Solomon referred to Bush's use of fear tactics as politically "useful." No doubt, in what he claimed to be a personal opposition to Bush, Solomon found his research (and the willingness of Reuters and CNN.com to report on as-yet unpublished research) just as useful for his purposes. And now, Wyatt Ehrenfels finds the buzz about Solomon's research useful for his efforts to illuminate the dynamics responsible for making a veritable Gulag of Psychology's academic community. "A rising tide raises all boats," remarked Ehrenfels.

Before the Fear. Selecting from among Applicants to Graduate Programs Those Who Will Best Respond to Fear

In a nutshell, Terror Management Theory boils down to this: when we feel threatened, and this could range from threats to our ego or to our existence, we cope with (or transcend) that anxiety by creating (and subscribing to) belief systems designed to make us feel as if we are a part of something more meaningful and enduring (e.g. creating a work of value to our society that will outlive us; subscribing to religions that maintain there's life after death). We as a culture through institutions (e.g. science, religion) imbue the universe with value by ascribing an order to it. We as individuals participate in this value by personally investing in these views (e.g. believing in life after death), by living in accordance with the standards of these institutions, and perhaps even by contributing to them, a value we appreciate as self-esteem. We defend our personal value to the world (i.e. self-esteem) and we defend those institutions that provide the belief systems (e.g. our religion or nation) that make us feel less vulnerable or isolated.

Solomon argues that Bush reminded Americans of their vulnerability to bolster public support for his policies (e.g. Patriot Act, Iraq War). Present his policies as a cure for the anxiety he himself stoked in his electorate (what Solomon & Co. call 'mortality salience') and, in the process, repair a tarnished political image.

Turn That Less Back on Thyself

In brief, Wyatt Ehrenfels believes the psychological pressures Solomon attributed to the Bush re-election campaign are the same mechanisms used by psychologists (like Solomon) to pressure Psychology's new recruits into an excessively harmonious and homogeneous community. "There are so many parallels here. Terror Management Theory is an even more efficient explanation of weaknesses and mischief in the way liberal psychology professors run their training programs."

Psychology professors are constantly engaging in this pro-community rhetoric. You have heard of Marines who recite the code 'Unit, Core, God, Country.' Well, psych profs abide by a slightly more dehumanizing and considerably more deindividuating 'Department, University, Science, [INSERT BRANCH OF STUDY HERE].' Their rhetoric is laced with terms like 'perfect fit,' '(in)appropriate,' and '(un)willingness to adjust.' They are quick to call 'arrogant' anything that moves like an individual, and they basically treat anything that comes from inside an individual (e.g. unconventional wisdom, products of rumination or self-description) with the same contempt with which we regard gum on the sidewalk. And they treat individuals interested in certain classes of psychological events (e.g. dreaming) -- which are improbable, uncommon, unverifiable, or subjective -- with a performance-enhanced skepticism that conjures up images of scientists on steroids. If you are not carrying a banner bearing the standard of your community, you are not a team player. If you do not have the epistemology of the field coursing through your veins, you are a misfit.

Psychology professors routinely elicit in their students fears that they are being (or may be) perceived as unprofessional by the faculty. As being unwanted or unworthy of membership in the academic/professional community. And it is this anxiety they tap like so much Alaskan oil to browbeat and/or brainwash their students. This method of drafting and developing colleagues works for psychology departments because it is consistent with the standard for academic excellence, which is no less arbitrary and social.

There are no concrete or mathematical standards by which the work of a psychology professor or aspiring psychology professor is judged (with the exception of exam grades). It's all peer reviewed, which is to say that it's all social. At its best, the process of professional development is moved forward (or backward) by the sum of (independent) subjective judgements. At its worst, and by that I mean most if the time the judgments are not only subjective, but non-independent. There are many ways in which the independence of the judgments is is contaminated. (1) Professors may insist on collaborating on the evaluation of a student (i.e. groupthink) (2) and; in some cases, end-of-academic-term evaluation of students gives professors an opportunity to discover a shared dislike for a student (and form an alliance). (3) Then there are the common factors. The psych profs may appear be functioning independently, but like some weeds, they're connected by a hidden root system. By this I mean the similarity of their training backgrounds (i.e. their indoctrination into the vaunted rigors of their scientific society) gives them a common disposition. (4) The range of dispositions in academia is restricted by the fact candidates for faculty positions qualify inasmuch as they appeal to the lowest common denominator of some committee. This is as true of professors seeking a tenure-track position in a university as it is of the research they submit for publication. There is definitely a culture here. And psych profs make it perfectly clear that the individual scientist or educator is nothing without this culture, and thus that any good model for career / professional development requires approximation to the cultural ideal (i.e. imitation and conformity). The garden-variety grad student is routinely threatened with the prospect of expatriation. Publish-or-perish is just the tip of the iceberg. It's what lies beneath the surface, the [INSERT BEHAVIOR HERE - or do not publish], that never grabs the headlines. And if you are not fortunate enough to be one of the garden-variety grad students. Many grad students come to crossroads during their training and are asked to show the department a little something extra to convince the faculty of their devotion to the team. It's at this point when many grad students, those who furrow their brows in dismay or implacable indignation, who are threatened with academic or conduct probation (and the humiliation and notoriety suffered by many reality show contestants). The anxiety inflicted in some students is so great that students often withdraw (deciding that there's still time to join a kinder, gentler "religion").

Exapnded Comments

Wyatt, who avoids references to himself as Dr. Ehrenfels to make himself more accessible to the public, is making a lot of psychologists nervous with his book, education reform portal, and cable access program. "I don't want to stand on pedigree. Let my critics fall back on their credentials. I want to win the public over on the strength of facts and ideas." A trained social psychologist, Ehrenfels's opinions on the social dynamics of the universities in which he was trained are widely regarded as educated. "An applicant's [to graduate psychology program] trainability is an important consideration when psychology professors at a given university select a handful of applicants from among the hundreds who seek training as therapists or researchers in their program. I am not saying they treat their students like they would rats or pigeons in one of their learning experiments, but there is a system of reinforcement, a token economy, principles of behavior modification and attitude adjustment in place. Even a program of propoganda. Naturally, they are careful to deny admission to applicants with characteristics they deem 'risks' to trainability. With all these applicants, psych profs can afford to cherry-pick, and they will avoid a student whose profile suggests he or she might not be as responsive to the reinforcement gradient as other applicants in the mix. A student perhaps with a vision or informal education too large to pass through the fine mesh through which the graduate faculty sift their apprentices. This could be an applicant with a single characteristic that reminds them of a previous student they did not like. This could be an applicant who comes across as too passionate or independent about what he or she wants to study or how he or she wants to study it. I remember not being able to understand as a college senior why my letter of recommendation source thought he was so wise to qualify his statement about my original dream research with "...but he is not monomaniacal about dreaming." Graduate programs can be sweat shops, slave labor camps -- some manner of indentured servitude -- and psych profs need to feel they can expect a student to perform tasks supporting interests and agendas that are not the student's. The ideal applicant boasts letters of recommendation from professors who can speak to a proven record of the student's working relationships with individual professors. Ideally, the student has worked with professors on their research and, for that work, was awarded with documented credit ranging from a footnote to secondary authorship. It's about networking and relationships, but more importantly, about having demonstrated one can make the kind of sacrifices, and form the type of collegial bonds, required to function in a highly competitive and highly communal discipline.

(ASIDE: As liberal minimum GPA and GRE requirements will attest, GPA and GRE are useful only to certify a pulse in the brain of the applicant. These 'vital statistics' are often used by pre-screening committees not composed of psych profs to disqualify substandard applicants before submitting the list of qualifying applicants to the psychology department. At this advanced stage of candidacy, GPA and GRE are seldom considered in helping to rule an applicant in; rather, the absence of political and professional desiderata like those discussed above become tools in the next round of disqualifications).

Occassionally, an applicant who the faculty misjudged will slip through this first checkpoint. A rogue professor with an independent chair and source of funding may admit a student over the objections of the broader faculty. A student may have applied to a program at a university in the middle of the country that receives only 80 rather than 700 applicants. An applicant's letter of recommendation may have come from a professor who worked alongside a professor at the school to which the student is applying. An applicant may have tricked his way into a program by feigning interest in a letter to a professor either directly, "I enjoyed your meta-analysis of depression published in Psychological Bulletin," or indirectly during an interview, "I may be interested in dreams, but I'd be more than happy to work with you on state-dependent drug use. And you know why? Because I have an intrinsic interest in the methodology." In any case, trainability alone is not sufficient to guarantee that an incoming student will one day blossom into a serviceable standard bearer for Psychology and veritable clone of his new professors. The student has to be socialized into academic culture. Whether you want to call them scare tactics or junior colleague pressure (like 'peer pressure' only the carrots dangled in this kind of pressure are career development milestones), fear is the active ingredient in the socialization program.

Enter the Fear

"Fear plays an important role. Psych profs use fear about as well as anyone," prefaced Wyatt Ehrenfels. "I remember what one graduate student had to say about her psych profs. And bear in mind that this student was well-respected among them. She said, 'they love to threaten.' Many students who make a decision they deem unconventional are threatened with one of several categories of conduct probation. For psych profs, the conduct probation is a necessary recourse when attempting to adjust the attitudes of students who have built a record of academic excellence. I know many students with near 4.0 GPAs who were placed on conduct probation. The unconventional decision, or attitude inferred from the unconventional decision, may be established in one of many ways. A graduate student could err in how he or she puts together a program of study, teaches an undergraduate section of Intro Psych, designs a master's thesis, discharges responsibilities as a funded teaching or research assistant, and often during a single semester, psych profs can find converging evidence across testimony of multiple professors to support an inference of an unprofessional 'attitude.' In one program, much of this evidence came from course instructors. A student might be censured as 'overly self-deprecating' for having once questioned themselves in class or as 'arrogant' for asking too many questions in class. I even know of one case in which one professor's impetus to attack a student was presented during program orientation, when the professor, a behaviorist, was offended by a student who introduced himself to his fellow students as a 'Jungian scholar interested in dream research' (the Jungian scholar on staff having resigned under mysterious circumstances just before the student arrived). And while many students know how to conceal their poker hand, psych profs are quite adept at scanning their students for 'tells' and quite content to impugn a student based on a critical mass of 'tells.' In some cases, it's not so much a matter of drawing inferences from hints of possible undesirable behavior, but a matter of drawing inferences from a lack of desirable behavior, as when a student fails to pay enough unsolicited compliments to the professor, the department, or Psychology in general. Some students make the mistake of thinking that their standing in the program is based on their grades and on their unique expertise in a particular subject when, in actuality, students are also expected to demonstrate that they belong -- that they fit -- that they mesh with the professional values and political ideology of their department and chosen profession. Students who do not put in regular appearances at social functions, do not pay the graduate student association dues, or that do not express an interest in joining extracurricular research teams, are straddling the knife's edge. The only way to really determine who is a fit and who is not is to entrap the ill-fitting students by giving them an illusion of choice (not unlike the deity of many major religions guarding admission to Heaven), carefully noting who attends weekly colloquia after announcing that attendance is not mandatory (har har).

The ill-fitting students are not the only ones to be subjected to some form of intimidation during their graduate training. Apparently, psych profs feel that most students need an occasional tuning, just to keep them honest or just to prove the student's loyalty under stress. And let's face it, we've moved from the age of demanding respect to the age of demanding 'props.' Psych profs need a little love, worship, or reassurance every now and then, and since their colleagues are stingy with such expressions, they turn to their students. A lot of menacing or irritable behavior from professors, which bemuses many of their students, can probably be translated to "show me a little love." I remember as a grade school student, a 9-year-old actually, having been part of the school's first 'romantic' relationship with a girl named Alicia. Everything was always quite 'swell' between us, so regular as to be almost mind- and heart-numbingly ordinary. I mean, what kind of romantic life could two 9-year-olds lead anyway? So every month or so, one of us would start a rumor in which we'd feign interest in another girl or boy just to make the other jealous. That turned the daily grind of grade school into quite a day-time drama that spiced up recess, gym, and home room. I cannot help but think that like the two 9-year-olds who played with one another's lives (and the lives of others sucked into our bogus melodrama), love-starved and faintly motivated psych profs, given the regularity and isolation of university life, would poke a few students. And with some consequence assured -- either reassurance or a fight -- what did the psych prof ever have to lose?

I also knew graduate students who were never embattled or beleaguered politically, and even some who flirted with the label of teacher's pet, who regaled me with an exaggerated report of their 'brush with disaster' after having been summoned into an office for a not-so-sincere slap on the wrist. Like a four-year-old who thinks the world is coming to an end when he firsts experiences neausea with vomiting. I recall a few instances in which a reprimand from a professor, ranging from a minor rebuke to a hint of disapproval, intended to fine-tune the gait of a strutting student, had dramatically life-altering consequences for the student, one of whom camped out in front of my office door and later sobbed and bitched on my shoulder after her near-death experience. (Such peers avoided me like the plague during graduate student until the first hint of trouble, and then they knew who to run to for support, as if they could not count on their friends not to sell them out given the chance). Occasionally, faculty like to test their students to reaffirm their control over them, and fear like that demonstrated by some of my brow-beaten and thin-skinned peers indicated a willingness to adjust driven by a strong desire to belong. The above-mentioned student quickly picked herself up off the floor, brushed herself off, and re-inserted herself into the hive as a 'seasoned, stress-tested junior colleague.'

Some people may liken graduate training to rushing a fraternity. And the hazing is quite apparent in the end-of-academic-term eveluation meetings when group discussions of a student's academic performance often lapse into a process, aided by groupthink and perpetuated by slander, whereby a student's current professors will draw characterological inferences about him in an effort to question his judgment, professionalism, and program fit. Naturally these negative perceptions take on a life of their own, and the student's future professors and supervisors are asked to monitor these tendencies. Many students find themselves looking over their shoulder for four years, trying to keep the red flags from falling out of their pockets, and while I managed to endure many beleaguered years up until my endearing doctoral dissertation, I was aided by a mental toughness I found lacking in many of my fellow students.

And this institutionalized hazing is meted out in a climate of self-contentment and celebration, where faculty are constantly congratulating themselves as a community, usually with a reference not unlike one I often heard about the "glue that holds us together." Naturally, they are referring to the framework of shared expectations and values that include the SOPs. I imagine this is how psych profs make students, colleagues, and even themselves feel better about what they dimly perceive as the sacrifices they have made for membership in their community and access to its one-size-fits-all sources of validation, guidance, and identity. Moreover, psych profs know you can't just mold discipline through fear (like the major religions they despise) without also enchanting students with a sanguine-to-salutary portrayal of the rewards, specifically a grandiose vision of the country club in the reflected glory of which they may one day bask as full-fledged members. Of course, once the rewards and honors have been doled out, once the club bylaws are coursing through the bloodstream, and once personal identities have fused with professional personae and the reputation of Psychology, tenured psych profs develop an amnesia for having signed away power of attorney over sources of their adult maturation, individuation, scientific progress, and true professional development.

So naturally when I read the description of the charismatic leader as one "who declared our country to be great and the people in it to be special," I thought of psych profs like Solomon and statements like the one below, cited by one graduate student as his favorite quote.

I shutter-and-wince (first shutter, then wince) whenever someone describes their own job as one of molding 'unstable' and 'chaotic' people, and then follows that up with a characterization of society as generally 'unstable' and 'chaotic.' When I read that, I begin to think, "Okay, if this psychologist believes psychiatric patients are 'unfit' for society and that society is generally 'unfit' for society, who does he find fit? Ah, yes, psychologists!" Do you think this student believes anyone other than psychologists is qualified to define what is and is not of sound mind? Those of you who are unfamiliar with what it means to be on the short end of the therapeutic alliance, and according to this graduate student, that might just be all of you, should re-read the quote bearing in mind that you do not fit this student's mold and that he has found creative ways to brand critical thinkers and other classes of imperfect fits 'unstable'...'violent'...'chaotic.' Then pray you never have to hear him utter words like 'community mental hygiene,' because like many professionals holding positions to which he aspires, he fashions himself the equivalent of a mental health CDC, with powers to enforce his views of appropriate attitudes and behaviors in the world at large. And naturally, the offenders highest on the list of most wanted deviants are critics of Psychology. Anyway, the quote jibes quite nicely with what I have known about psych profs for years now...that they want to mold society to suit their ideas of security, productivity, and well-roundedness and, by delimitation, stability (opposite of unstable), peace (opposite of violent), and order (opposite of chaos).

What Fear Made

Fear keeps psych profs from authoring critiques like that of Ehrenfels. Fear keeps psych profs from defending a protege as he or she is being assailed during an end-of-academic-term evaluation meeting. And fear keeps psych profs from giving unrewarded psychologistic phenomena like dreams the attention they deserve. Psych profs mask the fear under a bellicose celebration of the shared network of values and expectations that bind them together as a harmonious rank-and-file science and profession.

In his new book, education reform portal, and cable access program, social psychologist Wyatt Ehrenfels addresses the consequences of a communal life engineered by fear, detailing within departments of Psychology a growing intolerance responsible for a lack of progress in the understanding of phenomena widely regarded as central to the human condition (e.g. dreaming). Ehrenfels faults an ever-widening nucleus of arbitrary and superfluous policies and procedures that not only govern knowledge production but in so doing, determine the qualifications for faculty hiring. When departments of Psychology are viewed through an evolutionary lens, it becomes all too obvious that over generations of training and hiring, the psychological community 'evolves' into a remarkably homogeneous community, exhibiting biases with respect to characteristics that influence what is researched and how. Ehrenfels's position is summarized in the paragraph below:

"An examination of the SOPs indicates a Psychology acutely aware of its own aims as a social institution," remarked Ehrenfels. "Unfortunately, these SOPs exclude from the field scholars who are unwilling to surrender freedom allowed under (true) Science, passion inspired by Nature, and wits granted by God. In this system our own career development and our ability to comply with pressures to help manage a public perception of Psychology as a rank-and-file science and profession, requires that we cut corners. It just so happens that conceptualization and phenomenological fidelity are unfortunately the cornerstones of fundamental science. That we make these sacrifices for a desultory imitation of the more cosmetic features of other sciences is a social phenomenon in and of itself. Consequently, certain classes of natural phenomena like dreams, which by virtue of their mystery and complexity require strategies appropriate for exploratory rather than confirmatory research, are neglected and distorted. The SOPs as systemic biases governing research also ended up dictating criteria for faculty hiring and over training generations, these biases ended up favoring their human incarnations in serviceable standard bearers and savants with an evangelically skeptical, almost disqualifying or reductionistic, attitude toward dreams."

The intelligence community released a report explaining the inefficiency of the FBI as an instrument of terror investigation. Apparently, a policy that bases promotion on "number of cases solved" prevented terror investigators from ascending to positions of prominence in the FBI. This policy bares a remarkable similarity to the practice within universities of awarding interviews, and ultimately faculty positions, to applicants with the "greatest number of publications." With this practice in force, few students would attempt to stake a career researching complex or mysterious phenomena. As a graduate student interested in dreams, I realized any single study of dreaming worth its salt demanded so much in the way of legwork and brainpower as to rule out 'other projects.' Unfortunately, neglecting these 'other projects' is tantamount to neglecting the 'daily nutritional requirements' of a career. As a graduate student I was expected by some faculty, encouraged by others, to join extracurricular research teams in the hopes of becoming the sixth author on as many frivolous four-page publications as possible, even if that meant receiving an insincere reprimand or two for putting off thesis and dissertation. (The advice is appropriate when you consider that faculty search committees judge applicants based on number of publications with a rare regard for the nature or quality of the work completed in fulfillment of one's dissertation). But APA style and publication formats do not offer a style capable of telling the story of exploratory research. We have to look to other enterprises, to software development cycles and feasibility study project management plans, to find formats capable of absorbing phased, fluid, conceptually-driven, and contingency-responsive detectivework. The science of Psychology is ADHD at best, which is serviceable where some issues and subjects are concerned, but it strains the credibility of our so-called "organized body of knowledge" where psychologistic phenomena is concerned.

In addition to the use of fear in socializing students into Psychology's professional culture, the evolution of biases into the psychological community resembles aversive conditioning whereby phobias are strengthened by pleasure derived from avoiding the feared object. By analogy, anti-dream biases within the psychological community are reinforced when professors avoid risks to their career posed by dreams. An institutionalized neglect or distortion of the phenomena is now said to be ingrained in the academic culture.

One has to wonder whether self-styled terrorism specialist Sheldon understands that his own colleagues manage a special form of anxiety endemic to their own lifestyle as psychologists: uncertainty. Many psych profs toiling in the young science of Psychology (and only science in which the subject and object of research are one-and-the-same) develop an academic neurosis of sorts. Unable to tolerate doubts that what they are doing may not be right (or doubts as to whether there is one and only one right way to research the human condition), they cling to the ever-widening nucleus of arbitrary and superfluous policies and procedures, finding reassurance in the mass compliance of students and colleagues to the framework of shared expectations and social conventions. This may explain why any student stepping once inch to this or that side of the white line receives a disproportionately severe recrimination that bares all the earmarks of a professor personally affronted. Wrapped up into charges of unconventional tendencies and deemed synonymous (by mixed emotional-intellectual gymnastics) with patterns of poor judgment and unprofessionalism, the imagined sleight and scorn, the hypersensitivity and compulsiveness that is the hallmark of this neurosis, betrays the personal pathology as it is explosively mixed with the worst elements of collective behavior (i.e. groupthink, deindividuation). Faculty like to conceal from the student the source of a negative comment about him or her in an end-of-academic-term evaluation meeting. "I'm not at liberty to say," should be engraved into a plaque and mounted on the wall opposite the elevators to the psychology department. Psych profs enjoy the reputation of "scientists," but when a student wishes to investigate the source of a vague, unscrupulous, and unsubstantiated allegation or aspersion raised during an end-of-academic-term evaluation meeting, the professor to whom the inquiry is directed is trained to guard its anonymity. Psych profs do what they can to evade the disagreement or conflict engendered by their own defensive and therapeutic accusations. Does Sheldon understand this? Do Sheldon's colleagues Greenberg and Pyszczynski? The trio of social psychologists collaborated for years on pre-9/11 research into something called terror management. Terror management refers to the use of symbols and belief systems to protect the self-esteem from the ever-present threat of mortality. I like the theory a lot. It is one of the few examples of conceptual splendor and penetration in an increasingly issue-driven, topical, and all-around frivolous field. Now, having said that, I wonder whether Sheldon, Greenberg, and Pyszczynski would recognize the manner in which psychology professors have hijacked a science for the purposes of managing their own terror. Would they recognize the paradigmatic fat in their science as "psychologically useful" for buffering self-doubt and promoting a view of themselves and their community as "useful."

Naturally, I cannot address myself directly to the research itself, as it is not yet available (NOTE: this report was launched August, 2004). And I am addressing myself to the report of the research, drawing from my familiarity with social psychological research publications to issue some admittedly advanced comments on the science. The report did not mention any intermediate-level cause-effect relationships, none of the links between the fear and the behavior that would have made this glossy poll interesting science (or at least less of a 'tell me what I don't already know variety'). Based on my extensive knowledge of psychological research, I can tell you that these links are usually missing, typically left for someone else to address in future research. If indeed Solomon's research does nothing more than scratch this surface, I doubt anyone else would pick up where Solomon left off. The political nature of the research is likely to time-bind it to the 2004 Presidential election, after which the broader implications, which may earn a kind of 'drive-by' popularity in the present time, may be shelved until the next political opportunity. (One could be forgiven for wondering whether publication in the September issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin [the lesser but less lagging of the two journals] was arranged after it was learned the article would not be published in the more reputable journal until after the election).

Solomon was quoted as saying that "If people are aware that thinking about death makes them act differently, then they don't act differently." I wonder if the same could be said for psychology students and professors asked to consider how thinking about threats to their own career makes them act differently. We'll soon see. As for whether voters will behave differently, well, voters are already aware of the influence of fear on their own voting habits, even if they may not be acutely aware that a psychology professor named Solomon believes the Bush re-election team is attempting to manipulate the media to put more anxiety-provoking threats in the headlines. The voters will decide for themselves -- and I believe their own wits are quite sufficient toward this end -- whether the threat is real and whether the incumbent or the challenger is better equipped to deliver security. The terror gap has been narrowing in recent polls, putting only 8 points between Bush and Kerry.

NOTE
Barnes & Noble sells out of book while Amazon replenishes stock. As Ehrenfels works to boost supplies to Barnes & Noble and work out a better price at Amazon, Ehrenfels (for now) recommends PublisherDirect (click here) for speed.

fireflySun.com Report List

16 Points Memo: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Authors, Scholars Unite to Support Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Dream Researcher Gail Bixler: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Exposes Our Fear of Exposure Therapy: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Interviews with Internal Correspondent: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Psychology Professors Suffer from Professional Analogue of Borderline Personality Disorder: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Student Defies Psychology Professor's Warning Not to Correspond with Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Chides Daniel Dennett for Evangelical Atheism in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Argues Psychology Graduate Education Not Worth the Money: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology Professors Acknowledge Student Complaints about Curriculum: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Answers Critics, Campaign of Diversionary Tactics: Wyatt Ehrenfels

American Psychological Association Denies Listserv Members Access to Wyatt Ehrenfels OKTV Broadcast Report: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Talks about the Dissertation Experience: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Discusses a Methodology for Dream Research: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Defends Dreaming from Psychologist Negative Thinking: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Urban E-Zine Entelechy Publishes Wyatt Ehrenfels Essay: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Defends Dream Research against Vaunted Psychology News Group Moderator: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Customizes Probe to Explore Dreaming-Waking Interface: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Kindred Critic Dennis Fox: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Elio Frattaroli: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Political Scientist John Freie: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Biologist John Hewitt: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Shows Support for Embattled Psychology Graduate Student: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Counsels Students on True Callings: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Amuses with Proposal of Psychology Graduate Program Insurance: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Corrective Statistical Procedure Emblematic of Psychology's Flaws: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Brad Jesness Target of Malicious Psychologists on Usenet: Brad Jesness

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Medal-Winning Author M.J. John: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Critical of Vaunted Cornell Research Claiming Opposites Do NOT Attract: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Criticizes Berkeley Psychology Professors for Left Wing Bias: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Links to Education and Appropriations Subcommittees: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Thunders Away at Psychology's Load-Bearing Premises: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Counsels High School Students on Choice of College Major: Wyatt Ehrenfels

APPIC Match Service Helps Veterans Hospital Psychologists Discriminate against Applicants w/ Disabilities: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology Professional Development at Odds with Adult Maturation: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Republishes Work of College Curriculum Critic and FOX News Writer Wendy McElroy: Wendy McElroy

Wyatt Ehrenfels Likens Psychological Research to Premature Ejaculation: Wyatt Ehrenfels

According to Social Psychologist Wyatt Ehrenfels, Diversity Is Skin Deep, Black-and-White at University of Michigan: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Dismantles Psychology's Standard Defenses against Criticism: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Points to Hypocrisy in Terror Management Research: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Releases Revitalized Pocket Memo: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Publishes Critique in Revolution Issue of New Therapist Magazine: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Is Psychology at Odds with Itself?: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Campaign Not Intend to Offend Psychology Majors: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Why Community Access Television Is Coming Around to Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Overview of Wyatt Ehrenfels's Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Are Psychology Professors Prejudiced against Psyche: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology's Science of Dreams Fails Science and Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology Graduate Schools Blasted for Culture of Student Character Assassination: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Ode to Psychology Students: Are You Making A Major out of a Molehill: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Multicultural Fetish of Psychology Professors Belie Suppression of Individual Freedom, Ideas in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Games without Frontiers: Ehrenfels Depicts Science of Psychology as ADHD: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Uses Evolutionary Theory, Natural Selection to Impugn D-Volving Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals American Psychological Association as Lobbying Tour de Force: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Shares Bizarre Tale of Application for University Position: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Dreams & Dreaming Frequently Asked Questions: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Discusses Predictive Power of Tornado Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Releases Preface to Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

In a Drugged States, New Mexico Legislators Give Psychologists Prescriptive Authority: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun Press Release: Katheryn Moyer

Brad Jesness Exposes Malicious Stalking by Psychologists on Usenet: Brad Jesness

Psychology Majors Respond to Wyatt Ehrenfels fireflySun.com: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Personality Taxonomy: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Blueprint for Blighted Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

From Position of Ignorance, APA Official Diverts Attention from/Urges Skepticism for, Wyatt Ehrenfels APPIC Discrimination Report: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Comes to Terms with Roiled Psychology Graduate Student and News Group Moderator: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Responses to Wyatt Ehrenfels Campaign to Reform Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Independent Publisher Offers Glowing Review of Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Robert Roerich: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Psychology Professors Play Games with Rules: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Physicist Jeff Schmidt: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Malicious Stalking by Psychologists Abusing Psychotherapy News Group: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals Groupthink, Abuse in Psychology Faculty Evaluation of Graduate Students: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Begins Sequel to Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Exposes Counseling Center Hiring Preference for Gays, Lesbians: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Diagnoses the Diagnosticians with the Shadow DSM: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Prominent UC-Davis Dream Researcher Dodges Wyatt Ehrenfels Draft of Reformers: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Management Consulting Maven R. Mallory Starr: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Overview of Wyatt Ehrenfels Dream Research with Cancer Patients: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Comments on the Short Falls of Teaching in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Popular Psychotherapy All about Controlling Chaos: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Washington National Cathedral Site of Synchronicity in Novel by Social Psychologist: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Comments on the Value of a Degree in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Strategy for Self-Science of Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Attacks Psychology on Two Fronts: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Connie Vaughn Teams with Wyatt Ehrenfels to Explain Why She Is Not a Psychology: Connie Vaughn

Benjamin Willard Elected President of Wyatt Ehrenfels Fan Club: Benjamin Willard

Wyatt Ehrenfels Identifies Flaws in U.S. News Report of Psychology Employment Prospects: Wyatt Ehrenfels