the very thing that seems to divide them.
References
Fiske, S. (2004). Social beings. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Huffman, K (2004). Psychology in action. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
The Self
The concept of “self” is a difficult construct to define and even more so to measure. Many people define their “self” with commonly used labels, such as “mother”, “wife”, or “friend”. They also use personality traits to describe the “self”, such as “anxious”, “extrovert”, or “clean freak”. Many people question whether the “self” remains consistent throughout a person’s life, or if life’s experiences alter the self, as a person evolves and learns more about the world in which they live. According to many sources, the “self” consists of much more than these labels or traits and the concept of “self”, demonstrated in the following paragraphs, is defined and understood on many different levels.
Although the concept of self is difficult but important to define, it is more important to understand what it means. Several theories and definitions exist, but one of the more popular theories was developed by a humanistic psychologist named Carl Rogers. According to Rogers, the most important component of the personality is the “self”. He described the self as being the part of experience that a person comes to identify early in life as “I” or “me” (Huffman, 2004). According to followers of Rogers, the term “self-concept” refers to all the information and beliefs a person has, as an individual, regarding their own nature, unique qualities, and typical behaviors (Huffman, 2004).
While Rogers’ theories are more focused on personality and traits, the area of social psychology is more focused on four different levels of the self to help define the term. According to Fiske (2004), these levels are the body self, the inner self, the interpersonal self, and the societal self. These levels are examined from the most direct experience to the more indirect experience.
The first level level, the “body self” (also known as the material self), is described as being a person’s possessions. This can include material possessions such as a car or one’s own clothes. But, more personally, it also includes a person’s physical being such as their face, voice, or body. The material possessions change throughout a person’s life, but the possessions themselves reflect a person’s identity. The person’s physical being can be modified to some degree, such as staying in shape, but any extreme modifications, such as plastic surgery, can have a tremendous impact on how the self is viewed.
The next level is the inner self, or spiritual self. “People’s attitudes, abilities, interests, and emotions all constitute the inner self” (Fiske, 2004, p.171). While these are the characteristics to describe this level, it is important to know that is directly associated with the individual’s private thoughts and feelings, and their intra-personal and self-reflective identity.
The interpersonal self, also called the social self is described as a person’s personal relationships with people (Fiske, p. 171). When people describe themselves as a “wife”, a “student”, or “doctor”, they are describing their interpersonal identity. One thing the descriptions have in common is that they are all socially defined roles, which consists of behaviors expected of a person who has a specific, socially-defined position.
The final level, called the societal self, is broader in terms of a person’s identity and includes one’s culture, ethnicity, gender, age, and religion. It relates to a person’s self identity as a member of society. In general, the societal self is about identifying with a meaningful group membership.
What these four levels demonstrate is that the self is not a one-dimensional concept. When a person attempts to understand and identify their own “self,” they sometimes only manage to see one or two levels, instead of the whole picture. The levels are defined individually, but they overlap and intertwine with one another to create an individual that is as unique as the next.
Although not easy to define, the concept of self does exist and as a result, the question of how it develops arises. The self-concept is not innate, but rather developed by the individual through their interactions with society and through reflections on that interaction (Franken, 1994). This aspect of self-concept is important because it indicates that it can be modified or changed. People develop and maintain their self-concept through their experiences and then they reflect on this experience or action. In addition to their own reflections, they also take into account what others tell them about the experience and this feedback is used to form a thought or opinion that contributes to the self-concept. People reflect on what they have experienced/learned and think about what they will possibly experience/learn in the future. This reflection includes a comparison to their personal expectations and what they perceive as the expectations of others in society.
One of the most basic premises of psychology is that thoughts and feelings lead to action, or behavior. This is no different when exploring the concept of self. In terms of measuring such a difficult construct, research psychologists have divided the self into three sections to ease the difficulty of an operational definition and to focus on specific attributes that make up the “self”. The threesome (or sometimes referred to as the tripod) are the self-concept (cognition level), the self-esteem (emotional level), and the self presentation (behavioral level).
Self-esteem is the emotional aspect of the “self” and generally refers to how we feel about or how we value ourselves (Fiske, 2004). Franken (1994) also suggests that self-concept is related to self-esteem because "people who have good self-esteem have a clearly differentiated self-concept. When people know themselves they can maximize outcomes because they know what they can and cannot do" (p. 439). In other words, the better people know themselves, the better they can manage situations and its outcome. Because of this, added with an increase in self-confidence, this management has a direct impact on self-esteem.
Finally, the concept of self-presentation is described by Fiske (2004) as being the behaviors that people exhibit to try to convey certain identities or images to other people. People’s behaviors do not always reflect their true self and this is because they may be trying to demonstrate more desirable characteristics (or what society perceives as such) to the outside world than what comes naturally to them. For example, a person may try to convey to people at a party that they are outgoing, when in fact, they are introverted. This would be considered abnormal behavior for this individual, to this individual (not to a stranger). The motivation for the change in behavior may be that the introverted person perceives (either mistakenly or not) that extroverted behavior is a more a desirable characteristic and may attract more people.
When encountered with the term “self”, people usually think of the conscious reflection of their own identity, and often as an entity that is separate from their own environment. As evidenced by the information above, the self is very much part of the environment in which it lives. Much of people’s concept of their own self is derived from their environment, the people they encounter, and those whom which they share their lives. It would be difficult to have a full picture of one’s self without feedback and experiences acquired from both intra and interpersonal interactions.
References
Fiske, S. (2004). Social beings. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Huffman, K. (2004). Psychology in Action (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Although the concept of self is difficult but important to define, it is more important to understand what it means. Several theories and definitions exist, but one of the more popular theories was developed by a humanistic psychologist named Carl Rogers. According to Rogers, the most important component of the personality is the “self”. He described the self as being the part of experience that a person comes to identify early in life as “I” or “me” (Huffman, 2004). According to followers of Rogers, the term “self-concept” refers to all the information and beliefs a person has, as an individual, regarding their own nature, unique qualities, and typical behaviors (Huffman, 2004).
While Rogers’ theories are more focused on personality and traits, the area of social psychology is more focused on four different levels of the self to help define the term. According to Fiske (2004), these levels are the body self, the inner self, the interpersonal self, and the societal self. These levels are examined from the most direct experience to the more indirect experience.
The first level level, the “body self” (also known as the material self), is described as being a person’s possessions. This can include material possessions such as a car or one’s own clothes. But, more personally, it also includes a person’s physical being such as their face, voice, or body. The material possessions change throughout a person’s life, but the possessions themselves reflect a person’s identity. The person’s physical being can be modified to some degree, such as staying in shape, but any extreme modifications, such as plastic surgery, can have a tremendous impact on how the self is viewed.
The next level is the inner self, or spiritual self. “People’s attitudes, abilities, interests, and emotions all constitute the inner self” (Fiske, 2004, p.171). While these are the characteristics to describe this level, it is important to know that is directly associated with the individual’s private thoughts and feelings, and their intra-personal and self-reflective identity.
The interpersonal self, also called the social self is described as a person’s personal relationships with people (Fiske, p. 171). When people describe themselves as a “wife”, a “student”, or “doctor”, they are describing their interpersonal identity. One thing the descriptions have in common is that they are all socially defined roles, which consists of behaviors expected of a person who has a specific, socially-defined position.
The final level, called the societal self, is broader in terms of a person’s identity and includes one’s culture, ethnicity, gender, age, and religion. It relates to a person’s self identity as a member of society. In general, the societal self is about identifying with a meaningful group membership.
What these four levels demonstrate is that the self is not a one-dimensional concept. When a person attempts to understand and identify their own “self,” they sometimes only manage to see one or two levels, instead of the whole picture. The levels are defined individually, but they overlap and intertwine with one another to create an individual that is as unique as the next.
Although not easy to define, the concept of self does exist and as a result, the question of how it develops arises. The self-concept is not innate, but rather developed by the individual through their interactions with society and through reflections on that interaction (Franken, 1994). This aspect of self-concept is important because it indicates that it can be modified or changed. People develop and maintain their self-concept through their experiences and then they reflect on this experience or action. In addition to their own reflections, they also take into account what others tell them about the experience and this feedback is used to form a thought or opinion that contributes to the self-concept. People reflect on what they have experienced/learned and think about what they will possibly experience/learn in the future. This reflection includes a comparison to their personal expectations and what they perceive as the expectations of others in society.
One of the most basic premises of psychology is that thoughts and feelings lead to action, or behavior. This is no different when exploring the concept of self. In terms of measuring such a difficult construct, research psychologists have divided the self into three sections to ease the difficulty of an operational definition and to focus on specific attributes that make up the “self”. The threesome (or sometimes referred to as the tripod) are the self-concept (cognition level), the self-esteem (emotional level), and the self presentation (behavioral level).
Self-esteem is the emotional aspect of the “self” and generally refers to how we feel about or how we value ourselves (Fiske, 2004). Franken (1994) also suggests that self-concept is related to self-esteem because "people who have good self-esteem have a clearly differentiated self-concept. When people know themselves they can maximize outcomes because they know what they can and cannot do" (p. 439). In other words, the better people know themselves, the better they can manage situations and its outcome. Because of this, added with an increase in self-confidence, this management has a direct impact on self-esteem.
Finally, the concept of self-presentation is described by Fiske (2004) as being the behaviors that people exhibit to try to convey certain identities or images to other people. People’s behaviors do not always reflect their true self and this is because they may be trying to demonstrate more desirable characteristics (or what society perceives as such) to the outside world than what comes naturally to them. For example, a person may try to convey to people at a party that they are outgoing, when in fact, they are introverted. This would be considered abnormal behavior for this individual, to this individual (not to a stranger). The motivation for the change in behavior may be that the introverted person perceives (either mistakenly or not) that extroverted behavior is a more a desirable characteristic and may attract more people.
When encountered with the term “self”, people usually think of the conscious reflection of their own identity, and often as an entity that is separate from their own environment. As evidenced by the information above, the self is very much part of the environment in which it lives. Much of people’s concept of their own self is derived from their environment, the people they encounter, and those whom which they share their lives. It would be difficult to have a full picture of one’s self without feedback and experiences acquired from both intra and interpersonal interactions.
References
Fiske, S. (2004). Social beings. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Huffman, K. (2004). Psychology in Action (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Introduction
Psychology is a science? It's difficult to know whether to end that sentence with a period or a question mark. But, many people within this profession know without question (mark) what the answer is. I wanted to create this blog to invite colleagues and other professionals to share stories and information about this sometomes questionable field of study.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)