APA's Science Policy Insider News April 2003

[Subscribe to SPIN]  PPO and Science Staff Present at Div. 19/Div.21 Joint Meeting PPO's Heather Kelly and Science's Dianne Maranto led a policy discussion with psychological researchers and students at the March 6-7 Annual Mid-Year Symposium hosted by APA Divisions 19 (Military Psychology) and 21 (Applied Experimental and Engineering Psychology) and the Potomac Chapter of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Held at Fort Belvoir, the joint meeting was arranged around the theme of "Measuring and Maintaining Performance in Complex Environments." The session included presentations and posters on topics ranging from cognitive readiness under combat conditions to human factors analyses of military and civilian airline accidents (click here for the complete symposium agenda). Kelly and Maranto updated participants on APA's involvement in federal appropriations for science agencies, homeland security science and technology issues, and new opportunities in workplace research. National Children's Study Advisory Committee Holds Spring Meeting The Advisory Committee of the National Children's Study, being managed by NICHD, held its spring meeting the first week of March. As we have mentioned in previous SPIN's, Congress authorized this longitudinal study, which will follow 100,000 children from pre-natal to early adulthood, as part of the Children's Health Act of 2000. Since then, NICHD has led the coordinating efforts of several NIH institutes and other federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Background information on the study and working group member information is available at the study's new Web site. APA has advocated for the inclusion of behavioral and social science representatives on the Advisory Committee and is pleased that developmental psychologist Deborah Phillips, PhD, was asked to serve on the Committee. Much of the discussion focused on coordinating the work of the Advisory Committee with the 22 Working Groups of the study and the Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC). The ICC consists of federal staff from the three main agencies involved in the study (NIH, EPA, and CDC). Some concerns were raised that the ICC has not approved hypotheses proposed by some working groups or the Advisory Committee, which may affect future efforts of those working groups. The lack of dedicated staff at NICHD was also a concern, as there are only 1.5 staff dedicated to the NCS. Additional staff will hopefully be hired, but there was some concern that decisions related to study design were not being made by staff, but by a rotating group of volunteers on the working groups. It was decided that at the upcoming June meeting of the Advisory Committee, there would be a session held to explain the roles and responsibilities of each entity. Workshop on Science of Deception Geoff Mumford, Director of Science Policy, is collaborating with Susan Brandon, Emotional Processes Program Chief, National Institute of Mental Health, staff at RAND Corporation, and agencies within the intelligence community to coordinate an invitational workshop entitled "The Science of Deception: Integration of Practice and Theory," to be held at RAND in Arlington, VA in July 2003. The goal of the meeting is to bring together individuals with a need to know and use deception in service of national defense/security, with those who investigate the phenomena and mechanisms of deception. Those participants concerned primarily with application and the operational use of deception will provide discussion points and questions. Those participants who come with some research expertise will be given a brief opportunity to describe their investigations. The bulk of the day will be spent in discussions focused on the topics and questions provided by the intelligence community. This meeting will be similar in format and intent to a meeting convened in February 2002 by the APA, the University of Pennsylvania (Solomon Asch Center for the Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict) and the FBI Academy entitled "Countering Terrorism: Integration of Practice and Theory." This rather unique congregation of people formed in response to the attacks on 9/11, which appeared to both mobilize the academic research community and encourage the law enforcement and intelligence communities to seek advice and aid for their new challenges. The format of the conference allowed each participant to offer expertise and perspective; the intent was to provide a meeting place for "practitioners" and "theorists." For additional background and a summary of those proceedings click here. We have invited some researchers whose expertise appears to be completely within the domain of deception, and some whose expertise may be more tangential, in the hopes that a diverse group will increase the likelihood of creative solutions and offer new perspectives on common problems. One outcome of the February FBI Academy conference was that researcher participants did not just provide expertise, but were challenged with new questions and issues that were useful to their own research agendas. Possible topics of discussion include deception detection; deception denial; interpersonal and strategic persuasion; author attribution; deception strategies in interviews and negotiation; nonverbal deception cues; motivations to deceive; methods of deception in the nonhuman animal world; social psychological influences on deception detection; prediction of one's own and other's emotional and motivational characteristics; attribution theory; the role of implicit factors in persuasion; and the interactional functions of speech. [Back to top] Friends of NICHD Meet with Duane Alexander On March 14th, the Friends of NICHD, which is co-chaired by APA's Karen Studwell, met with NICHD Director Duane Alexander to discuss the budget outlook for the institute and other issues that are of concern to the coalition. The Friends Coalition is quite concerned that NICHD will not have adequate resources to carry out its mission based on the President's FY 2004 budget request, which would result in an approximate 4% increase for NICHD. The FY03 final budget for NICHD was $1.194 billion after taking into account the money that is transferred from NICHD to other agencies in what are known as "taps." The President's FY04 request is $1.245 billion. The Friends' request is for a 10% increase for FY04 over FY03, or $1.315 billion, which is also in line with the 10% increase supported for NIH overall, which would bring total FY04 funding to $30 billion. One new initiative that is underway is a work/life balance initiative in which APA President Elect Diane Halpern, PhD, has been involved. The initiative will look at issues around the balance of work, family, health and well-being. NICHD will hold a conference in June to discuss the state of the science in this area. The ultimate goal of the initiative is to conduct pilot studies that employ experimental design methodologies to test which types of workplace policies and practices are the most beneficial for workers, their families and children, communities, and workplaces. Dr. Alexander also discussed some specific initiatives that could be done with greater funding, including expanding clinical trials of reading research and keeping the National Children's Study (NCS) planning phase on schedule. NCS is the congressionally mandated longitudinal study to examine the effects of the environment (including physical, social, emotional) on child development. The current proposed FY04 funding would only partially cover what is needed to continue the planning stages of NCS and the planned FY05 enrollment will be delayed if adequate funding were not provided. NIH Makes Progress on Research "Roadmap" At the National Institutes of Health, sixteen working groups are busy identifying hot, cutting edge areas of science. This planning process will produce scientific "roadmaps" which NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, MD would consult in order to parcel out additional resources. In the months after his appointment, Dr. Zerhouni spoke often of prevention as an example of an important area where additional resources should be directed. PPO staff have subsequently learned that the sixteen issue areas where planning has commenced do not include "prevention." The rubrics are broader: for example, "translational" research is one area; "clinical" is another (as are structural biology, nanotechnology and others). These roadmaps may allow for additional funding of behavioral and social science research, but it very much depends on how the areas are defined by each of the working groups. Dr. Zerhouni will have approximately $35 million to spend on these roadmap areas if he chooses to: the NIH Director is provided a 'tap' of institute budgets to use for priority research funding. In concert with APA's CEO, Norman Anderson, Ph.D., the Public Policy Office is working with other behavioral and social science organizations to ensure that behavioral and social scientists are members of the working groups and that behavioral and social science is well represented in the areas chosen for additional funding. We'll have more information about these efforts in the next SPIN. 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

Back to Top^