bostonprocess.bsky.social
Boston Process Approach to neuropsychological assessment is my life
35 posts
51 followers
60 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Email 3: "We would like to inform you that the deadline for submissions to the current issue... of has been extended, allowing additional time for authors to finalize the manuscripts." Still not edited for English language, and now "Chelsea Evelyn, ME" with no location. So should I submit? 😂
comment in response to
post
Email 2: "I'm reaching out for the THIRD time to kindly remind you about the blah blah deadline for etc etc." You can't count, bad sign. Now her name is "Chelsea Evelyn, Head Editor", with no location or phone number.
comment in response to
post
Finished with "Cheers, Chelsea Evelyn, ME" (their last names are always also first names, that's how you know for sure that it's a journal scammer). From San Antonio (riiiiiight), with phone: +1 414 339 935 (you're missing a digit, dummy). And sender in header is "Cheslea" Evelyn. Great stuff
comment in response to
post
Email 1: "This is a fourth follow-up mail sent recently regarding year-end issue of Psychology Journal: Research Open" (what??) And then a couple of links, both with URLs clearly showing that it's a link to a tracker.
comment in response to
post
We did a journal club on your paper a few weeks ago, lends itself to important conversations!
comment in response to
post
Finally wrapped up listening to the podcast this morning. I'm a norms guy, so great stuff! Totally worth a listen.
comment in response to
post
So for years I thought that was pretty cute. And then, because I am a grammar dork, one day I came across this information when listening to a podcast by Grammar Girl, who also helpfully put it in writing here. What the hell? www.quickanddirtytips.com/articles/how...
comment in response to
post
(6) overall attitude: I had gotten so stressed out about my oral exam that I was in a stupor afterward and missed my flight home. They had even called me by name. I was at the gate playing a game on my phone the whole time. Dissociated I guess. Made it home the next day. Don't be like me. Good luck!
comment in response to
post
(5) oral exam: this is the part that scared me and that I personally procrastinated on. I again went with the study guide and had multiple colleagues review my practice sample to provide me with sample questions about it. The exam was nowhere near as scary as I expected. Everyone was lovely to me.
comment in response to
post
(4) practice samples: Pick 2 reports that are representative of what you see & are meaningfully varied. Make sure you issue a dx. Don't pick anything obscure or creative or messy; everything you mention in the report opens you up to more questions on cross-exam. **Have a trusted friend review them**
comment in response to
post
(cont.) Using that approach, there were only two questions on my exam that felt completely foreign to me. For all others, if I got them wrong, I knew it was my own fault for forgetting the information I knew I had read.
comment in response to
post
(cont.) It's important not to rely on only the study guide of course. But it's great to help you figure out which areas you need more resources in. It taught me that I knew nothing about pediatric disorders, so I found a textbook on the topic and studied that too.
comment in response to
post
(3) what to study: I think my written exam was in the first cohort after the Stucky et al study guide came out. Before that, the recommendation was to study everything. Like, everything. I definitely used the study guide as my home base, and it did not disappoint. I still use it a lot actually.
comment in response to
post
(2) how to study: this is the easy one of course; do it however works for you. A lot of people do study groups, a lot of people don't. I can't do group prep, so I didn't. Some people swear by note cards; that's not my style either. You've done well on a lot of tests, so follow your own policies.
comment in response to
post
(1) When to do it: anytime. Some trainees plan to do it as early as possible. But the EPPP takes a lot out of folks. It can keep for a couple of years. It took me 8 years after postdoc to get around to the exam; you don't have to wait that long, but don't panic if you're not doing it immediately.
comment in response to
post
Did you know that prior to 2016, nobody had ever received more than 43.1% of the vote (Maris 1988) without someday being inducted? The 75% cutoff only makes it harder for eventual inductees to enjoy it. Jones deserves the call.
comment in response to
post
It's tough, authors are squeezing in their manuscripts they swore they'd at least get submitted in 2024, and editors have to get them into under-review status regardless of the holiday. Decline the excess reviews and suggest alternate reviewers to make the editors happy.
comment in response to
post
So sorry, Jeff. Best of wishes to you and your family.
comment in response to
post
I'm very interested in this topic and happy to chat sometime
comment in response to
post
Loved the original edition. I was actually thinking about it just this morning. I'm absolutely going to read this one too. I might have to shoplift it (thanks OUP), but I'll read it....
comment in response to
post
When my oldest son was little, his favorite TV show had an episode focused on narwhals, and one character introduced them with: "Narwhals are magical creatures that live in the sea that no one ever sees!" The show's writers thought narwhals were fictional.
comment in response to
post
Excellent, looking forward to it 😄 I don't know the literature on occ attainment, I know I always struggled with figuring it out for the Barona formula, so I'd try it but I'd probably whimper for a while first.... 😅
comment in response to
post
Do we have a lot of those normative data? I think we need more. Education falls out when IQ is included. I feel like Area Deprivation Index might end up being a more practical proxy for SES than education or race, but there'd be some kinks to work out.
comment in response to
post
also consider this paper where we found that the relevance of certain comparison criteria depends on the test:
Gavett, B. E., Ashendorf, L., & O'Bryant, S. E. (2022). When is it appropriate to infer cognitive impairment on the basis of premorbid IQ estimates? Psych Assessment, 34(4), 390.
comment in response to
post
I'd be hard-pressed to refuse to calibrate for meaningful variables, so sure. The CNNS, which appears to be no longer sold or supported by PAR, offered a flexible approach to demographic corrections, you could use whichever ones you want whenever you wanted, and I liked that. However....
comment in response to
post
Age. (1) Most tests I use don't have full demo available; (2) I like comparing apples with apples so all norms should use the same variables; (3) the things demo variables represent have changed over time: education is not as good a proxy for SES as before, race is less heterogeneous, etc.
comment in response to
post
Luck of the draw? 😄 A lot of times editors don't use journal-specific lists, they invite authors from the citations list or a lit search on similar papers. Maybe you've had recent papers on the topic--I restrict my lit searches to the past 2-3 years so I can be more confident in the contact info
comment in response to
post
Consulted with my grants expert (/wife), who said the only thing to do is to reach out to the program officer to ask for guidance, and if they agree it was an error see if the mechanism has a way for the program officer to get the app back in the queue. Sorry, that's nuts