—
Dr. Cory Pedersen works at Kwantlen Polytechnic University in the Psychology Department at the time. Here we talked about psychology in her office, part 2.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: With your expertise, what do you consider the most controversial findings in psychology? What do you consider some of the implications of these findings?
Dr. Cory Pedersen: Well, I cannot speak to the whole field, of course. However, if I were to speak generally I would look back at my introductory psychology classes and cover a broad range of topics. Generally, I would say, probably, in issues to this day of consciousness. How to know what consciousness is? How to measure it? These are still problematic for psychologists and philosophers. I would say, in my particular field, some of the big issues are things like causes of sexual orientation, and at a deeper level whether we should be even asking such questions. Such questions are biased, as we do not ask about the causes of heterosexual orientation. Being straight is presumed status quo. I would say, in my field, this area counts as one of the biggest of controversy.
There is also controversy around certain sexual disorders. In particular, hyper-sexuality and gender identity disorder as disorder. Both of these are in considerable debate as to whether they should be included or not in the DSM. I do not believe that either of those should be included, personally, from the research that I have read. I think they simply represent variations in human sexuality, which is exceptionally varied. I have difficulty reconciling many sexual disorders in the DSM, because they suggest there is a normative amount of desire; that there is a normative amount and that anything more or less than that is pathological. I consider human behavior much too varied, especially human sexual behaviour, to say, “Oh, this is the appropriate amount of sex, and any more than this, or less than this, is pathological.” I have some difficulty with that.
In the developmental field, again there is controversy relating to the DSM, particularly, what constitutes developmental psychopathology? What is considered appropriate behavior for children? Determining whether a children’s behavior is pathological hinges on the adult’s perception of the behavior, and so it is the parents or teachers that go to a psychologist or physician and say, “My child is ill.” The child rarely goes into the doctor and says, “I think there’s something wrong with me.” You don’t see that, right? There are disorders in the DSM for children that are debatable. Take for example, a new one that was under consideration, I think it was to be called temper-tantrum reaction disorder or something like that, being proposed for the DSM-5. It is based on parent’s reports of children having unreasonable and excessive temper tantrums; in other words, more than the norm! I am not suggesting that there are no mental illnesses among kids. I simply mean that the DSM has expanded to the point where much “normative” behaviour is designated pathological if the parameters are not exactly right. I think those are the biggest debates in the field of psychology that are of most interest to me.
Jacobsen: If you restructure, or at least reframe, the study of sexuality, how would you do it?
Pedersen: Well, that is a tough question. I think this links somewhat to my earlier comments about pathology. I am teaching human sexuality now. The last several chapters are about things wrong in sexuality. Commercial sex, prostitution, exotic dance are wrong. Selling sex is wrong. Then, there are the sections of sexual dysfunction, like hyper-sexuality and hypo-sexuality, and how these are ‘disorder’. And then next week it is paraphilia; exhibitionism, fetishism, BDSM, etc. And it is all so structured like, “Wow, look how wacky everyone is…” Even the chapter on gender identity that I did last week was all about why would people want to transition from male to female? What is with these people? Look how these people are different? The science is set around pointing out what is presumed to be “normal”. Some textbooks are grey because they call these topics ‘sexual variations,’ but the implication is the same; that there is something somewhat wrong about it all. I do not like that. I do not teach my class that way. I am very liberal in my class encourage tolerance of these differences. There is nothing wrong with these differences. So, I would re-structure our science in how we pathologize everything, make everything seem like it is abnormal. I do not like that. While I appreciate that there IS pathology, I often believe much of the stress and stigma associated with pathology comes from the fact that we pathologize!
Jacobsen: If you had unlimited funding, what would you research?
Pedersen: Unlimited funding? If I had unlimited funding, I would get two different pieces of equipment. One, I would get a penile plethysmograph, which measures tumescence of the genital organs for males. Two, I would get a vaginal photoplethysmograph, which is a measure of vasocongestion. They are both measures of physiological arousal. In sexuality research, the field is burdened by the social-desirability bias. People are going to say what they believe other people want to hear. Take for example the standard question, this is just an example, but take the standard question, “How many sexual partners have you had?” Men tend to overestimate their number of sexual partners and women tend to underestimate their number of sexual partners. The truth is somewhere in between. It is hard to measure things like sexual arousal based on self-report. And that is all the kind of data that I have been primarily working with; questionnaires, self-reports, survey data. If I had unlimited funding, I would buy those pieces of equipment and hidden camera equipment to conduct observational research in labs.
If I had unlimited funds, I would also want an fMRI machine. It would be amazing to see what happens in the brain during orgasm. Is it diffuse or localized? I would put technology on my side if I had unlimited funding. Although I have asked the university for a vaginal photoplethysmograph and a penile plethysmograph, there is so far no such luck in getting this equipment.
—
Original publication on www.in-sightjournal.com.
—
—
Image Credit: Getty Images.