<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: frame</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'frame'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22frame%22&t=%22frame%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:54:25 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Best of Our Blogs: April 5, 2011</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4676869&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F04%2F05%2Fbest-of-our-blogs-april-5-2011%2F</link>
            <description>A few weeks ago, the weirdest thing happened.
I walked into a crowded after-school hangout for young adults and my thirty something year old self suddenly felt as awkward and gawky as I was at thirteen. Where was my self-confidence? What happened to those twenty years of work on building my self-worth to replace those few years of embarrassment and shame?
All I could think of was how fast I wanted to get out of there.
Have you ever felt like that before? Have you ever wanted to change your perspective or redo a moment so you can feel better about the life you are living?
Thankfully, after I left, I picked up the pieces of my fragile self and again walked in the shoes of a happy and confident adult. But I wish I had read one of these posts sooner.
If you have had a shot to your self-esteem ...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4676869</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 11:07:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4676869</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Could Depression Be Nature’s Way of Saying, “Think!”?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2744112&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F08%2F28%2Fcould-depression-be-natures-way-of-saying-think%2F</link>
            <description>Could depression serve a purpose we hadn&amp;#8217;t thought of? Something simple, like thinking?
That&amp;#8217;s the theory presented by Paul W. Andrews and J. Anderson Thomson, Jr.  in a recent article in Scientific American. 
The scientists point to a couple of points of evidence to support their theory. One, they say, ruminations help people figure out their complex problems, breaking them down into smaller, more digestible components. Such an exercise, they argue, makes a depressed person more able to solve the problems that made them depressed in the first place:

This analytical style of thought, of course, can be very productive. Each component is not as difficult, so the problem becomes more tractable. Indeed, when you are faced with a difficult problem, such as a math problem, feeling d...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2744112</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 03:41:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2744112</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Therapeutic Frame, again</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2357401&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=35451&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jung-at-heart.com%2Fjung_at_heart%2Ftherapeutic_frame_again.html</link>
            <description>Yesterday I mentioned that the boundaries of time, place, fee are elements of the therapeutic frame. These days, outside of the psychoanalytic literature, no one talks much about the therapeutic frame. But I have always found it to be one of the most important and useful concepts in the practice of psychotherapy. The frame is the container for the therapy, the fixed elements that form the boundaries for the work. The frame has three elements: time, place, fee. Optimally these three elements remain the same throughout the duration of the therapy, changed only after careful consideration, because changing one element alters the whole container. Keeping these elements fixed makes it easier to identify when either patient or therapist is acting out and facilitates working through whatever the...</description>
            <author>Jung At Heart</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2357401</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:12:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2357401</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Political Mind, Part III (Chapter 2)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2523117&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=34759&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fscienceblogs%2Fmixingmemory%2F%7E3%2FSq04fGdzolw%2Fthe_political_mind_part_iii_ch.php</link>
            <description>Chapter 2 of Lakoff's new book is titled &quot;The Political Unconscious, and it's absolutely terrible. It's also the first chapter likely to really piss off conservatives, or really anyone who might approach the chapter critically. Oh, and it has plenty of gratuitous neuroscience to top it all off.

First, let's look at what will inevitably piss conservatives off. Lakoff writes that there are &quot;thoroughgoing progressives&quot; who &quot;hold to American democratic ideals on just about all issues,&quot; and that these progressives &quot;are the bedrock of our democracy&quot; (p. 46). Progressives, then, need to &quot;reclaim&quot; our founding values, because conservatives have undermined them at every turn.

Why are progressives true Americans while conservatives are, at least to the extent that real conservatives exist (more on...</description>
            <author>Mixing Memory</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2523117</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:43:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2523117</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Political Mind, Part II (Chapter 1)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2523118&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=34759&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fscienceblogs%2Fmixingmemory%2F%7E3%2FMt0hyudSWIQ%2Fthe_political_mind_part_ii_cha.php</link>
            <description>The first thing to say about Chapter 1 is that it's much better written than the Introduction. In fact, if you buy the book, I recommend skipping the introduction, and starting with Chapter 1. Chapter 1 is, in fact, the best chapter in the book. That's because it contains a pretty good discussion of scripts, schemas, frames, and the like, and how important they are in our thinking. The discussion is dotted with what I've taken to calling &quot;gratuitous neuroscience&quot; (I even mark &quot;g.n.&quot; in the margins any time he uses it, and he uses it a lot throughout the book), but overall it's pretty good. If the chapter didn't end with a section titled &quot;We Are In the Melodrama,&quot; which is just a bunch of speculation and pseudoscience, I'd even say the chapter was very good. As it is, though, good's modifie...</description>
            <author>Mixing Memory</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2523118</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:06:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2523118</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Political Mind, Part I (Introduction)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2523119&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=34759&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fscienceblogs%2Fmixingmemory%2F%7E3%2F-1Av9fuKTVI%2Fthe_political_mind_part_i_intr.php</link>
            <description>Well, I've got Lakoff's new book, The Political Mind, and I've read the first few chapters, so I figured I'd start sharing my thoughts about them. For now, I'll do it on a chapter by chapter basis, which makes sense, because the chapters are pretty disjointed and, at least after the first few, it's hard to really say anything general about the book. Really, the sections within the chapters are really disjointed as well, so even chapter-by-chapter reviewing is a little tenuous, but I imagine reviewing each little section would be tedious in the extreme. I guess after a couple posts, we'll see how this works out and make changes if needed.

Introduction

So, the intro. I have to start by saying that the introduction is really sloppy, repetitive, and if I were a betting man, I'd say it was ha...</description>
            <author>Mixing Memory</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2523119</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:07:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2523119</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Lakoff in the NYT</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2523123&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=34759&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fscienceblogs%2Fmixingmemory%2F%7E3%2Fo8Q9dmdNO3g%2Flakoff_in_the_nyt.php</link>
            <description>There's a review of George Lakoff's new book, The Political Mind, in today's New York Times. You can read the review here. Some key excerpts:

Neuroscience shows that pure facts are a myth and that self-interest is a conservative idea. In a &quot;New Enlightenment,&quot; progressives will exploit these discoveries. They'll present frames instead of raw facts. They'll train the public to think less about self-interest and more about serving others. It's not the platform that needs to be changed. It's the voters.

I have to say, I've always thought there was a not-so-vague Orwellian quality to Lakoff's work, and if that paragraph is at all faithful to this new book, then I now know that I was right. And besides, how the hell would neuroscience show that &quot;pure facts are a myth.&quot; And if it did, what wou...</description>
            <author>Mixing Memory</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2523123</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 23:41:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2523123</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Therapeutic space revisited</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1366582&amp;cid=t_285458_109_f&amp;fid=35451&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jung-at-heart.com%2Fjung_at_heart%2Ftherapeutic_space_revisited.html</link>
            <description>Yesterday I ran across an interesting blog post about the possibility of therapist and patient blogging together about the therapy -- you can read it here.  After reflecting on how blogging is of use for her in her therapy, she goes on to consider co-blogging and suggests:

&amp;quot;Idea # 2: Start a new Co-blog
This idea was inspired by an Irvin Yalom story about how, after each therapy session, he and a patient wrote a brief synopsis about each of their experiences, learnings, understandings etc. in that session. They then shared what they wrote at the beginning of the next session. It was intriguing how each picked different components of the session as meaningful. It seemed like a really interesting way for a patient to learn to fully understand their behaviours and experiences from a th...</description>
            <author>Jung At Heart</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1366582</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:14:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1366582</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

