|
[
Subscribe to SPIN]
APA Nominations for Human Subjects and Genetics
Advisory Councils
Earlier this year, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services dissolved his Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing and replaced
it with a new committee called the Secretary's Advisory Committee on
Genetics, Health, and Society. Because psychology is included as one of
the core competencies the Secretary is to consider in constructing the
roster for the new Committee we want to be sure to nominate psychologists
whose research background is relevant to the scope of the Committees
charge. In consultation with the APA Working Group on Genetics Research
Issues Science Policy Staff submitted a slate of nominees to fill those
slots in mid-November. To view charter see: http://www.omhrc.gov/OMH/WhatsNew/2pgwhatsnew/2002-4.pdf.
A separate slate of nominees was developed in consultation
with APA's Director of Research Ethics, Dr. Sangeeta Panicker to fill
vacant slots on a newly chartered Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human
Research Protections (SACHRP). SACHRP, chartered on October 1 replaces and
expands the scope of the now defunct National Human Research Protection
Advisory Committee (NHRPAC). To view charter see: http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/sachrp/charter.pdf.
APA Staff & NSF Scientists Invited
to "Teach" at FBI Academy
Since the terrorist attacks on 9/11 and the anthrax
incidents in the autumn of 2001, APA Science/Science Public Policy has
been gathering and offering the resources of psychological science to
counter-terrorism efforts across the United States. Staff in these offices
have attended workshops and meetings, held conferences and Congressional
briefings, and created resource files that describe the multitude of
psychological researchers whose expertise is germane to such efforts. It
has been heartening to see how generous our community is with its time,
energy and skills.
The challenge is to share this expertise with those who
might make use of it. How can “first responders” make their problems
and concerns known to psychological researchers and theorists? How can
such researchers translate their findings into the kind of concrete,
operational tactics that police, medics and fire fighters are likely to
need on a daily basis?
Geoffrey Mumford, Director APA Science Policy, and Susan
Brandon, APA Science Senior Scientist, have begun a project that offers a
unique opportunity to listen to the concerns and questions of police from
across the United States. They have been invited by FBI Agents and faculty
from the FBI's National Academy in Quantico VA to visit several ongoing
classes and discuss behavioral science with the Academy students. The
National Academy, currently in its 211th session, was instituted “to
support, promote and enhance the personal and professional development of
experienced law enforcement officers by providing relevant education and
training and to increase their information networks in order to prepare
them for increasingly complex and dynamic leadership roles in the law
enforcement community” (FBI National Academy General Instructions, Feb.
27 2002). There are about 500 law enforcement personnel who take courses
at the National Academy during an a11-week semester; three such sessions
are held each year.
Mumford and Brandon met with one class on November 22.
They invited Deborah Frisch, PhD, a decision scientist from the National
Science Foundation, also to attend the class. Dr. Frisch started the class
off with a scenario about the Washington sniper incidents that illustrated
human decision-making behaviors. The discussion then was opened up to more
general concerns. Some of the questions posed were:
- How to predict panic in populations under assault, and how to
normalize community behavior in a crisis.
- How to understand the terrorist mindset so as to be able to predict
the selection of terrorist targets.
- Why some cops leak information to media knowing that it may harm an
investigation.
- The negative impact of media in high profile law enforcement
investigations.
- How to communicate information that the public wants during a crisis
in a way that cannot be used to the detriment of the investigation.
- How to articulate the needs of the police to focus limited resources
on likely suspects without appearing to apply profiling techniques.
- How to deal with police anxiety, which sometimes make it difficult
for police to serve as a calming influence for the public.
- The American cultural preoccupation with assigning blame.
Mumford and Brandon will continue to meet with several
more classes at the National Academy. What is learned there will help to
shape both the content and the format of how psychological science can be
put to good use in counter-terrorism endeavors.
[Back to top]
Brand New Congress, Big New Department
Next month Congress will return to Capitol Hill to begin
its 108th session. But the balance of power in this Congress has shifted
with the Senate now under Republican control. Within hours of the November
election, discussions of public policy likewise shifted with broad
implications for psychology. The new Congress will also deal with the
impact of the new homeland security legislation in the last weeks of the
107th Congress. But now the real challenges begin.
While the newly authorized Transportation Security
Administration was considered a behemoth, it will certainly be dwarfed by
the amalgam of twenty-two agencies that will comprise the new Department
of Homeland Security (DHS). Although the authorizing legislation will
serve as a blueprint, construction delays are likely and cost over-runs a
sure bet. And questions of who is assigned to oversee the completion of
the project and how it will be funded will add new wrinkles to the already
complex process of sorting out a legislative agenda for the 108th
Congress. Many of the agencies to be folded into DHS have traditionally
been authorized and funded by different, and competing, congressional
committees. This has raised concerns that the DHS Secretary (Gov. Ridge’s
nomination as Secretary was still pending at deadline) would spend most of
the time answering inquiries from every corner of Capitol Hill. A
streamlined proposal recommended that two new Committees, one to authorize
funds and one to appropriate funds, be created in each chamber of
Congress.
But such a proposal will likely stimulate controversy.
Many Committees will make a case for retaining jurisdictional oversight
and holding on to the purse-strings of programs that have been so long in
their charge. Those issues aside, there remains a question of funding, and
here’s where it gets a little shaky for everything beyond DHS,
especially given that the 107th Congress adjourned having completed only 3
of the 13 annual appropriations bills for FY2003. Adding yet another
appropriations bill that melds a $38 billion budget is awkward at best,
but also has to be viewed in the context of fiscal conservatism that
comes, by fiat, with a Republican majority.
Although the executive branch has been at work for several
months anticipating the creation of the DHS, Congress was given only 60
days to create an administrative plan for the new department. Implementing
that plan is likely to be an iterative process. While nominally meant to
take place within a year, realistically it is likely to evolve over
several years. It is, after all, the largest transformation of government
conceived in modern times. During the DHS organization, there are likely
to be both gains and losses for psychology. As DHS will house somewhere
between 170,000 and 200,000 employees, some unknown number of
psychologists in government service are bound to be affected. In addition,
new budget priorities and a possible war with Iraq will likely impact
agencies that provide funding for both mental health services as well as
psychological research.
But, as the intent of the Homeland Security legislation is
to integrate several governmental divisions into a coherent whole, the
field of psychology should be an integral part of that effort. The
Administration and Congress are pulling together a new vision for homeland
security, and so should we. It is incumbent upon all of us - scientists,
providers and educators - to be thinking creatively about how and where we
can fit into and advance the critical mission of DHS. To this end, APA’s
Science Policy staff will continue to engage congressional and federal
agency staff directly on those issues.
NCCAM Study on Complementary and
Alternative Medicine
At the end of October, the National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) announced the launch of an
Institute of Medicine (IOM) study of the scientific and policy
implications of the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by
the American public. Seventeen agencies within the Department of Health
and Human Services will co-sponsor the study. In mid-November, APA Science
Policy staff coordinated submission of a slate of nominees for the 15
member panel which should be assembled by mid-January. For more
information on the $1 million, nearly 2-year study, see: http://nccam.nih.gov/news/2002/102102.htm.
Congress Passes Bill Calling for Doubling of NSF
Budget
As SPIN goes to press, the National Science Foundation
Authorization Act of 2002 (H.R. 4664) is at the White House awaiting
President Bush’s signature. Passed by both the Senate and the House in
November, the bill overcame a series of congressional and administration
hurdles. The resulting compromise legislation would authorize a doubling
of the National Science Foundation’s (NSF’s) budget over the next five
years, with funding levels for the final two years (FY06 and FY07)
contingent on Congressional approval of progress in NSF’s management
practices. Although a separate appropriations bill determines NSF’s
actual funding each year, appropriators are guided by the policies and
parameters set by the NSF authorization bill. As such, H.R. 4664 as public
law would be a triumph for the non-biomedical science community.
See Bill Summary and Status of H.R. 4664 at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HR04664:@@@L&summ2=m&.
APA Board of Scientific Affairs Meritorious Research
Service Award
The APA Board of Scientific Affairs (BSA) is soliciting nominations for
the Meritorious Research Service Commendation. This citation recognizes
individuals who have made outstanding contributions to psychological
science through their service as employees of the federal government or
other organizations. Contributions are defined according to service to the
field that directly or indirectly advances opportunities and resources for
psychological science. This may include staff at federal or non-federal
research funding, regulatory or other agencies. Nominees may be active or
retired but ordinarily will have a minimum of 10 years of such service.
The individual’s personal scholarly achievements (i.e., research,
teaching, and writing) are not considered in the selection process
independent of their service contributions.
For more information, please contact
Suzanne
Wandersman.
[Back to top]
Any questions?
If you have any questions regarding SPIN or specific
science policy issues, please feel free to contact any of APA’s Science
PPO staff.
Geoff
Mumford, Ph.D., Director of Science Policy
Pat
Kobor, Senior Science Policy Analyst
Heather
O'Beirne Kelly, Ph.D., Senior Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer
Karen
Studwell, J.D., Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer
LaTonya Wesley, Legislative Assistant
|