Amsarmu ga "sharhi" na Rory Reid na nazarin Nicole Prause 2013 EEG (Steele et al., 2013)

YBOP COMMENTS:

A ƙasa akwai martanin YBOP na Yuli, 2013 ga " Sharhin Nazarin Farawa " na Rory C. Reid, PhD (Sashen Ilimin Halayyar Dan Adam, Jami'ar California, Los Angeles). Me yasa muka rubuta martani ga sukar Rory Reid game da " Sha'awar Jima'i, ba Jinsi Mai Yawan Juna Biyu ba, Yana da Alaƙa da Amsoshin Jijiyoyi da Hotunan Jima'i ke haifarwa "? Domin ba suka ba ne kwata-kwata. Madadin haka, kariya ce ta ɓoye ga binciken EEG na Prause ( Steele et al ., 2013). Kyauta ta farko ita ce Rory Reid ya ambaci Gary Wilson sau goma a cikin abin da ake kira "shari'ar". Na biyu, Reid ya faɗi sau 3 cewa ba a sake buga rubutun blog na Gary Wilson na Psychology Today da ke nazarin binciken Prause ba. Dukansu Reid da Prause sun san dalilin da ya sa ya ɓace: An matsa wa Prause lamba kan Psychology Today don cire ba kawai rubutun Wilson ba, har ma da wannan rubutun da wasu masu rubutun ra'ayin yanar gizo biyu suka yi. A ƙarshe, sukar Rory Reid ta gaza magance duk wani babban batunmu, ko kuma bayyana kuskuren Prause ga manema labarai. Madadin haka, Reid ya karkatar da sukar ta hanyar yin kuskuren siffanta abin da binciken YBOP ya faɗa a zahiri. Lura: Rory Reid ya bayyana cewa ofishinsa na UCLA yana kusa da na Prause (kuma su biyun suna zama abokan zama).

UPDATE: Kafin mu isa ga bayanin Rory Reid kuma Steele et al.Sakamakon ainihin, yawancin ya faru tun Yuli, 2013. UCLA bai sabunta yarjejeniyar Nicole Prause (a cikin Janairu, 2015) ba. Ba a sake yin amfani da aikin koyarwa a dogon tarihi na hargitsi da kuma lalata Gary Wilson da sauransu, ciki har da masu bincike, likitoci, likitoci, masu ilimin psychologist, tsohon abokan aiki na UCLA, sadaukarwa a Burtaniya, maza a dawowa, TIME editan mujallar, masanan farfesa, IITAP, SASH, Yakin Jaridar New Drug, littafin jarida Kimiyya mai kwakwalwa, kamfanin iyayensa MDPI, shugaban jaridar mujallar CUREUS, da mujallar Yin jima'i da jima'i da jima'i. Duba: Takaddun rubuce-rubuce na Nicole Prause na ɓarna da tursasawa Gary Wilson & wasu da yawa (da kuma yanzu shafi na biyu kuma a shafi na uku).

Muhimmin batu: Duk da cewa Prause ta ci gaba da da'awar ƙarya cewa ita ce "wanda aka azabtar," Prause ce ta fara duk wata hulɗa da cin zarafi ga mutane da ƙungiyoyi da aka jera a wannan shafin. Babu wanda ke cikin jerin shafuka na baya da ya ci zarafin Nicole Prause. Iƙirarin da ta ƙirƙira game da zama wanda aka azabtar da "bin diddigi" ko lalata daga "masu fafutukar yaƙi da batsa" ba su da takardu ɗaya. Duk shaidar da ta bayar an ƙirƙira ta ne da kanta: zane-zane guda ɗaya, wasu imel daga gare ta zuwa ga wasu suna bayyana cin zarafi, da wasiƙu biyar na dakatarwa da dainawa waɗanda ke ɗauke da zarge-zargen ƙarya. Hakanan za ku ga shaidar wasu koke-koke na hukuma da Prause ta shigar ga hukumomin ƙa'idoji daban-daban - waɗanda aka yi watsi da su ko aka bincika su aka kuma yi watsi da su. Da alama tana shigar da waɗannan koke-koken na bogi don haka za ta iya ci gaba da da'awar cewa duk waɗanda ta nufa suna "ƙarƙashin bincike."

Prause bai bayar da misalai na musamman na zama abin da ake nema a yanar gizo ba, ko ta hanyar tweet, Facebook, ko hanyoyin haɗi zuwa shafuka akan YBOP. A gefe guda kuma, shafin Twitter na Prause kaɗai ya taɓa ɗauke da ɗaruruwan tweets marasa kyau da ba daidai ba waɗanda ke kai hari ga Wilson da wasu da yawa (Tun daga lokacin Prause ta share kusan irin waɗannan tweets 3,000). A taƙaice, Prause ta ƙirƙiri tatsuniyoyi marasa hujja, yayin da take da alaƙa da masana'antar batsa , kamar yadda za a iya gani daga wannan hotonta (daga dama) a kan jan kafet na bikin bayar da kyaututtuka na X-Rated Critics Organization (XRCO) . (A cewar Wikipedia, Ƙungiyar Masu Sukar X-Rated ta Amurka ce ke ba da kyaututtukan XRCO kowace shekara ga mutanen da ke aiki a nishaɗin manya kuma ita ce kawai nunin kyaututtukan masana'antar manya da aka keɓe musamman ga membobin masana'antu . ^[1] ) Don ƙarin takardu, duba: Shin Masana'antar Batsa Ta Shafar Nicole Prause? ).

Amsarmu ga Rory Reid (Yuli, 2013):

Muna farin cikin ganin amsa ga tambayoyin da muka yi, koda kuwa hakan ya zama suka ga ayyukan Prause yayin da kawai yake sukar masu sukarta. Ganin cewa yawancin batutuwan da muka gabatar an yi watsi da su, ko kuma an juya su don su sami wata ma'ana daban, muna so Dr. Reid ya tambayi Dr. Prause don ya amsa waɗannan ƙarin tambayoyin :

1) Me ya sa ka yi tunanin cewa bincikenka ya nuna cewa yawan jima'i babban sha'awa ne lokacin da bincikenka ya gano cewa ƙarin kunnawar kwakwalwa yana da alaƙa da ƙarancin sha'awar jima'i? Lura da kalmomin Prause a cikin wannan hirar :

Mene ne babban binciken a cikin bincikenku?

"Mun gano cewa martanin kwakwalwa ga hotunan jima'i ba a yi hasashensa ta hanyar ma'aunin tambayoyi guda uku na yawan jima'i ba. Amsar kwakwalwa an yi hasashenta ne kawai ta hanyar ma'aunin sha'awar jima'i . A wata ma'anar, yawan jima'i ba ya bayyana bambance-bambancen kwakwalwa a martanin jima'i ba fiye da kawai samun yawan sha'awar jima'i. "

Amma hakan bai faru ba, kamar yadda John Johnson PhD ya bayyana a cikin wannan martanin da takwarorinsa suka yi :

"Binciken da aka yi a kididdiga guda ɗaya bai ce komai game da jaraba ba. Bugu da ƙari, wannan muhimmin binciken yana da alaƙa mara kyau tsakanin P300 da sha'awar jima'i da abokin tarayya (r=−0.33), yana nuna cewa girman P300 yana da alaƙa da ƙarancin sha'awar jima'i; wannan ya saba wa fassarar P300 kai tsaye a matsayin babban sha'awa . Babu kwatancen da aka yi da sauran ƙungiyoyin masu shan kwayoyi. Babu kwatancen da aka yi da ƙungiyoyin masu shan kwayoyi. Kammalawar da masu binciken suka yanke wani tsalle ne daga bayanai, wanda ba ya nufin ko mutanen da ke ba da rahoton matsala wajen daidaita kallon hotunan jima'i suna da ko ba su da martanin kwakwalwa kamar hodar iblis ko wani nau'in masu shan kwayoyi."

2) Dr. Prause, me yasa ka ambaci ƙungiyar kula da "cikin-batun" domin wannan ba shi da alaƙa da sakamakon da Steele et al. suka bayyana kawai:

"Hanyoyin P300 da suka fi girma ga jima'i masu jima'i, dangane da matsalolin tsaka-tsakin, sun kasance da alaka da matakan jima'i, amma basu da alaka da matakan jima'i."

Fassara: Mutanen da ke da ƙarin amsawa ga batsa suna da ƙarancin sha'awar yin jima'i da abokin tarayya (amma ba ƙarancin sha'awar yin jima'i ba). A wata hanyar kuma: mutanen da ke da ƙarin kunnawar kwakwalwa da sha'awar batsa sun fi son yin jima'i da batsa fiye da yin jima'i da mutum na gaske. Ba shi da mahimmanci ga ƙungiyar kula da abin da ake kira "cikin-batun" ta Prause.

3) Dr. Prause, me yasa ka yi ikirarin da ba a tallafa maka ba a hirarka da Psychology Today da kuma wasu wurare? Hira da Psychology Today :

Menene manufar binciken?

Gwaji : Bincikenmu ya gwada ko mutanen da ke bayar da rahoton irin waɗannan matsalolin suna kama da sauran masu shan muggan kwayoyi daga martanin kwakwalwarsu ga hotunan jima'i. Nazarin da aka yi kan jarabar miyagun ƙwayoyi, kamar cocaine, ya nuna tsarin amsawar kwakwalwa ga hotunan miyagun ƙwayoyi, don haka mun yi hasashen cewa ya kamata mu ga irin wannan yanayin a cikin mutanen da ke ba da rahoton matsalolin jima'i idan a zahiri jaraba ce.

Shin wannan ya nuna jaraba da jima'i shine labari?

Idan aka maimaita bincikenmu, waɗannan binciken za su wakilci babban ƙalubale ga ka'idojin "jarabawar jima'i" da ake da su a yanzu. Dalilin da ya sa waɗannan binciken ke gabatar da ƙalubale shi ne cewa kwakwalwarsu ba ta mayar da martani ga hotunan kamar sauran masu shan miyagun ƙwayoyi ba.

Abubuwan da ke sama sun yi iƙirarin cewa kwakwalwar mutane ba ta "amsa kamar yadda sauran masu shan kwayoyi ba su da tallafi. A cikin Steele et al., mutane suna da mafi girman karatun EEG (P300) lokacin kallon hotunan jima'i - wanda shine ainihin abin da ke faruwa lokacin da masu shan kwayoyi suka kalli hotuna da suka shafi jarabarsu (kamar yadda yake a cikin wannan binciken kan masu shan cocaine ). Da yake tsokaci a ƙarƙashin hirar Psychology Today na Prause, babban farfesa a fannin ilimin halayyar ɗan adam, John A. Johnson, ya ce :

"Zuciyata har yanzu tana cike da mamaki game da ikirarin Prause cewa kwakwalwar mutanenta ba ta mayar da martani ga hotunan jima'i ba kamar yadda kwakwalwar masu shan miyagun ƙwayoyi ke mayar da martani ga maganinsu, ganin cewa ta ba da rahoton ƙarin P300 don hotunan jima'i. Kamar masu shan miyagun ƙwayoyi waɗanda ke nuna ƙaruwar P300 lokacin da aka gabatar musu da maganin da suka zaɓa. Ta yaya za ta iya yanke hukunci wanda ya kasance akasin ainihin sakamakon? Ina tsammanin yana iya zama saboda tunaninta - abin da ta yi tsammanin za ta samu."

4) Dr, Prause, menene alaƙar da ke tsakanin bayanan EEG da duk tambayoyi 14 akan Jima'i Desire Inventory (SDI)? Zan amsa: babu wata muhimmiyar alaƙa. Binciken ya ba da rahoton alkaluman sha'awar jima'i da mutum ɗaya, amma yana da wannan ƙarshe:

Kammalawa : An tattauna abubuwan da ke haifar da fahimtar yawan jima'i a matsayin babban sha'awa, maimakon rashin tsari.

Me yasa duniya za ku yi iƙirarin "babban sha'awa" lokacin da waɗanda ke da ƙarin amsawar alama ba su da ƙarancin sha'awar jima'i da abokin tarayya . Bugu da ƙari, an maimaita kalmar "sha'awar jima'i" sau 63 a cikin binciken, kuma taken binciken (Sha'awar Jima'i, Ba Jinsi Ba….) yana nuna cewa ƙarin kunnawar kwakwalwa ga alamun yana da alaƙa da babban sha'awar jima'i. Bugu da ƙari, duk kanun labarai sun yi ihu cewa "sha'awar jima'i" babban sha'awa ne? Amma ba babban sha'awa ba ne!

5) Dr. Reid ya ce, "Wata matsala da zan iya tayarwa ita ce rashin jin daɗin da nake ji game da korar EEG da Mr. Wilson ya yi a matsayin fasaha." A ina muka yi watsi da EEG a matsayin fasaha? A gaskiya ma, amsarmu tana da alaƙa da bincike guda biyu da suka yi amfani da EEGs a hankali da ƙwarewa wajen binciken jarabar miyagun ƙwayoyi. Mun nuna kawai cewa, ba kamar jarabar sinadarai ba, jarabar halayen jima'i tana da hanyoyi da yawa na fahimta. Yin ikirari mai faɗi bisa ga kunna EEG ba shi da ma'ana saboda iyakokin fasahar da ke ciki.

6) Dr, Prause, ina shaidar da ke nuna cewa "sha'awar dyadic kaɗai" ana amfani da ita a matsayin ma'aunin "sha'awar jima'i?" Kuna ci gaba da da'awar wannan, amma goyon bayan da binciken ya bayar don wannan da'awar ya saba wa da'awarta ( nazarin 1 , nazari na 2 ). Bugu da ƙari, haka nan maganganun ɗaya daga cikin masu haɓaka SDI, Ilana Spector , waɗanda muka tuntuɓa a ƙoƙarin fahimtar da'awar Prause (da zarar mun ga binciken da aka ambata a ciki ya saba wa su). Spector, wanda ya tabbatar mana cewa an yi nufin a gudanar da SDI a matsayin raka'a ɗaya, ya ce, "An tabbatar da ma'aunin ne kawai ta amfani da DUKKAN abubuwan guda ɗaya da dyadic .... Ba a tsara ma'aunin don a yi amfani da shi ba [kamar yadda yake a nan] kuma ba a tabbatar da shi ta wannan hanyar ba."

7) Dr. Prause, hakika kun san ka'idojin da aka saba amfani da su don nazarin jaraba wanda ke tantance ayyukan kwakwalwa da aka haifar. Me yasa mutane maza da mata, ciki har da mutane 7 waɗanda ba 'yan luwaɗi ba ne ? Bincike bayan bincike ya tabbatar da cewa maza da mata suna da martani daban-daban na kwakwalwa ga hotunan jima'i ko fina-finai. Nazarin kwakwalwa na jaraba masu inganci ya ƙunshi batutuwa masu kama da juna: jinsi ɗaya, yanayin jima'i iri ɗaya, tare da shekaru iri ɗaya da IQ. Wannan kaɗai ya rage bincikenku.

8) Dr. Prause, ta yaya za ka iya tabbatar da cewa waɗanda ba 'yan luwaɗi ba ne a cikin gwaji da batsa ta maza da mata kawai - sannan ka yanke hukunci mai yawa daga rashin alaƙa (wanda za a iya hasashensa)? Wannan kuma yana sa sakamakonka ya zama abin tambaya.

9) Dr. Prause, me yasa ba a riga an yi wa mutanen da kake nazari a kansu ba? Nazarin kwakwalwa na jaraba yana tantance mutane game da yanayin da suka riga suka kasance (baƙin ciki, OCD, wasu jaraba, da sauransu). Wannan kuma yana sanya shakku kan sakamakonka.

10) Dr. Prause, me yasa ka yi amfani da SCS (Scale of Compulsivity Scale) alhali ba gwajin tantancewa bane mai inganci don jarabar batsa ta intanet ko ga mata? An ƙirƙira shi a shekarar 1995 kuma an tsara shi da tunanin jima'i mara tsari (dangane da binciken annobar cutar AIDS). Kuma, wannan kaɗai ya bayyana dalilin da yasa babu wata alaƙa tsakanin karatun P300 da SCS.

Komawa ga Asusun Sha'awar Jima'i (SDI), da kuma iƙirarin Rory Reid cewa mun rasa maki na SDI na Solitary: " Mr. Wilson ya yi ƙoƙarin tabbatar da cewa Dr. Prause ta gaza yin cikakken nazari kan wani ƙaramin sikelin SDI da aka yi amfani da shi a cikin bincikenta ". Karanta abin da muka faɗa a zahiri, farawa daga nan . Mun bayyana a sarari cewa babu wata alaƙa da ta wanzu lokacin da aka yi amfani da dukkan SDI. Wannan gaskiya ne. Duk da yake Steele et al sun ba da rahoton mummunan alaƙa tsakanin karatun EEG da tambayoyin SDI da aka haɗa, wannan binciken ya bayyana kansa a matsayin taken binciken da ke ɓatarwa da kanun labarai na ƙarya game da "sha'awar jima'i ". Sakamakon binciken:

"Bambance-bambancen girman P300 da abubuwan da ke motsa sha'awa na jima'i, dangane da abubuwan da ke motsa jiki na tsaka-tsaki, yana da alaƙa da ma'aunin sha'awar jima'i, amma ba shi da alaƙa da ma'aunin jima'i."

Fassara: Mutanen da suka fi mayar da martani ga batsa suna da ƙarancin sha'awar yin jima'i da abokin tarayya (amma ba ƙarancin sha'awar yin jima'i ba). A wata hanyar - mutanen da ke da ƙarin kunnawar kwakwalwa da sha'awar batsa sun fi son yin jima'i da batsa fiye da yin jima'i da mutum na gaske. Ya bambanta da hirarraki da kanun labarai.

Dubi Table 2 daga cikakken rubutu na binciken.

Danna don kara girman Table 2

Da farko, "Bayanin" ya ce zangon gwajin gwaji shi ne "3-26," kuma amma ma'anar mace ta wuce ta. Kusan 26.46 – a zahiri daga sigogin. Me ya faru?

Mafi mahimmanci, duk da haka, idan SPAN Lab ya auna ainihin "sha'awar jima'i" ta amfani da cikakken SDI, masu binciken sa zasu ƙara babban al'aura-sha'awar ma'anar kashi 23.92 (daga 26) zuwa ma'anar haɗin gwiwa-sha'awar ma'anar kashi 58 (mai yuwuwa 70). Don haka, ainihin “sha'awar jima'i” ma'ana ci shine wanda yakai 82 (na yiwuwar 96).

Me ke faruwa idan aka kwatanta ainihin sakamakon "tambayoyi 14" na "sha'awar jima'i" da bayanan EEG? Babu wata muhimmiyar alaƙa ko kaɗan . Babu da'awar da ba ta dace ba game da wargaza ra'ayin "jarabar jima'i," babu wani abin tsoro na kafofin watsa labarai, kuma babu buƙatar duk wani tsoratarwa da ke bayan fage don ƙoƙarin gano wani kuskure. A takaice, Steele et al. binciken ƙarancin alaƙa tsakanin karatun EEG da tambayoyi zai zama wani abu mara daɗi (wanda wasu raunin hanyoyin suka bayyana cikin sauƙi).

Yana da mahimmanci a lura cewa binciken ya ƙunshi kuskure na biyu game da SDI: " SDI yana auna matakan sha'awar jima'i ta amfani da ma'auni biyu da aka haɗa da abubuwa bakwai kowannensu . " A gaskiya ma, Inventory na Sha'awar Jima'i ya ƙunshi tambayoyi tara da aka haɗa , tambayoyi huɗu na musamman , da tambaya ɗaya da ba za a iya rarraba su ba (#14). Ɓarkewar kafofin watsa labarai masu rai, wacce ta raka buga wannan binciken, ta dogara ne akan kanun labarai masu jan hankali akan sakamakon SDI na ɓangare. Duk da haka, rubuta binciken ya ƙunshi kurakurai masu haske game da SDI kanta, waɗanda ba sa haifar da kwarin gwiwa ga masu binciken.

Psychology Yau da kuma Nicole Prause

Eh, an cire rubutunmu na Psychology Today. Mun fahimci cewa an cire shi ne saboda barazanar doka mara tushe da aka yi wa "Psychology Today," daga Dr. Prause da kanta. A gaskiya ma, kwana ɗaya bayan haka, PT ta cire wani rubutu namu na baya… game da wani binciken SPAN Lab . Rubuce-rubucen da muka cire a cikin shekaru 4 na rubutun ra'ayin kanka a yanar gizo rubuce-rubuce ne da suka shafi Prause. Hmm. Kimiyya tana bunƙasa ne a kan muhawara a bayyane, ba irin wannan tsoratarwa a bayan fage ba.

Dokta Reid (na sama) sau biyu yana da alaƙa da tsohuwar rubutunmu a kan "Psychology yau" (wanda yanzu ke nuna shafi wanda ba a buga shi ba) kuma ya ba da shawarar cewa an share shi saboda imanin "Psychology yau" cewa ya ƙunshi kurakurai. Ganin cewa mu kanmu mun sami mummunan rauni, barazanar doka daga Dr.Prause, muna da shakka game da wannan.

Ko da yake ba ma son yin taƙaitaccen bayani game da imel a bainar jama'a, a wannan yanayin, muna jin ya zama dole domin masu karatu masu sha'awar su sami cikakken hoto game da dabarun Dr. Prause. Duba duk musayar imel tsakaninmu da ita (a ƙasa). Waɗannan sun faru watanni da suka gabata, a watan Afrilu, 2013, lokacin da ta "ba da labarin" wani sigar wannan binciken da ba a buga ba, wanda ba a sake dubawa ba (kawai) ga mai rubutun ra'ayin kanka a yanar gizo David Ley, marubucin The Myth of Sex Addiction. Daga baya ta cire amsarmu daga "Psychology Today". A gaskiya ma, mun nemi editocin "Psychology Today" su cire sakon Ley bisa ga binciken da aka fallasa (wanda Prause ya ƙi bayarwa ga wasu), kuma "Psychology Today" sun cire shi. (Yi hukunci da kanka: Danna nan don ganin rubutun David Ley a shafin yanar gizo, sakon martaninmu a shafin yanar gizo, da kuma sharhin da ke ƙasa da rubutunmu - gami da musayar Gary da Nicole Prause.)

Lokacin da binciken karshe ya fito, Fuskantar ya nemi Brian Mustanski don gabatar da wata hira mai kyau, inda Prause za ta iya "juya" sakamakonta ga abin da take so. Mun buga amsar sakonsa, kuma wannan shine abin da Prause ya cire "Psychology yau".

Ku tuna cewa Prause tana da isasshen damar yin tsokaci a shafukan yanar gizo na amsawa game da karatunta guda biyu (dukansu ana iya samun su a cikin Sharhin Nazarin Batsa . Madadin haka, ta zaɓi kada ta kai mu kai tsaye. Yanzu, ta ɓoye a bayan sharhin gidan yanar gizon Dr. Reid, inda ba a yarda da amsa kai tsaye daga masu suka ba.

SABUNTARWA: Tun lokacin da aka fara ƙirƙirar wannan shafin, Prause ta ci gaba da kai hari ga Gary Wilson da sauransu, ciki har da masu bincike, likitocin likita, masu ilimin hanyoyin kwantar da hankali, masana halayyar ɗan adam, abokan aiki tun daga ɗan gajeren lokacin da ta yi a UCLA, wata ƙungiyar agaji ta Burtaniya, maza a cikin murmurewa, editan mujallar TIME , furofesoshi da yawa, IITAP, SASH, Fight The New Drug, Exodus Cry, mujallar ilimi Behavioral Sciences , kamfanin iyayenta MDPI, shugaban mujallar ilimi CUREUS, da mujallar Jima'i Addiction & Compulsivity . Duba: Cin Zarafin da Bai Da'a na Nicole Prause da Bata Gary Wilson & Wasu

SABUNTARWA: A kusan Janairu 2015: Nicole Prause ba ta sake aiki a UCLA ko wata cibiyar ilimi ba.

SABUNTARWA: Yanzu akwai nazarin Steele et al. , 2013 guda 8 da aka yi nazari a kansu. Duk sun yi daidai da sharhin YBOP mai zuwa . Duk sun bayyana yadda binciken Steele et al. , 2013 ya ba da goyon baya ga tsarin jarabar batsa. Takarda #1 an keɓe ta ne kawai ga Steele et al. Takardu 2-8 sun ƙunshi sassan da ke nazarin Steele et al., 2013:

Nicole Prause - musayar imel na Gary Wilson:

Maris 5, 2013

Marubucin "Tatsuniya ta Jima'i," David Ley, da Nicole Prause sun haɗu don rubuta wani rubutu a shafin yanar gizo na Psychology Today mai taken dabarun: " Kwakwalwarka akan Batsa - BA TSORO BA ce." (Kwakwalwarka akan Batsa gidan yanar gizo ne da Wilson ya kafa.) Ya kasance game da binciken EEG na Nicole Prause wanda ba a buga ba, amma har yanzu ba a sake duba shi ba ga takwarorinsa ( "Sha'awar jima'i, ba jima'i ba, yana da alaƙa da martanin jijiyoyi da hotunan jima'i ke haifarwa" ).

Yana da mahimmanci a lura cewa Ley ne kawai ya sami damar yin amfani da karatun da ba a buga ba (an buga shi watanni 5 daga baya). Shafin yanar gizon da aka danganta da gidan yanar gizon Wilson 'Brainka a Yanar gizo' kuma ya ba da shawarar cewa YBOP yana goyon bayan hana batsa (ba gaskiya ba).

Mahimmin bayani: Watanni biyar kafin binciken EEG na Prause (Steele et al., 2013) da aka buga, duka biyu da Prause da Ley suna da manufa da Gary Wilson da kuma shafin yanar gizonsa.

Maris 7, 2013

Wilson ya buga wani rubutu a shafin yanar gizo na Psychology Today wanda ke mayar da martani ga abubuwan da ke cikin rubutun David Ley. Daga ƙarshe editocin Psychology Today sun cire rubutun Ley da martanin Wilson , saboda binciken da ke ƙasa bai samu ba tukuna. Kuna iya samun ainihin rubuce-rubucen shafin yanar gizo na Ley da Wilson da aka adana a nan . Yana da mahimmanci a lura cewa rubutun shafin yanar gizo na Wilson ya bayyana a sarari cewa yana mayar da martani ne kawai ga bayanin Ley game da binciken Prause. Daga baya Nicole Prause za ta zargi Wilson da yin kuskuren yin nazarinta (wanda ita da Ley kaɗai suka gani, kuma suna yin iƙirarin jama'a game da - waɗanda daga baya aka nuna ba su da tushe ).

Maris 7, 2013

Wilson ya gabatar a ƙarƙashin labarin David Ley yana neman binciken:

“Ya kai David - Ina mamakin yadda ka sanya hannunka kan binciken da har yanzu ba a buga shi ba, ko aka ambata a ko'ina. Ko kana shirye ka aiko min da kwafi? ”

David Ley bai amsa ba.

Afrilu 10, 2013

Dangane da sharhin da ke sama, Prause ya tuntuɓi editocin Psychology Today kuma ya aika wa Wilson imel mai zuwa. A cikin imel ɗin, Prause ya kai wa Wilson hari da kansa, kuma ya faɗi kuskure cewa bai nemi binciken ba. A zahiri, ya nemi David Ley ya yi hakan. Imel ɗin:

Psychology Yau ([email kariya])
4/10/13
don: [email kariya]

Daga: Nicole Prause
Ya Mista Wilson,

Ba doka ba ce a gare ku ku yi kuskuren gabatar da iliminmu ba tare da ko da kwafin rubutun ba. Za'a kula dashi kamar haka. Labarinmu ya daidaita sosai. Ba kamar ku ba, Ina da wallafe-wallafe na bita a bangarorin biyu na wannan batun. Kun yi ƙoƙari ku ɓata shi ta hanyar bayanin abubuwan da ba a yi ba. Ina bin wannan ne tare da Psychology yau a yanzu, amma zan shawarce ku da ku cire mukamin da kanku kafin a tilasta ni in ci gaba da aiki.

Ba ku da damar izinin kowane ɓangare na wannan imel ɗin. Sakamakon sadarwa ne.

Sayar da littattafanku bisa cancantar ku. Kada kuyi ƙoƙarin neman kuɗi ta bayan masana kimiyya suna yin aikinsu. Zan iya fada wa wannan binciken a fili yana firgita ku saboda zane da bayanan suna da karfi, amma abin takaici ne da ba a nemi kwafin rubutun ba kuma kawai kun cika abun ciki. Kunya gare ki.

Nicole Prause, PhD
Binciken bincike
UCLA

Bugu da ƙari, editocin Psychology Today sun aika imel na biyu daga Prause:

Kwanan wata: Afrilu 10, 2013 5: 13: 30 PM EDT
Tambaya: Sharhi a kan Blogs

Daga: Nicole Prause, PhD

Ga wanda ya damu:

Na yi mamakin ganin wani labarin da Gary Wilson ya rubuta game da wani bincike da ya yi mini a Psychology Today.

Ba ni da matsala tare da shi wanda yake wakiltar ra'ayinsa da fassarorin karatunsa, amma baiyi ba, kuma ba zai iya samun damar shiga wurina ba. An yi la'akari da shi kuma bai taba buƙatar kwafi daga kowane mawallafi ba. Na sanar da shi cewa ya kamata a cire shi. Bai riga ya yi haka ba. Tabbas, idan an rubuta shi a fili, zai sami damar yin amfani da ita kuma zai iya wakilta shi (mafi kyau).

Tabbas, yin kuskuren sane da mutum ya yi musu lalata ba bisa ka'ida ba ne. Ina fata Psychology Yau za ta dauki wannan matsala. Zan tuntubi wasu mambobin kwamitin, idan kullunku ya cika kuma yana iya ɗaukar tsawon lokaci don amsawa.

Na gode don taimakon ku wajen magance wannan al'amari.

gaskiya,
Nicole Prause, PhD

Labaran doka marar tushe, da'awar karya, da kuma kunna wanda aka azabtar ya fara ne a farkon hulɗa da Wilson. Babu wani abu da ya dace ya nuna gaskiya ne:

Wilson bai bayyana karatun Prause ba ko ɓata shi ta kowace hanya. Ya amsa kawai ga na Ley description na binciken. Karanta Ley's da Wilson's blog posts kuma ku yi hukunci a kanku.
Har wa yau Kuskuren bai riga ya karyata kalma daya a Wilson ta Maris, 2013 Psychology yau post, ko nazarin Wilson ya rubuta a Yuli bayan nazarin binciken EEG a ƙarshe ya buga. Kuma ba a yi amfani da komai ba a cikin kalma ɗaya a cikin huɗun nazari na jarrabawa na nazarin nazarinta ta 2013 EEG (1, 2, 3, 4.).
Wilson bai sanya kudi ba daga wannan aikin.
Wilson ya buƙaci kwafin nazarin (Kariya ya ƙi kawo shi).
Yi amfani da farawa tare da Wilson.

Amsar imel ɗin Wilson ga Nicole Prause:

A ranar Laraba, Apr 10, 2013 at 3:14 PM, gary wilson <> ya rubuta:

Hi Nicole,

Na yi sharhi a cikin sharhin ku. Yi kallo.

Ba mu da kuɗi a kan wannan. Gidan yanar gizo na ba shi da talla kuma ba mu karɓar kyauta. Ba mu da sabis don sayarwa. Ba ni da littafin da zan sayar. Littafin matata, wanda ya bayyana akan PT, ba batun batsa bane.

Idan kuna son yin adalci da gaske, da fatan za a aiko mana da cikakken binciken kuma ku ba mu izinin yin blog game da shi - kamar yadda kuka yi da Dr. Ley.

Zan jira karatun ku,

Gary Wilson

Afrilu 12, 2013

Kwana biyu bayan haka, Prause ta sake tuntuɓar Wilson tana barazanar sake ɗaukar mataki na shari'a. Ta bi diddigin ɗaya daga cikin maganganun Wilson akan shafin dawo da batsa na Your Brain Rebalanced . An buga shi a wani dogon zare game da rubutun David Ley na asali. An yi nufin sharhin Wilson don bayyana dalilin da yasa aka cire rubuce-rubucen Ley da Wilson na Psychology Today ta Psychology Today . Wannan ya nuna tsarin Prause na yin amfani da yanar gizo, saboda binciken Google ba zai iya gano wannan rubutun ba. Ta yaya Prause ya san game da wannan zaren a dandalin dawo da batsa?

Imel ɗin da ake amfani dasu:

Nicole Prause (nprause@________)
4/12/13

Ya Mista Wilson,

A cikin gidanku: http://yourbrainrebalanced.com/index.php?topic=7522.50
Kuna da'awar ƙarya: "Na amsa mata saƙon imel mara kyau tare da buƙatar ganin karatun ta, amma ta ƙi."

Wannan shi ne lalata. Don Allah a cire wannan sakon ko zan bi tare da aikin shari'a.

Nicole Farko

Wilson amsa:

A ranar Fri, Apr 12, 2013 a 11:09 AM, gary wilson <> ya rubuta:

Ƙaunar Nicole Farko,

Wataƙila ba ku sani ba cewa matata ta kammala karatun makarantar koyon aikin lauya ta Yale. Ban ce komai ba. A zahiri, maganganun na sunyi daidai.

1) Kun ƙi yarda da nazarin binciken da ba a buga ba.

2) Kun kasance m da barazana, kamar yadda kuke yanzu.

3) Bugu da} ari, ka yi maƙirarin cewa, na ba da ku] a] en ku] a] e, daga wa] ansu mutane, da ke fafitikar dawowa daga buri.

4) Har ila yau, kun ɓata matsayin na PT, saboda ya kasance bayyananniyar amsa ga bayanin David Ley na binciken da ba a buga ba. Ba ku zaɓi gyara bayanin Ley ba ko ku ba ni cikakken binciken, koda lokacin da na yi tambaya game da shi a cikin ɓangaren sharhi wata ɗaya da suka gabata.

Har yanzu ba ku amsa tambayoyin na na asali (da aka gabatar a cikin sashe ba)

1) Me yasa kuka saki karatun ku ga David Ley kawai? Kamar yadda marubucin "Labari na Jima'i Jima'i," kuma wanda ya yi iƙirarin batsa batsa ba zai iya zama, me ya sa shi kaɗai ne zaɓaɓɓe?

2) Me yasa baku gyara fassarar karatun karatun David Ley ba? An kwashe sama da wata guda, kuma kun yi sharhi sau biyu a kansa a cikin watan da ya gabata.

3) Kunyi sharhi a ƙarƙashin rubutun Ley wata ɗaya da suka gabata. Nan da nan na sanya tsokaci a ƙarƙashin ku sharhi, tare da takamaiman takamaiman tambayoyin da aka yi muku game da karatunku. Wannan shine damar ku don amsawa da bayar da binciken. Ba ku yi ba. Me ya sa?

Ina lafiya tare da yin musayar mu ga jama'a. Shin ba zai zama mai ban sha'awa ba lokacin da kuka shigar da ƙara a kan wasu masu rubutun ra'ayin yanar gizon PT waɗanda suka yi ƙoƙari su ɗauki bincikenku?

Mafi,
Gary Wilson

Yi amfani da imel sake tare da ƙarin da'awa da barazanar shari'a [Lura: Wilson ko matarsa ba su taɓa fara hulɗa da Prause ba. Ita ce wadda ta tuntube su akai-akai kuma ta yi musu barazanar ɗaukar matakin shari'a mara tushe.]

Daga: nprause@________ Kwanan wata: Jumu'a, 12 Afrilu 2013 15:01:09 -0700
Subject: Re: [PT] Tambaya via Psychology A yau

Ya ƙaunata Gary,

Wannan don sanar da kai da matarka cewa hulɗar ku (kai da matarka) ba a so. Dangane da dokokin bin diddigi a jiharku ( http://courts.oregon.gov/Lane/Restraining.page ), duk wani ƙarin hulɗar cin zarafi za a fassara shi a matsayin cin zarafi da za a iya ɗauka a matsayin abin da za a iya ɗauka a kansa.

Ba ku da izini na raba wannan sadarwar sirri a kowane taron.

Nicole Farko

Wilson ya aiko imel na ƙarshe zuwa Gidajen aiki, don saita rikodin a madaidaiciya: cewa ita ce wanda ke farawa da duk lambar sadarwa da kuma mutumin da yake barazanar (da kuma ƙaryar ƙarya):

Daga: [email protected]

Don: nprause Subject: RE: [PT] Tambaya ta Psychology A yau

Kwanan wata: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15: 44: 12 -0700

Ƙaunar Nicole Farko,

Tashin hankali? Ban ƙaddamar da musayar imel daya tare da ku ba, har da wannan.
Na farko, farawa a kan 4 / 10 / 13, inda kake da imel ɗin karshe. Kuma wanda ke ƙasa, inda kake ƙoƙarin ƙirƙirar ƙarya cewa wani yana tursasa ka, lokacin da hakika kana barazana ni a karo na biyu.

Hakanan kai ne wanda ya tuntuɓi editan Psychology yau don ya sa baki a cikin rubutun na. Matata ba ta taɓa tuntuɓarku da abin da za a yi ba.

Ba mu buƙatar izinin ka.

Gary Wilson

Wannan kawai farkon ne don Nicole Prause. Duba: