London Times - Is self-help a scam?

[tru]

This was published in the London Times yesterday suggesting that coaching is a scam. http://tinyurl.com/bs4sb

I'm not sure I agree that it is. Any thoughts from people who use coaches.

[ludlow]

Accck, what an annoying article - thanks for pointing it out.

Books denouncing the entire self-help world as a scam (such as the one the article is taken from) seem to be an irritatingly popular scam in themselves.

Uh... surely some self-help is useful, and some of it is a scam, as with most things? The book extract gets nowhere at all in terms of helping potential customers tell one from the other, because the author has a Big Un-Nuanced Media-Friendly Concept to hawk, namely that it's all a scam...

[CosmoGTD]

Is self-help a scam?
Good question.
I would say that yes, the vast majority of what is sold out in the self-help Industry is a scam.

Here is a free ebook, that pretty much tells you everything you need to know about self-help.
Psychological Self-Help
http://mentalhelp.net/psyhelp/

That's a good article, and its from the new book
Sham : How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless by Steve Salerno.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400054095/102-3603665-1692139?v=glance

I have not read the book yet, but I ordered it from the library, and am looking forward to reading it very soon.

This "personal coaching" is a craze, and its excesses will lead to its demise. You can't have countless untrained and unqualified people trying to go out and charge hundreds an hour for giving advice. This "coaching" field is riddled with scammers, in my view. The reason why so many people are promoting it, is that it is all profit. All you need is a phone, or an office. Its like therapy, but you don't have to get a license.

Of course there are plenty of folks out there who can do good work with people. But they are in the minority, and not so easy to find.

There are even companies who sell "phone coaching" to people with costs well in excess of $400-$600 an hour, and these same "coaches" are pitching products and services at the same people they are "coaching".

Not only is much of this coaching a SHAM, it can also be a good old-fashioned scam.

Here is Part 1 of this article.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1723312,00.html
Self-help books? Don’t bother. They won’t help
Steve Salerno
Our correspondent spent 16 months editing self-help manuals for a big publisher — and decided that the business is a sham that exploits our weaknesses for profit

SELF-HELP IS AN enterprise wherein people holding the thinnest of credentials diagnose, in basically normal people, symptoms of inflated or invented maladies, so that they may then implement remedies that have never been shown to work.
For more than a generation, the Self-Help and Actualisation Movement — felicitously enough, the words form the acronym Sham — has been talking out of both sides of its mouth, promising relief from all that ails you while promoting nostrums that almost guarantee nothing will change (unless it gets worse).

Along the way, Sham has filled the bank accounts of a slickly packaged breed of false prophets, including, but by no means limited to, high-profile authors, motivational speakers, self-styled group counsellors, “life coaches” and any number of wise-men-without-portfolio who have promised to deliver some level of enhanced contentment. For a fat fee.

Between 2000 and 2004 the market for self-improvement in the US grew by 50 per cent. Today, it is an industry that grosses $8.56 billion (£4.8 billion) annually. And what has America got in return for its investment?

[CosmoGTD]

(from)
http://mentalhelp.net/psyhelp/chap1/chap1i.htm

The publishing business and self-help books

The first thing you need to know is that, unlike drugs, self-help trade books (mass market books in local bookstores) are not "tested for effectiveness." These books, even those written by journalists and free lance writers, aren't even reviewed by psychological experts for accuracy, effectiveness, or dangerousness of the ideas. Instead, the publishers seek books that seem likely to sell because the topic is "hot" or the book has an attractive "gimmick." The largest publishers require that writers have a literary agent before they will even consider a manuscript. Thus, it is these agents who really select the books for the big New York publishers. Agents ask "will it sell," not "will it help?" Later, if the book is printed, the publisher's sales representatives have only seconds (maybe a single sentence) to sell a book to big bookstore buyers (there are 50,000 new books every year). By contrast, professional books, like college textbooks or books for psychotherapists, which you won't find in the usual bookstore, are very carefully reviewed by several highly respected professionals (because no teacher would use a textbook with glaring errors). With self-help books (almost all are trade books) the attitude is "let the buyer beware." Selecting a highly advertised "best seller" tells you almost nothing about the scientific quality of the book. In fact, only about half of the so-called "best sellers" are considered good books by mental health professionals (Santrock, Minnett, & Campbell, 1944). Publishing a self-help book is not a highly scientific process.

Next, you need to realize that more than 2,000 self-help books are published each year. So, over the last 25 years more than 20,000 such books (maybe 40-50,000) have been pushed by bookstores. That sounds like a very commendable effort to help you, but the question is: What is the main motivation of many publishers, helping the suffering or making money? No doubt, some care; most are more concerned with making money (yet, supposedly 75% of published books lose money). Many new books merely repeat what has already been written. It is also not unfair to point out that several psychologists have complained that their own book publishers have made exaggerated claims. Do you suppose these untrue advertisements are for benefiting people in crisis or for profits? Did you ever see a publisher recommend that you look up his/her best books at the library?

Publishers seem to believe that people will not try to generally self-improve or prevent problems. We readers are assumed to be so stupid that we will only seek help after we are in trouble. Therefore, the self-help book industry publishes books about specific, serious crises which will drive us (while in distress) to buy their books. Fortunately, many of those books are written by experienced professionals and are quite helpful. However, truly effective self-help education should emphasize early detection of problems and prevention, as well as crisis intervention. Prevention is sorely neglected (discussed later).

...
Is it common to buy a book for a specific problem and soon discover that you don't really have that problem? Yes (perhaps that is partly why 90% of self-help books never get read beyond the first chapter). Is it reasonable for every specific problem to require its own self-help books? No, although that would sell more books, wouldn't it? Do the thousands of unique problems require thousands of different methods for coping? No. This is an important point, let's look at it more closely.

There are only 15-20 self-help methods for changing our own behavior, no matter what problem or crisis we are having. Likewise, there are only a few basic methods for controlling emotions which are used in all upsetting situations. The same for learning skills, changing our thoughts, uncovering unconscious factors, and so on. In short, it is easier and better to know the general principles of behavior and the basic methods for changing than to study hundreds of seemingly unrelated problems. Therefore, 20,000 self-help books are an overkill. A case in point: this book deals with hundreds of problems (chapters 3 to 10), but the methods for coping with those problems are described in entirely different chapters (11 to 15) because the same method will be useful with many different problems. What we all need is comprehension of the general principles of behavior and changing, as well as carefully designed research (not necessarily by professionals) testing the effectiveness of self-help methods. Our knowledge needs to be integrated and unified, rather than split into little atomistic books.

[tru]

When I originally posted this I asked for comments from anyone who used a coach.

From your comments I'm not sure whether you guy's have actually used a coachinf, self-help or not. Are you offering opinions or facts?

I don't particularly care if the coach I hire has qualifications or not, I'd be paying them to help me make progress on something I want to achieve. I am interested in what they have achieved with other people.

Like if I hire a sports coach - I don't care if they are qualified. I want them to help me improve my game. If they don't help me improve my game they are toast - irrespective of qualifications.

I don't care if self-help is based on theory - does it work, that's what i want to know. For example I don't care whether GTD is based on theory. I'm not sure if GTD is self-help. Is it? Or if it is scientific proven. Is it? I am interested that it seem to work for me an a lot of other people.


I'll ask again differently:

1.Does anyone have specific examples of where they have personally, or professionally, made significant progress using a coach / self-help?

2.Does anyone have specific examples of where they have personally, or professionally, made little progress using a coach / self-help?

[Danny Hardesty]

The usual "meaningful" distinctions must be made:

1. Coaching "in theory" is absolutely essential in most fields. Lawyers "coach" or "woodshed" their client witnesses; Professional athletes are heavily "coached" and coaching is common-place in the corporate world.

2. Yes, scams exist, in all businesses. I recommend that you research the particular coach you are interested in. Ask for references, determine if their hourly rate is "above" or "below" market, etc. For starters, buy David Allen's very excellent book "Getting Things Done" that, for fifteen bucks at Office Depot, is the best coaching value around.

Good luck!

Danny Hardesty

www.dannyhardesty.com

[CosmoGTD]

Yes I have used a "coach" in the sense of hiring a PhD registered psychologist, to work with various professional issues. This guy was based on REBT, and was very practical and realistic.
I got good results, but this guy held similar views to me that most of "self-help" in terms of the industry is a just for making money for those who are selling it.

When younger I also bought lots of "self-help" books, and got duped, and they got my money for selling wishful thinking. In my view most of these books are a waste of money and time.
On the other hand, CBT, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is self-help, but this has been shown in many studies to actually work in specific ways, and I have gotten good results from this as well, but no miracles.

I also constantly meet people who are "coaches" these days, and try to enroll everybody they meet. I think most of this coaching stuff is a sham, but there are good people out there too.

My opinion is:
Only pay by the hour, no contracts, only face to face, no anonymous coaches somewhere on the phone, and watch out if they are trying to "upsell" you or manipulate you or hypnotize you, or whatever.
Insecure people can get addicted to this type of thing.

[tru]

Danny, Cos

Thanks that's useful.

I have GTD and think its superb VFM.

I'll also take a look at RCBT (and stay away from the pop psychologists). Any introductory reading suggestions?

In terms of fees I was thinking more of a low hourly rate for face-to-face plus a bonus based upon results achieved - that seems reasonable to me.

[sablouwho]

I personally did coaching for about a year and I can definitively say that I didn't get much out of it. (And my coach had gone through the Coach U program, held a Masters in Social Work!) The tests were lame and not very enlightening. The Myers-Briggs isn't bad, but you don't need a coach for that, you can do it from a book (or, I imagine, online). Cosmo said "insecure people can get addicted to this kind of thing" and in retrospect I think that is what happened to me. It sort of "felt good" that I was "doing something" because I had the coach, but in reality, what I was doing was flushing money down the toilet.

I have no doubt there are some good people out there, but because so many have jumped on the coaching bandwagon, the sheer numbers alone pretty much guarantee that most of them will be mediocre (even if their prices are high).

I think that anyone hiring a coach will not necessarily find a great fit on the first try. The same is often true w/psychologists--with a need to try out a few by "shopping around" a little bit until a person finds a good fit. I haven't had to shop around for a psychologist, but have had to do it with an MD.

From my personal experience having worked with the coach (and having met other coaches), my advice is:

Do not sign up for *any* package deals, period. Be prepared for coaches to reply to your objections about such package deals. Watch out for "clever" sounding words and phrases that lend them an air of authority while at the same time making them sound like their integrity is beyond reproach, thus loosening your resolve and your wallet.

They will likely say something like it is their "personal policy" to only deal with clients on a contracted/package basis because they "have found that the client needs to commit to the process" or whatever, "in order to get a benefit on the time and money invested" and that otherwise the coaching isn't very effective and the clients money is wasted.

And, yes, you will pay more by the hour without a package rate. But in the end, this can save you money. I wouldn't want my money tied up with one coach until I got to know them and could see that we could work well together. And, coaches know that if they are successful at getting you to sign up for a package, just the inertia alone may cause you to stay with them even if they aren't all that great. Because, something they say is inevitably going to resonate with you. Even if it is only a nugget of truth that may "feel" like a breakthrough. It is just like a magazine subscription--even if you aren't *really* reading it, and only get a moment of amusement from reading one article, you've got to Choose do something about it (cancel the subscription, get a pro-rated refund, etc) when it is a lot easier to just do nothing because it the magazine, while it may not be adding all that much to your life, is "comfortable" in some way, and you are just used to having it arrive in your mailbox on a regular basis.

~Cindy

[CosmoGTD]

Cindy! Great post!
Lots of good info there.
This "contract" business is only about one thing, more money for the coach by getting people to sign on the dotted line. Its very simple. If they try to give you the blah-blah about the contract, just assertively say, "look, I am NOT interested in your contract. Only per hour to start. I am talking with several other coaches and they have no problem with this, so if that is not something you are interested in, have a nice day". And then get up and start to leave the room, and if they start freaking out a bit, you know they are just trying to put the pinch on you.
Then, you can put the pinch on them, by negotiating a lower rate by using their competitors as leverage. Don't let them try and hoodwink you to think they are worth charging $250 for 30 minutes, and the guy down the street is useless. This is all salesmanship. Use the market to your advantage, and you can get someone who is good, at a fair market price, and everyone wins.

But the reality is if they are giving you ANY hassle, I mean ANY about the contract, then just get out of there. They are trying to do a number on you.
Any person with integrity will either say fine, and drop the contract, or say sorry they only work with a contract, and show you the door.

I could give the names here of some "coaching" companies who in my view are nothing but a type of scam, but that is off-topic for this forum.

My "coach" charged the proper hourly fee, I met him first for a short interview for free, and then started having sessions, I think the rate was about $120 an hour. I had 24-48 hrs to cancel the appt, or you have to pay the fee, which is fair.
Also, if you get a well-trained psychologist, then if you have insurance, it can cover most of it! Bonus!
No bull no hassles, no scamola contracts, no upselling.
Just problem-solving, and a trained outside eye.

About the other point about CBT and REBT.
For CBT I would recommend "The Feeling Good Handbook" by Dr. David Burns.
For REBT, any book by Dr. Albert Ellis, get them from the library, and see if they make sense to you first.

[Skiptomylue11]

I have only tried one type of self-help system, which is Tony Robbins(Get the Edge), and it just had a general positive buzz around it. The biggest thing it did for me was motivating me to do things or find ways to improve myself. Which is how I stumbled across GTD.

Anyway, I didn't find his planning technique very effective (RPM), but I liked the way he thought, and learned a few things from his tapes. I've become more grateful for pretty much everything and it has made me happier in general. I've also changed my diet and have S/M'ed adding an Hour of Power(hour of exercise in the morning) - probably jogging with my dog.

Anyway, from my experience self-help has motivated me to change and improve myself. So far, I've become more organized, become more grateful, changed my diet, increased strength training, became a harder worker, and became more religous.

Good luck,

Skip

[sablouwho]

Cindy! Great post!.Why thanks! I think I may have just deleted it by mistake (I meant to edit it!) Oops!


I would guess David Allen would use a contract, but then most people who hire him would know what they are getting up front.
David Allen Co. limits their coaching to a VERY specific domain in which they themselves are VERY competent. This is on a totally different "level" than these feel-good life coaches, or the "boot camp" life coaches. There is a lot of bull out there, to be sure. Watch out--I have noticed that even the professional organizer-types are now donning the coaching term.

Also, if you get a well-trained psychologist, then if you have insurance, it can cover most of it! Another "benefit" of coaching (for the coach, but certainly NOT for the client) is that don't have to deal with insurance companies. Less administrative load on them--and they don't have to agree to any contracted rates. While seemingly only a minority of coaches have therapy backgrounds, this is NOT necessarily a benefit to the coaching client. Certain therapists (like coach I used) appear to have switched over to coaching business model because...READY for THIS...they weren't very good therapists! The new "buzz" about coaching all-of-a-sudden provided a great way for these mediocre therapists to market themselves to a whole new target audience, people drawn in by the newness of coaching and who didn't feel comfortable with the idea of "therapy".

So, it is conceivable that a person could wind up paying a LOT of money to a former therapist-turned-coach, who isn't very good at it, and uses the therapy credential to justify really high fees. And remember, they cannot CALL it "therapy" when donning the coach hat, thus CANNOT take insurance (and they don't want to--the ones that even have credentials to even be considered "legit" by health insurance standards, that is).

Anyway, the whole thing seems to be based on the premise that coaching is only for people who are "emotionally whole" according to a quote in the original article, which is attributed to Thomas Leonard, founder of CoachU. Excuse me? This guy was a FINANCIAL PLANNER. (When I read that I almost fell out of my chair). What kind of credentials did he even *have* to make the assessment that his clients of his financial planning services were "emotionally whole"? This statement is so self-serving, it would be ridiculous if it wasn't hurting people who need really therapy but get coaching (ripped off both emotionally and financially) instead. I also love Leonard's implication that equates financial success with emotional health., as if there was a causal relationship between the two. Egads!

For CBT I would recommend "The Feeling Good Handbook" by Dr. David Burns.
For REBT, any book by Dr. Albert Ellis, get them from the library, and see if they make sense to you first.

Ditto on Burns. I know of Ellis, but am not familiar with the term REBT? Cosmo, can you please help me out with that?

~Cindy

[Danny Hardesty]

Albert Ellis is the father of "rational emotive therapy." In a nutshell if you said....Life is not fair....Ellis would say....and your point is....

Check his books out, they are quite good.

Danny Hardesty

www.dannyhardesty.com

[CosmoGTD]

Yes, Dr. Albert Ellis is the founder of REBT, Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. It is a cognitive-behavioral therapy, and is quite similar to CBT, with some differences.
Ellis has a ton of books, and you can get them from a library, or wherever.
Ellis gives the specific ABC's of REBT, and there is a ton of valuable info there.
The premise is that we are not upset by events, but we upset ourselves by how we think about events. REBT deal with thoughts, feelings, behaviors, beliefs, and many other things.

http://www.rebt.org/WhatisREBT.htm
http://www.rebt.org/

About coaching, I would agree that the generalized "life coaches" are the most dubious. On further reflection, I realized I have hired MANY coaches in my life, but they were all very specific. For instance, you can hire a computer coach, a singing coach, a drama coach, an exercise coach, a dietician, a math coach, a fashion coach, etc. These are all very specific and skill based, which is terrific.

In my view, using a well-trained psychologist could be useful, as long as they do not do therapy. I know some are able to do this, but some are not.
Even worse, in my view, I have met "Life Coaches" who are into a bunch of New Agey stuff as well, so they are going heal your aura too I guess, so that's a bargain at twice the price.

I don't know about this CoachU stuff. I just read their Guiding Principles, and this sounds like a bit of a mindf___ to me. I think this life coaching hysteria has peaked and is a bust.

There is a natural mentorship and apprenticeship that happens in life, and you can't buy that for a dollar. Also, the old fashioned "buddy system" might be more effective.

I think coaches, need to be focussed on specific skill sets.
When it gets into the overly general "Life" coaching, something about that makes me feel icky inside.
So that is my technical analysis.

It makes me feel icky inside when I think about it.

[CosmoGTD]

If you enjoy vicious satire, it looks like Penn & Teller did a show in their Bullshit! series on "Life Coaches".
Check out the links at the bottom of the page!

www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=life

(if you are outside the US)
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:ycHwow1VX1kJ:www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do%3Ftopic%3Dlife+life+coaching+penn+teller&hl=en

[shtriemel]

My credentials:
Masters Clinical Counseling
6 years individual and family therapy experience
Theoretical orientation: Psychodynamic i.e. self-psychology, psychoanalysis, etc

Self-help works if it works for you. But the rub is this: Within each 350 page book, there's a kernel of truth. And every now and again, one book rises to the top of the heap.

Coaching works if it works for you. The problem is, and this is my experience, is that coaches wade into the murky waters of therapy...and they're not trained to do that. This is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

CBT...brief solution focused therapy etc., are effective the way good parental advice are effective. But in my personal and professional life, they don't cut it visavis deeper, more complex issues. These "new therapies" have more to do with pleasing insurance companies (because they're brief...less expensive) and our insatiable need for "quick fixes" than they do for lasting change.

Or as Dr. Irving Yalom has said:
"When a biological oriented psychiatrist and/or a CBT therapist seek out a therapist, most choose psychoanalysis"

Nothing beats (so long as the issues you're dealing with aren't related to full blown mental illness i.e. bi-polar disorder) the long term, transference/counter-transference relationship of a depth therapy.

[CosmoGTD]

Hi there, of course we are all entitled to our points of view, but I just have to say I completely disagree with what you have said here.

Firstly, there is nothing "superficial" about CBT or REBT. They can deal with very serious issues, and hundreds of controlled scientific studies have shown them to be very effective with serious issues.
As a matter of fact, for something like PTSD, the worst thing you could possibly do would be to go into psychoanalysis. For a serious disorder like that, the best therapy is exposure therapy. CBT is also the best for anxiety, depression, anger disorders, phobias, guilt, shame, and many other issues.

Also, the idea that CBT is about pleasing insurance companies is not true either. They have been tested to work, and there are shorter term therapies, and also longer term therapies for personality issues. It has nothing to do with insurance companies per se, it has come out of the research, and trying to reach more people.

I know of ZERO CBT therapists who would ever even consider psychoanalysis. Most of them think psychoanalysis is a total waste of time, and even destructive.

The idea that CBT and REBT are shallow is also an error. They have other modalities that take into account the transference, and engage in long-term therapy, going a year, or much longer into the future, to deal with long standing, complex personality issues. There are new treatments emerging for the personality disorders as we speak.

I know that the CBT-REBT folks mock the psychoanalysis folks, and vice versa, but there are a lot of myths about all kinds of therapy out there.
I would give the exact opposite advice that you have given, and would say to avoid at all costs long-term psychoanalysis, unless you have lots of money to waste, and enjoy hearing yourself ramble on and on while not getting better in any measurable way, and even want to end up worse off than when you started!
:-)





CBT...brief solution focused therapy etc., are effective the way good parental advice are effective. But in my personal and professional life, they don't cut it visavis deeper, more complex issues. These "new therapies" have more to do with pleasing insurance companies (because they're brief...less expensive) and our insatiable need for "quick fixes" than they do for lasting change.

Or as Dr. Irving Yalom has said:
"When a biological oriented psychiatrist and/or a CBT therapist seek out a therapist, most choose psychoanalysis"

Nothing beats (so long as the issues you're dealing with aren't related to full blown mental illness i.e. bi-polar disorder) the long term, transference/counter-transference relationship of a depth therapy.

[CosmoGTD]

Here is another interesting REBT link.
http://www.rational.org.nz/prof/docs/intro-rebt.htm

[shtriemel]

Cosmo,

I'm assuming you're not a trained a therapist, yes? And that you don't work in the field, yes?

[CosmoGTD]

Actually, making "assumptions" in CBT is called "Mind Reading" and that can lead to erroneous conclusions!
If you are asking me if I am pulling this out of my ass, the answer is no.

[kewms]

Actually, making "assumptions" in CBT is called "Mind Reading" and that can lead to erroneous conclusions!
If you are asking me if I am pulling this out of my ass, the answer is no.

It looked like a simple yes or no question to me. No need to get so defensive.

Are you trained and licensed as a therapist?

Do you work as a therapist?

Katherine

[ActionGirl]

Coaching works if it works for you. The problem is, and this is my experience, is that coaches wade into the murky waters of therapy...and they're not trained to do that. This is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
You are probably right about many "life-coaches." But it seems to me that many different approaches to therapy may have value in the right circumstances. The problem most people face (insurance problems aside) is understanding the various options and trying to assess both the approach and the individual therapist.

CBT...brief solution focused therapy etc., are effective the way good parental advice are effective. But in my personal and professional life, they don't cut it visavis deeper, more complex issues. These "new therapies" have more to do with pleasing insurance companies (because they're brief...less expensive) and our insatiable need for "quick fixes" than they do for lasting change.
If "brief solution focused therapy" works for a particular person for a particular problem, then it may be the best kind. Does the research show that CBT is only a "quick fix" and the changes do not last for most people? I was under the impression that it is, in fact, effective in the long term for many people, and especially with the specific kinds of problems mentioned earlier. Part of the approach is to teach people to monitor their own behavior and apply CB techniques as needed. Maybe it does resemble "self-parenting," but what exactly is wrong with that?

Nothing beats (so long as the issues you're dealing with aren't related to full blown mental illness i.e. bi-polar disorder) the long term, transference/counter-transference relationship of a depth therapy.
What do you mean by "long-term transference/counter-transference" and "depth therapy?"

Also, how do you know when the patient is "cured," if that's the right term?

[shtriemel]

It looked like a simple yes or no question to me. No need to get so defensive.

Are you trained and licensed as a therapist?

Do you work as a therapist?

Katherine

I'm not surprised by Cosmo's response. There's a huge interest in quick fix therapy (and yes, CBT fall into this category - this isn't to say that CBT isn't effective for something like phobias and/or trauma, because it is) for the reasons I mentioned. As a graduate student, I was exposed to a number of different systems and psychodynamic therapy happened to ring true for me. As a client of therapy, I've tried coaching, supportive therapy, CBT (by the director of the CBT program at the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal) and psychodynamic therapies. My practical experience reinforced my theoretical agreements with the effectiveness of depth therapy over other therapies.

As a therapist, I utilize an abridged form of psychodynamic therapy. I've been trained in CBT and brief solution focused therapies, and I find them poor substitutes for psychodynamic therapy. Unfortunately, insurance companies are only willing to cover 6-8 sessions of therapy (if you're lucky, 2-3 months), just enough time to get to know your client and wish them good luck on their journey. A very sad state of affairs.

[shtriemel]

What do you mean by "long-term transference/counter-transference" and "depth therapy?"

Also, how do you know when the patient is "cured," if that's the right term?

I mean it takes time for the repeatition of issues that occurs in a clients life, outside of the therapy office, to occur within the session. And then the real work begins... With respect to transference/counter-transference...a google search will reveal what these things are and how they heal.

Re "cured"...none of us is every "cured" of ourselves. We merely learn to manage our uniqueness, good and bad, better than we did the day before. The whole "cure" thing has got us into this pharmacological mess we're in, whereby some folks believe that all we are is random neurotransmitters firing incorrectly. A damn shame IMHO.

[ActionGirl]

Wow, google brings up many sites that I doubt you would want to represent your views or your profession! (I'm sure there's good stuff out there too, but I don't have time to find it now.) My favorite is the term paper for sale:
_____
Paper #058896 :: Counter-Transference and Professional Misconduct - Buy and instantly download this paper now

An analysis of counter-transference and professional misconduct in a therapist-patient relationship.

2,675 words, 15 sources, APA, $ 69.95 USD
_____

funny on so many levels :D

ETA: I put "cured" in quotes because one criticism often made of psychotherapy is that it can go on for years at great financial benefit to the therapist, but little progress for the patient. What I mean is, how do you (or the patient) know when to end the therapy? Or is therapy ideally something many (all?) of us should have continuously throughout our lifetimes?

[shtriemel]

funny on so many levels :D

ETA: I put "cured" in quotes because one criticism often made of psychotherapy is that it can go on for years at great financial benefit to the therapist, but little progress for the patient. What I mean is, how do you (or the patient) know when to end the therapy? Or is therapy ideally something many (all?) of us should have continuously throughout our lifetimes?

Yeah, Googling is always an interesting experience.

My girlfriend is a 2nd year psychiatry resident and criticisms of her profession i.e. overuse of meds, etc., are well known. Same is true for lawyers, surgeons, accountants, priests, rabbis etc. The question isn't which profession doesn't have any flaws, it's which professional you feel safe and comfortable working with.

When your symptoms become more manageable, you know something is going right. And this takes time. So yes, if you can't find a psychiatrist or an MD who does talking therapy...the alternative can be quite costly. There's many organizations that offer a sliding scale, however, they're slowly restricting the amount of sessions you can obtain.

When Freud was asked how long one should access therapy, he replied: "A lifetime". By this he meant, that working on ourselves is a life long process. And during key moments i.e. birth, death of a parent, marriage, etc., many of us tend to regress to earlier, less effective ways of coping with stress, intimacy, etc.

And before the anti-freudians get all up in arms...Freud was known to raise money for patients who couldn't afford therapy and his daughter, Anna Freud provided free therapy for her child/adolescent clients.

[CosmoGTD]

In order to figure out if any therapy or self-help system works, "arguments from authority" don't cut it, and neither do personal anecdotes. What happens is people get "indoctrinated" into their specific school of therapy, and then through the "confirmation bias" over time their viewpoint becomes totally biased.
http://skepdic.com/confirmbias.html

Many of these different schools of therapy even directly conflict with each other, so they all can't be correct. The reason why various therapists are so threatened by CBT and REBT, is that its theories directly contradict their theories and practices, and this is obviously quite upsetting to their belief structure.

What is needed to overcome this are careful scientific studies done in many different areas by objective people. These studies have been going on for many decades now, and the facts are very clear, to anyone who takes the time to look at them.

There are hundreds of careful scientific studies showing the high efficacy of cognitive therapy. This web-page has a list summary of its efficacy in over 300 studies, for various disorders.

http://www.beckinstitute.org/FolderID/194/SessionID/{07878EAA-951A-47B4-AA1E-E226017907E7}/PageVars/Library/InfoManage/Guide.htm

or

http://tinyurl.com/87zzv

The claim that CBT is "superficial" is simply false. If one studies the literature one can see that CBT has been applied successfully in many serious psychological issues. REBT also involves profound philosophical, behavioral and emotive changes, and CBT is really all about modifying your core beliefs and "schemas". Just because someone says CBT is "superficial" does not make it true. This criticism is the main one from the psychoanalysts, and is suitably vague, and has also been refuted in detail many times by the main leaders in cognitive therapy, like Dr. Aaron Beck.
One just needs to look at the evidence, the facts, and the proof.

As a matter of fact, a very recent study showed that CBT was very effective in helping to prevent repeat suicide attempts.
"Cognitive therapy effective in preventing repeat suicide attempts"
http://i-newswire.com/pr40748.html
CBT also deal with core beliefs, and all forms of behavior, and the entire spectrum of the emotional disorders. If anything, it is much more comprehensive than most other forms of therapy.

I am not going to get into the Therapy Wars, as that is off-topic for this forum. If people want to get engaged in long-term psycho-dynamic psychoanalytic therapies, then it is their life and their mind, and their money, knock yourself out. But I personally think its a really bad idea, and could very well make their problems worse, as Freudian style psychotherapy has been shown again and again to cause serious damage to people, and can even wreck your life. But c'est la vie, whatever floats your boat.

But if I see factual inaccuracies being put forward about CBT-REBT, and things of this nature, then I am going to correct them.
As far as CBT only being 6-8 sessions that is another factual error. There are brief courses of therapy for certain conditions, and I have already said, there are courses of cognitive therapy that can go for months, and even years, and there are even "tune-ups" that can extend far into the future. Transference and a strong therapeutic relationship are also a part of CBT. The length of these therapies emerged out of what was shown to be most effective in the research, and not just due to reducing the cost of therapy to make it more accessible to more people. Having a spectrum of therapy is actually a good thing, as then there are more resources to help more people. Freud said "analysis was only for the rich", and that is not something to defend.
I personally think its a good idea for there to be time limits on therapy, as in the bad old days, people could keep people in therapy for YEARS a couple of times a week, with no improvement, even in many cases getting much worse.
There was no scientific accountability whatsoever.

[shtriemel]

In order to figure out if any therapy or self-help system works, "arguments from authority" don't cut it,

So the answer to my question is...no you're not a therapist. Thank you for clearing that up.

[shtriemel]

The claim that CBT is "superficial" is simply false.

Cosmo,
During graduate studies and advanced training at my last counseling gig I was trained using various methods of CBT techniques. Moreover, I attended 4 months of CBT done by the director for cognitive/behavioral studies at McGill University/Jewish General Hospital. What part of "superficial" do you not understand?

I'm aware that you're very good at Googling...now please provide some folks on this boards with some sort of credentials so that they know you're not merely talking out of your bum, but from experience i.e. tried both psychodynamic therapy AND cognitive therapy...or are trained as a therapist. If you can't, I'm sure I can spent 5-10 min on Google providing links to a whole whack of sites debunking your links. Gotta love the internet, huh?

CBT is perfect for a generation of folk who'd rather ignore the space between the lines, pop a pill, develop some quick breathing exercises and watch their symptoms disappear...for a month or so. And then they return. And then what? Between CBT and family docs who over prescribe SSRI's, I had my work cut out for me.

[ActionGirl]

CBT is perfect for a generation of folk who'd rather ignore the space between the lines, pop a pill, develop some quick breathing exercises and watch their symptoms disappear...for a month or so. And then they return. And then what? Between CBT and family docs who over prescribe SSRI's, I had my work cut out for me.
GTD seems to offer mostly behavioral and cognitive suggestions for dealing with stresses most people face on a daily basis. Most people who post here have tried these and have found at least some of the suggestions helpful, so it's hardly surprising to find this board favorable on balance to CBT, whatever they may think other psychological approaches.

So, what do you make of GTD?
-- Sham?
-- Nonsense on stilts?
-- Helpful for some mundane problems?

If you've tried to implement some of the ideas, what was the outcome? What is the general take on GTD among psychotherapists, (if it's something you've ever heard your colleagues discuss)?

[shtriemel]

GTD seems to offer mostly behavioral and cognitive suggestions for dealing with stresses most people face on a daily basis.

In general, pills and techniques that promote the status quo i.e. dealing with stresses most people face..., contribute to the overall problem. And if you don't know what I'm refering to, well, that's a problem in itself. Let me explain...

Before my graduate studies in counseling, I obtained a biz degree with a major in marketing. Our advertising prof, in an attempt to both frighten and titilate us with wacky world of advertising, told us he missed his first born due to a product launch that was taking place the next day. My classmates oohed and awwwed. I felt sick.

What is normal is not necessairly healthy. If you peruse this BB, it's shocking to read how out of control people's lives have become, and how they lean on GTD to bring some tranquility to it all. Makes you wanna slap 'em and say...HEY BUDDY, HOW ABOUT A LIFESTYLE CHANGE?

I've read and implemented parts of GTD. There's some decent ideas, particularily turning vague notions/ideas into doable objectives.

IMHO however, Barbara Sher has cornered this market, many years ago, with Wishcraft. Still it doesn't hurt to tweak the system every now and again.

[shtriemel]

What is the general take on GTD among psychotherapists, (if it's something you've ever heard your colleagues discuss)?

My girlfriend is a psychiatry resident and has never heard of GTD...Covey etc. Nor have her professors. My colleagues don't even know about this world. And I feel it's a shame. Insight is crucial to understand the roots of our struggles/pain. But it's not enought. Good friends/family...exercise, eating well, humility, and the development of proper goal setting/implementing is crucial as well.

However I feel that Allen lacks poetry and song and is way...WAY to geared to white collar management types who need less organizing, and more lifestyle changes to deal with the "stresses of everyday living".

[ActionGirl]

I don't think you have enough information about the people who post here to make such sweeping generalizations. While I have seen a couple of posts here that make me wonder about about people's priorites, I see many more that address the ways people are trying to find ways to devote more time and energy to the people and passions in their lives, mostly family matters, but also concerning their faith or pursuit of music, etc.

What makes you think you think David Allen (or anyone here) lacks poetry and song in his life? Because it's not in his book? I didn't buy his book to hear about his take on poetry, (though he does give some hints about his own spiritual quests, etc.). I have my own preferences on poetry, thank you very much! ;)

[shtriemel]

What makes you think you think David Allen (or anyone here) lacks poetry and song in his life?

Simple...I've read GTD and listened to Ready for Anything. Sounds like a cheerleader for the working drone. Worse, I heard him interviewed on a podcast, and when confronted with the problems with his system, he seemed quite cocky and defensive visavis why WE can't do HIS system. Feh. It's a too dry and a much too left brained for this creative/freudian type.

BTW...I checked out a couple of your posts...like this one:
http://www.davidco.com/forum/showthread.php?p=29260#post29260
Sounds like a bunch of people trying to figure out what David is saying. Hmmmm. I thought this system was suppossed to make life easier...less anxious etc. Personally, I felt my anxiety going up...up...up with each page turn of GTD. Again, this is just my personal experience. Though I highly doubt I'm alone.

[ActionGirl]

Okay. I can see how that gives you such insight into my life. :roll:

[shtriemel]

Okay. I can see how that gives you such insight into my life. :roll:
Is that you or is that not you, and other's like you, discussing GTD like it's some esoteric form of Kaballah? Sounds like it to me. And anything that is suppossed to make you breathe easier, yet provoke long BB discussions about what the author is trying to convey, doesn't sound like an anxiety reducer to me. And it's funny, because a quick peruse of posts on this site ask the very questions you're asking...over, and over, and over again. If the system is so simple, why do people seem so confused over how to do it? I'm truly curious.

[shtriemel]

ActionGirl,
Is responding to my posts a N/A? Because it would seem to me that it's a huge waste of time to do so. Shouldn't you be busy implementing your N/A? And isn't that the problem with the system i.e. WE'RE HUMAN. And GTD tries to sell you a system that's better suited for the working ant. That's all I'm saying. And clearly, by responding to my posts, you're proving my point. Again, I beg you, please get back to your N/A. David would be proud.

[sablouwho]

I heard [David Allen] interviewed on a podcast, and when confronted with the problems with his system, he seemed quite cocky and defensive visavis why WE can't do HIS system. Feh. It's a too dry and a much too left brained for this creative/freudian type.

After reading only part of GTD and listening to snippets of a David that I downloaded from somewhere on his web site (it had to do with the GTD Add-in) I had similar concerns.

But I decided to give it a try nonetheless, and attended his newly revamped public seminar three weeks ago. In person, the impression I had of David was anything but cocky and left-brained. He showed up some of his mind-maps, he is definitely a creative guy. This was a surprise as I was expecting him to be way more "serious" and "corporate-sounding" from having listened to that recording.

Funny that you mention Barbara Sher. I really like, how in Wishcraft, she teaches how to "backtime" (my word) things to get to from where we are to where we want to be. But I have to say, for me, personally that GTD has really made huge improvements in my ability to DO what Barbara suggests in a way that an easily-distracted, idea person like myself could not only grasp, but run with.


I was a Franklin Covey user for several years, and I have to say, David is by comparison a breathe of fresh air.

[shtriemel]

Funny that you mention Barbara Sher. I really like, how in Wishcraft, she teaches how to "backtime" (my word) things to get to from where we are to where we want to be. But I have to say, for me, personally that GTD has really made huge improvements in my ability to DO what Barbara suggests in a way that an easily-distracted, idea person like myself could not only grasp, but run with.

I was hoping for the same thing...and was very disapointed. What I prefer about Sher is that she allows you to be where you be...get it? No huge life changes...system enhancements etc. That's why New Year's resolutions always fail. And that's why so many on this BB are struggling to do what David says is so easy to do. It ain't easy. And it ain't clear. And the proof is in the postings.

[sablouwho]

I was hoping for the same thing...and was very disapointed.

Your comment reminds me of something Barbara Sher said at speaking engagement that I went to in order to support a friend. She said one of the reasons she'd written so many books was that different people would "get" her message in different ways. (I have read more than one of her books, and Wishcraft resonated more for me than some of the others). So, perhaps GTD just isn't resonating for you. Which is fine, it doesn't have to. It is valid for people if they find it useful, and it not, then, it doesn't, and that's the end of the road.

What I prefer about Sher is that she allows you to be where you be...get it? No huge life changes...system enhancements etc..

Ah, yes, that is indeed something nice about Wishcraft. In that regard I feel like DA's book is aimed at a different audience.

That's why New Year's resolutions always fail. And that's why so many on this BB are struggling to do what David says is so easy to do. It ain't easy. And it ain't clear. And the proof is in the postings.

FWIW, I actually have kept some New Year's resolutions that I have made in the past few years. My "trick" is that I give myself a head start and begin to think about them in the Fall and get started early, so that I wake up on Jan 1 with the habit already having been done. But I don't just do this once a year, it is an on-going thing.

Also, my interpretation of many (but not all) of the posts are that people are looking for "hacks." Just quickie little tidbits of information on how to tweak stuff, like dealing with software, or figuring out something that has to do with work in progress (paper stuff) or whatever. With so many different software programs out there, so many different PDA's and PPC's, and so many different ways to deal with handling the specifics of paperwork, that I think this BB serves a useful purpose in being a place for people to share ideas.

I haven't found implementing GTD to be difficult, or unclear, but then it is also very possible that I really got "jumpstarted" by taking David's seminar--the seminar made it VERY clear, after it was done I couldn't wait to get cracking! Before I took the seminar I wasn't quite as motivated to implement based on the book alone, nor were things quite as clear, but that is solely my experience of it, it may not be applicable to others.

Indeed there are DEFINITELY some posts that pose questions that, in my view, are clearly answered in the book. Much of the time, I have found that the person asking the question turns out not to have read the book (or not finished) or not to have tried to implement anything, so that they are asking their questions in a vacuum of a "non-starter." Sometimes it appears that prior to the post they were just lurking the BB, trying to learn GTD from here, which I imagine would be piecemeal and difficult.

Shtriemel, it sounds as if you are pretty clear about your feelings about GTD and it's usefulness, or lack thereof, for you, though I do not claim that I correctly understand your specific objections/dissappointment with it. And that is fine, I don't have to understand. But I do find myself wondering what it is you hope to get out of participating in the BB? It sounds as if your decision has been made. Is there are particular discussion thread about GTD that might be useful for you, but that hasn't already been started?

[mackenzie]

Hi everyone, this is my first post here, although I have been reading for a while.

As a survivor of the mental health system, I have to say that the various methodologies of psychology have a close resemblance to religion. Each school of thought has it's own dogma's and tennets. There are those who lean heavily on psychopharmia, those who loathe even the vaguest suggestion of drugs. The various therapists snap and snarl at each other over the efficacy of their own chosen path.

As the mother of 2 psychology students (1 graduate, one still studying), I am also aware of the research into the results of each type of therapy. CBT is recognised as the best choice for depression and some eating disorders. No, shtriemel, I am not going to quote sources right now, but I can, if you insist, it's just not on my NA list right now! lol

Anyway, back to GTD, it does have a lot of CBT resonance, and that is a good thing for those of us stressed out by our jobs and trying to find life/work balance. We need to recognise our behaviours and learn how to adapt them.

Yes, there is an argument for changing your lifestyle, but it isn't always possible. In an ideal world we could all go off and do a job we loved which would fit in with our families and leave us time to explore ourselves and our hobbies. The world we find ourselves in, however, is far from ideal. We have to work to earn enough to pay the bills and, hopefully, have some left over for the little things that make life bearable (like food and clothes!). To do that, we have to take what we are given.

Yes, some of us have enough that we could step back and relax a bit, but most of us need our jobs in order to survive. We therfore look for ways to cope, ways to gain control of the work which threatens our family/relaxation. Before GTD I was working through every lunch hour, coming home late every night, and spent most evenings wound up and stressing about all the things I hadn't done. With GTD I have regained some control. I now at least know everything I need to do, and the things I want to do, and that gives me some peace of mind. DA's words about psychic RAM and open loops resonated with me. He was describing exactly what was happening to me, the constant reminders popping into my head of phone calls I hadn't made at 2am, or of letters I hadn't written while on the train.

The visits to this forum are for hints and tips, ways to keep my lists in better order, ways to trust my system more (I'm still in the first implementation phase).

Yes, it is sad that we have to do this. It would be so much better if we could just be who we are and do what we wanted to do, but, alas, we live in a material world, and we have to work in order to live. To me, David Allen has given me a way to live as well as work, which I had lost for a while there.

I also disagree strongly with the idea that he has no poetry. He is constantly emphasising the need to free your mind to allow creativity, stressing the need to acknowledge your dreams. As I see it, the whole point of GTD is to give you back the control and the confidence to read or write poetry again.

[ActionGirl]

Is that you or is that not you, and other's like you, discussing GTD like it's some esoteric form of Kaballah? Sounds like it to me.
Again, I think you are making sweeping generalizations based on very limited evidence. That was me. I, however, would not assume that others here are "just like me" on the basis of their participation in discussions of so limited a topic as GTD. If you want to see REAL hair-splitting in action, you should visit my favorite message board about a certain sport. :)

ActionGirl,
Is responding to my posts a N/A? Because it would seem to me that it's a huge waste of time to do so. Shouldn't you be busy implementing your N/A? And isn't that the problem with the system i.e. WE'RE HUMAN. And GTD tries to sell you a system that's better suited for the working ant. That's all I'm saying. And clearly, by responding to my posts, you're proving my point. Again, I beg you, please get back to your N/A. David would be proud.

Again, you are making very broad assumptions about me based on very little evidence. I spent most of yesterday and last night on the internet, partly because I could, having only recently gotten an internet connection at home, but mostly because I was following reports online of obscure competitions taking place in various places. [The internet age is a beautiful thing when you can get almost real-time eyewitness accounts of events not covered by the sports media, and from people who often know all those arcane rules much better than the paid reporters. :)]

Actually, I probably don't disagree with you to the extent that you assume. I myself put GTD into the category "helpful for dealing efficiently with mundane issues," i.e., a life hack. In all seriousness, it has changed my life in small but significant ways. I used to have paper everywhere, and though I could usually find things that were important, it was a source of stress. DA's tips on filing convinced me to buy a gargantuan filing cabinet and to use it intelligently. I threw out a ton of crap, and what I kept, I can actually find quickly and easily. My surroundings no longer look like a landfill. Granted that may seem pretty trivial, but I'm very happy about it. No way will I go back to my previous habits. If you got past the mountain of paper that used to cover every horizontal surface of my office in my last job, you would have found that I was a philosophy professor, not the white collar "ant" you assume.

[shtriemel]

As the mother of 2 psychology students (1 graduate, one still studying), I am also aware of the research into the results of each type of therapy. CBT is recognised as the best choice for depression and some eating disorders.

I'm confused. You need GTD because you're life was unmanageable, stressed and had too much to do. But you had the time to research, and attend, the different schools of therapies and make a sound decision on which one is best for depression. Wow. Wow.

I have no doubt that most folks on this BB are fans of CBT and/or other brief, quick fix solutions for thier hectic, stressed lives. We're living in sick times people. Or as Dr. Elio Frattaroli states: "When you have a sick culture, you produce sick symptoms".

Anyway, back to GTD, it does have a lot of CBT resonance, and that is a good thing for those of us stressed out by our jobs and trying to find life/work balance. We need to recognise our behaviours and learn how to adapt them.

Oy vey, such a rationalization. And it tearing families and communities apart. A very good friend of mine about to lose his marriage. Both he and his wife work crazy hours, BUT own two beautiful cars and a lovely home. They justify their choices due to their love for their daughter. They claim all of their friends are suffering through similar predicaments. And as their marriage is being flushed down the toilet, and as they blame each other for their woes, they both have no interest in changing their lifestyle. And they also take sollace in similar circumstances in all of their friends homes. Nice. And yes, they also try to implement various systems a la GTD to deal with their choices.

Yes, there is an argument for changing your lifestyle,


You make it sound like it's a choice, it's not. My clients were stressed beyond thier means, but they couldn't understand how their choices were contributing to so much of their unhappiness and anxiety. True we're predispostioned to biology...sociology, but I'd bet most folks on this BB aren't worried about how to put food on the table (wanna take a bet?). They're worried about how they're going to pay for the house, SUV's, vacation, 6 large screen TV's, etc., etc. Again, wanna bet?

Yes, it is sad that we have to do this.

We agree.

I see it, the whole point of GTD is to give you back the control and the confidence to read or write poetry again.

Really? As I see it, it's to help you be a better drone.

[shtriemel]

Again, I think you are making sweeping generalizations based on very limited evidence. That was me. I, however, would not assume that others here are "just like me"

ActionGirl,
You don't need a research degree to figure out:

a) that time-management systems, in general, come in fads, provide us with a few kernels of truth, and appeal to two types of folk: 1) Time-management nerds who are pretty good at this stuff and are constantly tweaking the system 2) Hopeless procastinators that are always looking for a way to beat their nature (and with each new book, tape, hypnosis...they cling to the illusion that this time it'll be better)

b) that many, if not most, of the posts on this BB are folks trying to understand what David is talking about visavis implementation.

c) that people on this site who cry out to the heavens: "Thank God for GTD"...a to-do list on steroids IMHO, will be back, on amazon, buying another book by another guru, promissing that you can have it all, only if you purhcase my book, tape, outlook-add in and wallet with note-taker (you gotta give allen credit, he knows how to make money off of suffering). Not unlike a therapist, huh?

[shtriemel]

Shtriemel, it sounds as if you are pretty clear about your feelings about GTD and it's usefulness, or lack thereof, for you...but I do find myself wondering what it is you hope to get out of participating in the BB?

Call it cognitive dissonance...perhaps I feel like a sucker, or that I ignored that inner voice that said: "Stay with your system that works for you". But I'm human, and I read so many good reviews about GTD on Amazon that I spend a few months working it. And he throws in some Asian metaphors and I thought: "Ah, a spiritual component a la Covey...I like this". And then I read the BB's, and realized, that so many people here sound like my clients. And the whole thing made me a little sad and angry. So I'm putting my stick in the hornets nest to see what happens. If I wanted to discuss the benefits of psychodynamic therapy, importance of lifestyle changes, etc. in an incestuous enviornment, I'd do so on a board for therapists and/or spiritual types. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

And since I've just moved, and have no responsibilities besides setting up my place, I've got some time...or I believe the phrase is "a mind like water".

[shtriemel]

A recent post:
http://www.davidco.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3871
How timely.

[mackenzie]

shtriemel, I am a single mother who has raised 3 children mostly alone. When I wasn't alone, I had an abusive husband. It took all of my courage to get out the door and get a job when he left, but it was the only way to keep the roof over my head.

I work to keep that roof there and to put food on the table. I have no car at all, let alone an SUV, a basic TV (not even widescreen), just the one, I haven't had a vacation in over 15 years, unless you count the odd daytrip, and my house is rented.

If you care to read the paragraph you quoted, I said that my daughters were studying psychology. I help them with their studies, it's part of my life/work balance. It is their study and their research I am quoting, and yes, if you insist I can give you the sources, though it might take a day or two for them to check back on them and for me to then get back to you.

Maybe GTD is just the latest "fad", but it is not GTD which is tearing families and communities apart. It is the society we live in, the materialistic, capitalist mindset which insists that we are what we own and that wealth is the only status worth having. David Allen did not bring that about, and GTD is just a way of coping within that society in a way that can possibly save your family or community.

Have you actually read the book? David Allen is constantly emphasising the need to look at your commitments in ALL areas of your life.

[shtriemel]

Have you actually read the book? David Allen is constantly emphasising the need to look at your commitments in ALL areas of your life.

I've read and tried implementing the book. When I came to this site for guidance, it seemed there was a plethora of other folks like myself who didn't understand what David was talking about. So much for "a mind like water" shlock. Worse was the posts where people were discussing where to put "brush my teeth" and if it was a project or not.

Mackenzie...you may say who you say you are (this is the interent after all)...and if GTD helped, congrats. But if you think you're going to sell me the line that GTD is system for the people, ya know, good wholesome stuff, I say you're wrong. It's a system that has responded to a sickness, not as a cure, but a maintenance package. And this IS my opinion after having read/implemented parts of GTD and listened (though I had to stop half way though) to Ready for Anything. Again, I'm human. And I'm sharing my experiences with this BB because I belive there are others who feel the same way. And since I work with suffering/pain for a living, I thought I'd have a different perspective than other worker ants who'd cheer on the system.

[ActionGirl]

I've read and tried implementing the book. When I came to this site for guidance, it seemed there was a plethora of other folks like myself who didn't understand what David was talking about. So much for "a mind like water" shlock. Worse was the posts where people were discussing where to put "brush my teeth" and if it was a project or not.

Maybe you should give David Allen's coaching services a try. Or at least base your critique on his own writings rather than on what people who happen to post here may say. After all, I doubt you would recommend that anyone go to a message board for guidance about therapy, or that you would accept as valid criticism of psychotherapy that was based on what non-therapists said on a message board!

[shtriemel]

Maybe you should give David Allen's coaching services a try. Or at least base your critique on his own writings rather than on what people who happen to post here may say. After all, I doubt you would recommend that anyone go to a message board for guidance about therapy, or that you would accept as valid criticism of psychotherapy that was based on what non-therapists said on a message board!

ActionGirl...I stated, appx. 3-4 times already, that I READ and tried IMPLEMENTING GTD as a supplement to B. Sher's work in Wishcraft. My opinions and feelings about GTD were nourished during this experience.

[Day Owl]

Having followed this thread through several lengthening readings since its inception, I am impressed by the amount of squabbling and sniping and personal attacks and just plain meannness expressed by most of the contributors.

Just about every other thread on this board is characterized by helpfulness and good will. If people have different opinions on the other threads, they are likely to express them with civility. What is it about this particular thread that has aroused such defensiveness, hostility, and combativeness?

I hope newcomers to this board will not judge it by this thread alone.

[TesTeq]

I've read and tried implementing the book. When I came to this site for guidance, it seemed there was a plethora of other folks like myself who didn't understand what David was talking about. So much for "a mind like water" shlock. Worse was the posts where people were discussing where to put "brush my teeth" and if it was a project or not.
shtriemel,
It seems that there is a long and winding road before you - until your mind will be like water. You came here to fight but unfortunately you haven't met anybody who wants to fight. Everybody wants to help you but apparently you do not want to accept any help.
If you do not like GTD why you are wasting your precious time here. Give David's books to charity and forget about it.
Live your life in your own way.

[shtriemel]

shtriemel,
It seems that there is a long and winding road before you - until your mind will be like water. You came here to fight but unfortunately you haven't met anybody who wants to fight. Everybody wants to help you but apparently you do not want to accept any help.
If you do not like GTD why you are wasting your precious time here. Give David's books to charity and forget about it.
Live your life in your own way.

Actually there are a few who fought, but that's another story.

This thread became a runaway train, that I'll give ya. But once it did, I took the opportunity to point out (which I could never do with my clients) the what/whys around much of our suffering. And I believe GTD maintains, not heals, this scenario. On that note, I wish you luck in turning your minds into water and figuring out if your N/A should be to respond to this email or flush your toilet.

[Suziloo]

I fit into the procrastination category that was mentioned. GTD has helped w/ that. Should I instead have found a psycho therapist to help me?

[TesTeq]

On that note, I wish you luck in turning your minds into water and figuring out if your N/A should be to respond to this email or flush your toilet.
Great! That's exactly the answer I was expecting from you. Thanks.
But to make my post a little educational I would like to quote David's description of the "mind like water" state:
Imagine throwing a pebble into a still pond. How does the water respond? The answer is, totally appropriately to the force and mass of the input; then it returns to calm. It doesn't overreact or underreact.

[alsa]

This is an unusual thread here and an unusual poster. :) One could assume that we are a bunch of zombies (or drones) and this new poster is our Savior who intentionally or unintentionally is set to lead us out of this cult. :D

I think someone has had too much psychology/psychiatry. Even my own mother told me that some learned people can become, well, you know. Just look at some colleges like Berkeley (but I am not going to descend into politics here -- of all places)

Anyway. This has been a fun conversation (in which I, admittedly, did not participate), but I think that to take GTD TOO seriously is uncalled-for. What's to be serious about is recognizing patterns that lead us all to question our efficiency in anything.

Color me a drone ;)

[Gator Ash]

Hello everyone! I've only posted a couple of times before but I thought I'd chime in on this topic. I suffered from 6 1/2 years worth of depression and tried most of the basic self-help material out there to include NLP, Neuro-Semantics, self-hypnosis, Tony Robbins, etc. which all failed. I even saw counselors and psychologists at school as well as received informal counseling from friends who were in the counseling field. I even turned to religion. After all that, I did manage to find something that worked for me. This is no hyperbole, but I managed to cure this depression in about 10 minutes (a statement I would stand behind in any venue). I did this on March 8th of this year and I've not had to do any follow up work at all. I've had a bad day here and there since then, but I figure that's what happens to normal people, LOL! The difference is that unlike the "artificial" feelings that you get from self-help stuff, I simply don't feel extremely sad and hopeless all the time. Life isn't a bowl of cherries for me just yet but it sure isn't a bowl of crap either!

[TesTeq]

After all that, I did manage to find something that worked for me. This is no hyperbole, but I managed to cure this depression in about 10 minutes (a statement I would stand behind in any venue). I did this on March 8th of this year and I've not had to do any follow up work at all. I've had a bad day here and there since then, but I figure that's what happens to normal people, LOL! The difference is that unlike the "artificial" feelings that you get from self-help stuff, I simply don't feel extremely sad and hopeless all the time. Life isn't a bowl of cherries for me just yet but it sure isn't a bowl of crap either!
Congratulations!

Many people have this moment of enlightenment sooner or later. But unfortunately some people are not able to find this simple truth. In my opinion the main problem is to find the answer for the following question:

Who is this person that is looking at me from the mirror?

And if you can find the satisfactory answer you are ready to make friends with him.

Self acceptance and "rules of life" acceptance are the keys.

[ceehjay]

. . . I did manage to find something that worked for me. This is no hyperbole, but I managed to cure this depression in about 10 minutes (a statement I would stand behind in any venue). I did this on March 8th of this year and I've not had to do any follow up work at all.
What was the cure, the "something that worked for me?"

Carolyn

[Gator Ash]

What was the cure, the "something that worked for me?"

Carolyn

Thanks for the question Carolyn, that might have been some useful info to add, LOL! What worked for me, was a technique called the 3D Mind Model which is based on the 3D Brain Model by Dr. Ken Giuffre, author of "The Care and Feeding of Your Brain". The 3D Brain Model claims that most personal problems are the result of chemical imbalance in the brain. The 3D Mind Model is a very quick way to restore that balance. So it has a very different focus than most self-help where the focus is to replace negative thoughts with positive thoughts through affirmations, visualizations, willpower etc.

[CosmoGTD]

Wow, you are still at this?
Its interesting how you have turned this into a "personal attack" issue, and are staying away from the objective facts, which are very clear.
I don't care if you were Freud himself, I follow the scientific facts, and don't follow what someone says because they say so. One could easily say a Masters degree in therapy is just enough knowledge to be dangerous, but I would never say that, as I am not going to follow this into personal sniping, and if you continue with making personal comments, then I will just ignore you.

The facts are very clear, CBT works extremely well.
Its not about Googling, its about knowing what is going on in the field right now.
The facts of CBT have nothing to do with what you have said so far.
CBT doesn't even give "advice" as its Socratic when done properly.

So people can spread misinformation if they want to, its a free country.

So its a pity that people might be mislead by the erroneous statements you are making, likely due to learning about CBT in a biased environment from someone with an Ideological axe to grind.
CBT works extremely well, and it doesn't take 7 years to get results.

Science advances based on scientific evidence, and there are hundreds of studies showing that CBT works.
People can see how it works for themselves, by getting some CBT training from someone in their city who has been recently trained either at the Beck Institute, or the Albert Ellis Institute.

CBT and REBT are a set of Cognitive, Emotive, Behavioral, and Interpersonal skills that you practice for the REST OF YOUR LIFE. You are always learning.
CBT is open to long-term therapy for personality based issues as well.
CBT was created by Dr Aaron Beck when he discovered that Freudian therapy did not work, and that certain ideas like, "depression is anger turned inwards" were not true.
Again, I am not going to argue with those who suffer from extreme Ideological bias, but I am just making these comments in case people read this, so they will realize that there is a mountain of hard, scientific evidence that shows that CBT works extremely well, and they can find that out for themselves by doing their research.





Cosmo,
During graduate studies and advanced training at my last counseling gig I was trained using various methods of CBT techniques. Moreover, I attended 4 months of CBT done by the director for cognitive/behavioral studies at McGill University/Jewish General Hospital. What part of "superficial" do you not understand?

I'm aware that you're very good at Googling...now please provide some folks on this boards with some sort of credentials so that they know you're not merely talking out of your bum, but from experience i.e. tried both psychodynamic therapy AND cognitive therapy...or are trained as a therapist. If you can't, I'm sure I can spent 5-10 min on Google providing links to a whole whack of sites debunking your links. Gotta love the internet, huh?

CBT is perfect for a generation of folk who'd rather ignore the space between the lines, pop a pill, develop some quick breathing exercises and watch their symptoms disappear...for a month or so. And then they return. And then what? Between CBT and family docs who over prescribe SSRI's, I had my work cut out for me.

[CosmoGTD]

I have met Barbara Sher, and know her work very well. Sher is basically about general "goal-setting".



I've read and implemented parts of GTD. There's some decent ideas, particularily turning vague notions/ideas into doable objectives.

IMHO however, Barbara Sher has cornered this market, many years ago, with Wishcraft. Still it doesn't hurt to tweak the system every now and again.

[mscudder]

Is that you or is that not you, and other's like you, discussing GTD like it's some esoteric form of Kaballah? Sounds like it to me. And anything that is suppossed to make you breathe easier, yet provoke long BB discussions about what the author is trying to convey, ... If the system is so simple, why do people seem so confused over how to do it? I'm truly curious.
... GTD is not ... something that is going to make your life magical.
If you look at the title...Getting Things Done...that pretty much tells you what its about. Getting Things Done.
Its very practical....
The reason people are confused is why the posting board exists.
Each person has to figure out how to make this stuff WORK for themselves.

[M]y interpretation of many (but not all) of the posts are that people are looking for "hacks." Just quickie little tidbits of information on how to tweak stuff, like dealing with software, or figuring out something that has to do with work in progress (paper stuff) or whatever. With so many different software programs out there, so many different PDA's and PPC's, and so many different ways to deal with handling the specifics of paperwork, that I think this BB serves a useful purpose in being a place for people to share ideas.

Although he gives some implementation tips and suggestions in Getting Things Done, David Allen is explicit that GTD is a conceptual system which each individual user of GTD must implement for themselves, in accordance with that person's own needs, situation, working methods, and cognitive style. Resolving a conceptual system or set of requirements into specific enough form that you can actually use it is often hard; in particular, it can be hard to ensure that the implementation truly reflects the design being implemented. (Ask any engineer or software developer.)

Shtriemel, the "What does David mean when he says...?" type of questions on this BB are mostly about how to implement -- or whether a particular implementation method reflects -- one or another design element of the GTD system.

As CosmoGTD says, GTD is about the practical. That said, one of the big surprises for me was, for a system purportedly and utterly concerned with the mundane, how deep and nuanced GTD is.

Some of Shtriemel's complaints about this BB -- the repetition, esoterica, irrelevance (and worse) of some of the postings, even the cultiness -- reflect general characteristics of online BBs, not GTD. All BBs, including this one, have their flaws and excesses (although I must say, I'm continually impressed and delighted with the comparatively high quality of this BB). If you want some real esoterica, check out some of the other productivity, organization, and time management groups, as well as, for example, BBs on cars, cats, computers, and (especially) poetry and literature.

[TesTeq]

Some of Shtriemel's complaints about this BB -- the repetition, esoterica, irrelevance (and worse) of some of the postings, even the cultiness -- reflect general characteristics of online BBs, not GTD.
Luckily Shtriemel apparently has lost his interest in anti-GTD discussions and I think it is rather good news for this forum.

By the way, one of the David's last blog entries is about another anti-GTD "movement".

[CosmoGTD]

Personally, I think very strong criticism and analysis of GTD, and everything else for that matter, is extremely valuable, as long as its done with intellectual integrity.
The last thing I would ever want to do is to do things because "someone said so", or because of anecdotes and advertising blurbs.

On the other hand, there are many people who I know, who would have less than zero interest in something like GTD. To them it just seems like obsessive craziness, and does not match the way they work or think.

But on a deeper level, I know that GTD really needs to have controlled, scientific "clinical studies" done to test its efficacy.
This would not be that hard to do, if the studies were conducted by properly trained people.

After all, GTD claims two basic things. Increased Productivity and less Stress. These are both measurable.
What you would do is get random samples of people, and do different things with them, and then measure the results over a period of time.
Some might just read the book, some get training, some get a "placebo" Time Management book, some people go on a waiting list, etc.
You could then measure if people really do get these benefits, or not.

Some problem areas might be that people stop using it, procrastinate, skip over parts of it, hide behind lists, etc.

If these types of studies were done over a number of years, with a number of partners at universities and institutes, then some results would occur, that are unpredictable.
They could even get grants from various foundations to carry this stuff out.

Is this going to happen? I would say no.
The reason for this is that I have never seen David Allen mention that he even understands the power of doing these kinds of scientific studies, or even the awareness that Stress and Productivity are MEASURABLE. They are very measurable, so it would be quite easy to see if GTD works as advertised.

Until proper studies are carried out, I don't actually "believe" it works for most people. My gut tells me that people get excited by the salespitch, try it out, and then fall of the wagon, and fall back into old habits.
The temptation here is to blame people for being lazy and misdirected.
But that is an error.

Any type of system like this has to be designed to take into account the vagaries of Human Nature, and thus be usable.
Many "systems" sound good on paper, but are unusable by actual humans over time.
I do think vigorous analysis and criticism, and scientific testing is needed. But i doubt this is going to happen.

To REALLY see if it increases Productivity and lowers Stress, this has to be MEASURED and personal anecdotes don't count. But sadly, the vast majority of people do not understand the power of carrying out these types of studies, and instead just prefer to focus on making sales.

[mscudder]

If these types of studies were done over a number of years, with a number of partners at universities and institutes, then some amazing results would occur, that are unpredictable....

...I have never seen David Allen mention the power of doing these kinds of scientific studies, or even the awareness that Stress and Productivity are MEASURABLE....

On the positive side, if David Co undertook a 10 year research project, and got some partners, and carried out dozens of controlled scientific studies, then GTD would improve 10-fold, and could really have a profound impact in the world.

I agree it could be valuable for DA to do this (although I don't know about having "a profound impact on the world"), but such studies would be considered research and development. Because of the inherent conflict of interest, any research on the efficacy of GTD remotely associated with David Allen or the David Allen Company would not be regarded as credible, no matter how rigorous -- same as for any business.

I wouldn't be surprised if productivity and stress studies are done all the time, both publicly and privately funded and if GTD is eventually studied scientifically by a 'neutral' third party.

[TesTeq]

If these types of studies were done over a number of years, with a number of partners at universities and institutes, then some amazing results would occur, that are unpredictable.
They could even get grants from various foundations to carry this stuff out.Many "scientific studies" are carried out to obtain grants and spend some money without any significant result.

The reason for this is that I have never seen David Allen mention the power of doing these kinds of scientific studies, or even the awareness that Stress and Productivity are MEASURABLE. They are very measurable, so it would be quite easy to see if GTD works as advertised.Can you tell me how you can measure stress and productivity. In my opinion it is not possible to create the same test conditions for all participants.

I think David Allen does not say that he invented system for all people. He says that you can reduce stress and increase productivity using GTD.

[CosmoGTD]

If professionals were to carry out a long-term, credible, science based studies of these things, it WOULD have an impact, as the system would be based on scientific evidence, and proof, and not just opinion and anecdote.
This is how actual scientific human knowledge advances, especially in the psychological sciences. So the actual knowledge and data that would emerge would ultimately be very powerful, as it is based on real scientific evidence.

The studies just have to be carried out in an open way, using objective measures, and peer-reviewed, and all the rest of it. There are clear protocols set up on how to go about it. The RAW DATA has to be open for others to review.

If someone is opposed to "scientific studies", then I have nothing to say to them about that, as that leaves me speechless. Of course most studies have "no result" as most things people try DO NOT WORK. This is how sceintific knowledge advances. Its a hit and miss process, but the theories and methods have to be testable. (see Popper)
Those types of studies are the ONLY way for knowledge in this area to move forward.

There are many people who's entire careers are based on setting these types of studies up, and adding in the proper "controls" and ways to measure these things.

Productivity is measured all the time by economists, so this is something that could easily be measured.

Stress levels are measured all the time as well by psychologists, and there are many accurate ways to measure stress over time.

The tests are in a way similar to Depression tests, Anxiety tests, IQ tests, etc. Many of these have stable results over time, and show if there are any changes.
So if a person does a bunch of Stress-tests, both written and verbal questionnaires, and even perhaps measuring blood-pressure, and things of that nature, then they get a set of results.
Then these same tests would be taken each week or so, for perhaps 6 months or a year.
It would be very easy to see if people's stress levels were reduced. They could also measure "drop-out" rates, that is how many people drop out and stop using, and all sorts of other things.

The way this come up with accurate results is by using statistical methods, and selecting people randomly, and randomly putting some people into "control groups" and all the rest of it.
There is an entire science behind doing these types of studies, and they have been shown to be very accurate, when done properly and PEER-REVIEWED in scientific journals that focus on these things.
I am not going to try and explain this entire science, but sadly it would not surprise me to find out that most folks are not aware that these methods even exist, and that they are the ONLY real way to get objective scientific data about this type of thing.

This is how, for instance, CBT has been able to figure out specific techniques that work in specific ways. Not for EVERYONE, but it gives a certain statistical probablility that it will work in a population. http://tinyurl.com/87zzv
Its like a medical treatment, or things of that nature.

Here is an example of a list of a bunch of psychological "inventories".
http://tinyurl.com/bgzo5

You can't just "claim it works" due to anecdotes, stories, or things of that nature.
But all areas of "self-help" are not tested properly, and no one cares, as its really just about making money in most cases.

But REAL researchers, psychologists, and scientists test this type of thing all the time.

For example, Martin Seligman, has founded Positive Psychology. What he is doing now is TESTING WHAT WORKS, to increase people's happiness. http://www.authentichappiness.org/
This website lists many tests that people can take, to measure their levels of happiness, which is harder to measure than stress. Also, there are many studies going on now in this new field, and the evidence from these studies will turn this field into a legitimate area of human knowledge. Positive Psychology, over time, will gain powerful credibility as it is based on SCIENCE and not hearsay. But the price for this is having the knowledge to carry out these kinds of studies, which is very hard to do.
GTD will never have any scientific credibility unless MANY of these types of controlled trials are undertaken by professionals.
Personally, I think the tests would have some shocking results, but we'll never know unless the tests are carried out.

But again, I doubt this TESTING of will ever happen, for many reasons I won't mention.

[CosmoGTD]

Here is a link with some info on how to set up a control group study.
http://skepdic.com/control.html
http://skepdic.com/science.html

Also, here is a very basic overview of some of what it takes to carry out a proper scientific study.

http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/bto/statistics/tress2.html

There are many professionals whose entire careers are dedicated to doing this properly. This is the ONLY way to figure out if something really WORKS, that is if the Theory generates the results it claims.

[TesTeq]

If someone is opposed to "scientific studies", then I have nothing to say to them about that, as that leaves me speechless. Of course most studies have "no result" as most things people try DO NOT WORK.The real scientific studies with meaningful results do happen from time to time. But I've heard too many stories about ridiculous studies (for example "The effect of car color on the engine failure rate").

[TesTeq]

Productivity is measured all the time by economists, so this is something that could easily be measured.

Stress levels are measured all the time as well by psychologists, and there are many accurate ways to measure stress over time.

The tests are in a way similar to Depression tests, Anxiety tests, IQ tests, etc. Many of these have stable results over time, and show if there are any changes.
The overall productivity can be measured but very often the business success is an effect of being in the right place, in the right time with the right product and have luck.

Applicability of many tests (for example IQ tests) was questioned recently. IQ tests do not measure intelligence but the ability to solve puzzles.

So first the GTD measurement methodology should be developed and tested to prove that it is adequate to meassure GTD implementation results.

[TesTeq]

If these types of studies were carried out, one would then end up with some scientific evidence whether or not GTD works, and if it does, which parts work, and which parts don't.
...
GTD will never have any scientific credibility unless MANY of these types of controlled trials are undertaken by professionals.
I am afraid that there are not so many people interested in GTD scientific credibility. If it works for somebody - great. If it does not work - nothing wrong happens. You do not have to spend excessive amounts of money to implement basic GTD - you need just pen and paper. I do not think that it can hurt anybody.

[TesTeq]

The way this come up with accurate results is by using statistical methods, and selecting people randomly, and randomly putting some people into "control groups" and all the rest of it.
Using statistical methods I can say that for example 51.3% of you, CosmoGTD, is a woman and 48.7% is a man. Is it true? No, the actual test performed on you would reveal the truth.

The same is with GTD. We can have the statistical result that for 60% of people it increased the productivity by 178% and reduced stress by 44%. And it means nothing to me until I try to implement GTD by myself since the results for me may be very different.

[eowyn]

TesTeq: Statistics cannot be used to predict the actual results for an individual - They give a probability only.

If GTD were found to be successful (in reducing stress, and increasing productivity) for 90% of people - then you could recommend it to another person with a lot of confidence that it would be successful for them too.

If GTD were successful for only 10% of people, and an alternative technique/method had a similar level of success for 70% of people, which would you recommend? Regardless of your individual success with GTD?

[TesTeq]

If GTD were successful for only 10% of people, and an alternative technique/method had a similar level of success for 70% of people, which would you recommend? Regardless of your individual success with GTD?
So you need a comparative study of two or more methodologies. And each should be tested on the same human subjects in the same conditions. Since it is rather not possible to test two methodologies simultaneously on one person (we would not be able to measure results of each methodology) the tests must be performed one by one. And this leads to the problem that after implementing one methodology the person being tested is not "fresh" for another test (he/she learned some general productivity skills that are common across different methodologies). Of course we can use two groups of people and other solutions for such problems but in my opinion the human nature is too complicated for statistical aproach.

But don't get me wrong. I am not against the scientific studies - I am only very sceptic to the statistical results. I am ready to rethink my approach if you show me the results of such comparative scientific studies.

If one medicine is good for 70% of people and the other for 10%, it is only the probability and sometimes a given person can obtain better results using the 10% medicine. And in some cases even placebo works perfectly.

The best method is the method that works for you regardless of the other people results or scientific studies.

[mcogilvie]

GTD is neither rocket science nor revealed truth. On the GTD-Fast tapes, DA says something like "this is really just common sense." To which I would add "consistently applied."

If most aspects of GTD work well for most people (called for simplicity "normal"- whatever that is), then some aspects probably work well for people who have issues far from the norm. Recall however that GTD implementations vary from person to person in any case. DA has never advocated a one-size-fits-all approach, let alone a blind one.

There may or may not be deep truths about the way human brains work captured in GTD. Or deep truths about how all brains work; we have a limited selection of life forms to work with- they're all carbon-based...

[eowyn]

So you need a comparative study of two or more methodologies.

We dont need a direct comparative study. You identify some criteria of success (which I don't have the knowledge or experience to do at this time), you test a random selection of people with GTD, and see how many are successful. - Lets's say the answer was 10% of people had that level of success.

Later on, some other scientist uses the same criteria with another technique, with another random selection of people and also sees how many are successful- say the answer is 70%.

Another scientist tests another two random groups of people, with GTD giving 15%, and the other technique 65%. - Small differences (10% to 15%) would be expected in the scientific method due to variation - but what is important is the difference between the two techniques - 10% to 70%

Again, I ask, which technique would you recommend to someone else?

I agree with CosmoGTD. I would like to see some scientific studies, because at the moment I can only recommended it based on personnel experience, I cannot recommend it on indepedent, scientific, objective advice.

If one medicine is good for 70% of people and the other for 10%, it is only the probability and sometimes a given person can obtain better results using the 10% medicine. And in some cases even placebo works perfectly.

The best method is the method that works for you regardless of the other people results or scientific studies.
So if you were sick, which medicine would you try first? You don't know yet which one will work for you as an individual.

[moises]

A man named Pennebaker uses controlled scientific studies to show that writing down traumatic emotional events is associated with better physical health as measured by immune system markers and other indicators.

DA has no controlled studies. It does not take a very big imaginative leap to realized that a social scientist could do what Pennebaker did but substitute "writing down next action commitments" for "writing down traumatic emotional events." One may or may not wish to substitute "reduced anxiety as measured by your favorite questionnaire" for "better physical health as measured by immune system markers and other indicators."

More and more I believe that the key GTDian insight is "get it out of your head." Of course this insight is not original with DA. What is original is how he organizes this well-known insight into a personal productivity system.

Years ago, Alan Lakein wrote a nice book called How to Get Control of Your Time and Your Life. In it he wrote:
Many people seem to have difficulty planning because they regard it only as "thinking"--which all to often translates into either "staring into space" or "daydreaming." They need a way to make a more concrete task out of planning. From experience with thousands of people I have concluded that it is much better to conceive of planning as "writing" than as "thinking." [27-8]

Of course I read Lakein years ago and didn't get very far with his system. I've been doing GTD for two years and I have progressed by leaps and bounds. But the key insight was there with Lakein all along.

The author Charles Taylor talks about the importance of expressing oneself as an idea traceable at least as far back as to the philosopher Herder. Taylor attributes to Herder the view that
man as a conscious being achieves his highest point when he recognizes his own life as an adequate, a true expression of what he potentially is--just as an artist or writer reaches his goal in recognizing his work as a fully adequate expression of what he wanted to say. And in one case as in the other, the 'message' could not have been know before it was expressed. The traditional view receives a new formulation in expressivism: man comes to know himself by expressing and hence clarifying what he is and recognizing himself in this expression. [Hegel. page 17]

And the contemporary would add that human beings not only know, clarify, and recognize themselves by expressing themselves, they also reduce stress and improve their physical well-being.

[TesTeq]

I agree with CosmoGTD. I would like to see some scientific studies, because at the moment I can only recommended it based on personnel experience, I cannot recommend it on indepedent, scientific, objective advice.
And that's the difference between us. I am recommending to other people the things or methodologies that worked for me. I can say that I've heard that Toyota cars are good but I would recommend them when I used one daily and had no problems. The same is with GTD - if it works for me I can recommend it with certainty. And I don't care if it works for 70% or 20% of people.

By the way - when recommending music - do you always recommend pop music from the top of the hit list or the music that you like? The Top Ten list represents the preferences of the majority of our society, isn't it?

Many consultants are recommending products that they've never tried and only read something about them. It is not fair.

[TesTeq]

So if you were sick, which medicine would you try first? You don't know yet which one will work for you as an individual.
I would go to doctor and rely on his advice. That's the common sense that sometimes works.

But not always. I have a problem with a pain in my wrists. I was examined by ~5 doctors. Each one of them had a different idea about my wrists and each tried his best to stop my pain. Up to now nothing worked so despite the fact that some kinds of treatment worked for most people I am not able to recommend anything to other people who suffer the wrists pain like me.

[moises]

I have a lot of sympathy with TesTeq's skepticism with regard to social science. If you look at Martin Seligman and the Authentic Happiness movement, much of it is driven by big business and the US Military.

It is rather ironic that this discussion about science is occurring in a thread which was initially about life coaches being a sham because they are not licensed therapists. Many followers of Seligman are therapists and they are looking to get the big money, as consultants to big corporations. I believe that Seligman has been providing psychometric testing to big business for years.

Does the fact that big business is driving this kind of social science produce good science? My guess is . . . probably not. But it might be good (translation: highly remunerative) for some big-name hotshot social scientists.

There is good science and bad science. I hope that a good research program is developed to investigate GTD.

By the way, despite the armchair musings of myself and others, this is not easy. Albert Ellis is the most cited psychologist in history and one of his regrets was that he was never able to develop an effective research program scientifically validating his ideas. It fell to Aaron Beck to do that.

[eowyn]

I would go to doctor and rely on his advice.

I hadn't through through my example, had I? But I would expect the doctor to start with the medicine that works for most people, all else being equal at the time.

The top ten music is not based on any science.

In terms of wrist pain, for a right-handed person I have become proficiecient in using the mouse with my left hand, as I get soreness from overuse of the mouse. For you, hopefully over time there are more scientific studies on the causes and useful cures for wrist pain.

Cheers,
eowyn

[tuqqer]

What an odd thread. Korzybski and the "General Semantics" folks would have fits with it.

"Are self-help books a scam? Please discuss..."

Might as well have asked:

"Are high school teachers jerks? Please discuss..."

or

"Are bosses all nice looking? Please discuss..."

Some definitions, from Answer.com:
Scam: a fraudulent business. With intent to swindle
Self-help: any case whereby an individual or a group betters themselves economically, intellectually or emotionally.

Have you ever read a book that helped you economically, intellectually or emotionally?

Hell, forget the whole book: did you ever read a sentence that helped you economically, intellectually or emotionally?

Has anyone ever told you something—one phrase that you forever remembered after that, or a concept that altered your perceptions— that helped you economically, intellectually or emotionally?

These are self-help moments, self-help books, self-help phrases, and self-help people. Whether they had a set of letters after their name that distinguished them as a agreed-upon expert in self-help... looking back, did that matter? Really? My dad and I never got along and didn't speak all that much, but he told me one thing—while traveling in a car for 10 minutes in my Junior year in HS—that I never, ever forgot, and it has mailed me a ton of money. He was an engineer, not a therapist, psychoanalyst, doctor, or NLP expert. He was just a guy, who had had some experiences, and he was passing on his best guess.

I believe that most humans are people that have had some experiences, and when they write a book about those experiences and attempt to quantify what those are into some form that might help the reader, I think they're doing what humans have done since cavemen times: they're helping others self-help. It can be anything from how to paint a house, to how to live your life, how to get things done, how to view the cosmos and god, how to stay healthy, how to stay fit, how to find happiness in life, how to how to how to.

If you read a book of someone's suggested how-tos, and it didn't work for you... then what that means is that the book didn't work for you. It doesn't make you right, and others (who get value from it) wrong. It certainly doesn't make you wrong and the others right.

There are so many philosophies and religions and ideas in the world that I find worthless. It doesn't mean those things are "scams."

[TesTeq]

My dad and I never got along and didn't speak all that much, but he told me one thing—while traveling in a car for 10 minutes in my Junior year in HS—that I never, ever forgot, and it has mailed me a ton of money. He was an engineer, not a therapist, psychoanalyst, doctor, or NLP expert. He was just a guy, who had had some experiences, and he was passing on his best guess.
Can you share it with us or is it too personal?

I agree with you that everybody should judge whether the information he/she has read or heard is applicable and works for him/her.

[andersons]

In order to figure out if any therapy or self-help system works, "arguments from authority" don't cut it, and neither do personal anecdotes. What happens is people get "indoctrinated" into their specific school of therapy, and then through the "confirmation bias" over time their viewpoint becomes totally biased.

With all due respect, your many passionate posts about CBT show you to be "indoctrinated" into this specific school of therapy and apparently somewhat biased.

Many of these different schools of therapy even directly conflict with each other, so they all can't be correct.

As a scientific researcher, I completely disagree. The human brain and mind is exceeding complex. It is completely reasonable that different and even conflicting approaches can have correct elements, as in the story of the blind man and the elephant.


What is needed to overcome this are careful scientific studies done in many different areas by objective people. These studies have been going on for many decades now, and the facts are very clear, to anyone who takes the time to look at them.

There are hundreds of careful scientific studies showing the high efficacy of cognitive therapy. This web-page has a list summary of its efficacy in over 300 studies, for various disorders.


Science is (or at least should be) the search for the truth about causation. You say that the facts are very clear to someone who takes the time to look at them, but I wonder if you have indeed taken the time to look at any of those 325 studies.

Dr. Beck's references point only to studies of his approach.

There are hundreds of other studies showing the effectiveness of other approaches as well. For example, a meta-analysis of hundred of studies showed that therapy patients are are significantly better after treatment than about 75% of control patients. Behavioral and psychodynamic verbal therapies appeared to be superior to other therapies.

In short, if you want to convince people that psychodynamic therapy is overpriced and harmful garbage, you had better start reading the scientific studies about it. If your knowledge comes only from personal experience and the Beck Institute references, it is biased and prejudiced.

[CosmoGTD]

Dr Albert Ellis, the founder of REBT, Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy was mentioned a number of times in this thread, so I feel its appropriate to post this information, as Dr Ellis has asked for help from the public.

I wanted to bring to your attention a very serious injustice which has been brought upon Dr. Albert Ellis, the founder of REBT, and renowned humanist, psychologist and promoter of reason in psychotherapy. In 1971 the American Humanist Association named Albert Ellis as the Humanist of the Year, and Ellis is now regarded as one of the most influential psychotherapists of the last century.

Dr. Ellis has recently been removed from the Institute he has run for more than 50 years in a hostile takeover and "palace coup". My view is that this has been done for the personal financial advantage of those who have illegally stolen the Institute out from under hi