June 28, 2011

Google Logo Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm

Editor’s Selections: Computer as Therapist, Nicotine and Body-Mass, and Another DSM-5 Proposal – Gambling Addiction

Here are my Research Blogging Editor’s Selections for this week. To start us off this week, Neuroskeptic discusses a new study that attempted to use a computer to translate therapists’ notes into psychiatric diagnoses.

By Jason G. Goldman

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Here are my Research Blogging Editor's Selections for this week.

  • To start us off this week, Neuroskeptic discusses a new study that attempted to use a computer to translate therapists' notes into psychiatric diagnoses. Could it be that certain language used by therapists or their clients could predict the severity or duration of a mental illness? The study has problems, but it's an interesting idea to consider, more generally. Machine-Readable Psychiatry.

  • It is well known, according to Daniel Ocampo Daza of the Ego Sum Daniel blog, that "smokers tend to have a lower body-mass than non-smokers, and that smokers who quit have a tendency to gain weight." Until recently, the mechanism behind the relationship of body-mass and nicotine addiction was unknown, but some new studies shed some light. Nicotine, Appetite, and the Brain.

  • Here's the next in our continuing coverage of new proposals for DSM-5. Dirk Hanson at Addiction Inbox discusses the proposal for the inclusion of a "problem gambling" diagnosis.

That's it for this week... Check back next week for more great psychology and neuroscience blogging!

Jason G. Goldman is a science journalist based in Los Angeles. He has written about animal behavior, wildlife biology, conservation, and ecology for Scientific American, Los Angeles magazine, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, Conservation magazine, and elsewhere. He contributes to Scientific American's "60-Second Science" podcast, and is co-editor of Science Blogging: The Essential Guide (Yale University Press). He enjoys sharing his wildlife knowledge on television and on the radio, and often speaks to the public about wildlife and science communication.

More by Jason G. Goldman

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe