I was waiting for my luggage at the Oakland Airport yesterday when I noticed a woman yelling at a man who was about in his late fifties.  She was furious. She came at him like she was going to hit him.  But just as she did, a young man grabbed her and held her back.  He took her back to her luggage and her young child about 25 feet away, then went back to the man she had been trying to attack.  I didn’t hear what he said, but the older man calmly said, “Are you going to hit me?”  He didn’t seem afraid.  He more seemed like if the guy hit him, it would prove him right. The young man just walked away.

A few minutes later I asked the older man what had happened. He said quit calmly and with great  confidence that the woman’s child (who looked to be about 2) was crying during the whole flight.  He said he told her that she shouldn’t fly with a child who couldn’t remain calm.

I was shocked. I told him that I was a clinical psychologist and that I thought that was an enormously cruel thing to say and that he should apologize to her.  He calmly reasserted that she shouldn’t fly with a child who cried.  He was so sure of himself. I told him that he had really added to the mother’s stress.  But he was unmoved.

I later found out from another couple who had been trying to comfort the woman—who continued to cry—that the woman had been taken off the airplane in a wheel chair.

Later I found myself wanting to say to the guy, “Maybe she was coming to her dying mother who had never seen the grandchild.  Maybe she was bringing the child for treatment of cancer.  Maybe the child had flown before without any problem.”

What was so striking to me in this cruel act was the man’s absolute confidence that he was right.  I suspect that being right is very important to him.

I have no idea how a bystander could do anything other than comfort the woman.  (I went over to her and told her that she had my sympathy and that I had told the guy that what he did was really cruel.)

What could you say to this guy that might deter his behavior?

A slightly edited version of the following was published in the Eugene Register Guard on February 28, 2010

I find myself in the midst of two public discussions. The first is the question of whether Oregon Research Institute should be allowed to build a building in the research park; I am a Senior Scientist at ORI. A second is the question of what Lane County should do to improve public safety; I am a member of the Citizens Advocates for Public Safety, chaired by Jean Tate and David Frohnmayer. (more…)

My dear brother-in-law has inspired me to elaborate on the efficacy of government. (more…)

Amid all of the noise about how terrible taxes are, I feel compelled to say something on the other side.  Maybe a lot.  Given that the major media organizations–even PBS–have so much about how people hate taxes, please, please, please, forward this to your friends.

I was looking through the policy briefs that Kelli Komro and her team of policy experts have compiled for our Promise Neighborhood Consortium.  Here are some of the things that empirical evidence shows will benefit the population: After school programs that include academic supports; Reduced classroom size in grades k through 3; Provision of nutritious food by schools; High quality childcare and preschools for young children; and Living wage ordinances.  Every one of these things, plus numerous programs and practices, would improve child and adolescent development, reduce crime, substance abuse, and depression; increase academic performance; and improve the productivity of the workforce.  All of them are lacking because there is no money to pay for them.

Higher taxes spent on these things would be of benefit not only to the direct beneficiaries of these policies and programs, but to entire communities. There would be fewer people breaking into our houses, more well-trained and conscientious employees to work in our companies, and fewer sick people.

As Wilkinson and Pickett’s book The Spirit Level documents, other nations which tax more heavily and spend the money on programs and policies of this sort have longer life expectancy, less crime, and less stress-related disease.

For the past forty years, a network of wealthy individuals and organizations has been promoting this anti-government, anti-tax philosophy and thanks to their domination of the media and public discussion, we have had low taxes and a deteriorating nation.  The most amazing thing about their advocacy is that they have millions of people who directly benefit from government and get no benefit out of our low-tax practices taking to the streets to support the very wealthy having fewer taxes.

So here I am in this little blog on a Friday afternoon, wishing that voices would be raised to tell the truth about how we need more taxes on those who have so much more that most.  (And I am one of them and happy to pay.)

So if you have read this, copy the URL and send it to other people.  Not just true believers, but your Aunt in Missouri who watches nothing but Fox.  If enough voices are raised, we could influence the direction of the country.

More taxes for those who have so much!

This was the phrase written in big white block letters on the back window of a car I saw in Portland the other day.  (more…)

In the same week that the Supreme Court overturned a century of precedent and made it legal for corporations to campaign for their favored candidates, I received a copy of Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s new book, The Spirit Level.  What a sad and ironic convergence. (more…)

          I have often been struck that when I start on a research project, I have trouble really seeing and feeling what can be achieved.  As I look back on my work, I often think that—if only I had realized just what the world would look like when we were done, that vision or sense of it might have made our work both easier and better.  I think in particular about what it would have been like if we had assumed that not only would the intervention we were testing have been stronger, but we would have planned for its dissemination and sustainability more effectively.  In that vein, I thought it might be good to try to envision what our little adventure might look like in two, five, and ten years.

          (I don’t say any of this to say this is what we must do. Don’t forget I am planning to cut back in two years and retire in five.  And I don’t want our dreams to become our burden.)

What We Could Accomplish in the Next Two Years

          We have gotten fifty neighborhoods at various levels of involvement with the PNRC.  All of them have registered and get information from our website about evidence-based practices.  Twenty or so have implemented one or more of our recommended measures and are using our website to collect data and to display it to their residents, policymakers, and organizations funding them. Thanks to materials we produce from their data, they are able to effectively publicize to residents and policymakers the importance of the outcomes that our measures document and, increasingly, public attention and practice is shaped by evidence and discussion about the outcomes and processes that our measures assess.

          At least twenty neighborhoods, are implementing programs that we have specified and informed them about. We have partnered with them in securing funding for these programs. Solid designs (interrupted time series designs?) are in place to detect the impact of these programs. The measures that these neighborhoods are collecting are just the ones needed to detect effects of these programs.

          Many more neighborhoods have residents and neighborhood organization leaders who are using kernels to influence prosocial behavior.  In many cases, good experimental designs are being used evaluate the use of the kernels.  (Our success with the kernels followed our working out the nettlesome issues of conflict of interest and ownership. J )

          Our work on policy, which has been distilled down to one page fact sheets, as well as high quality reviews of the empirical evidence is influencing policy making and advocacy in twenty to thirty of our communities and our repository of policies has become the place that local, state, and national policy makers look to guidance about the most useful policies.

          Many more unregistered users of the website are getting information from it about evidence-based prevention.

          Our online journal has been started. Just as scientific publications went from Latin in the time of Newton to English in the time of Priestly, we have evolved new and more effective ways of communicating scientific knowledge through an online journal that makes use of all of the possibilities of the internet and makes the knowledge simultaneously accessible to both scientists and nonscientists. As a result, science is once again an integral part of public discussion, as it was in Priestley’s and Franklin’s day.

          Through partnerships with neighborhoods and communities, we have helped many neighborhoods get funding to implement effective interventions to reduce poverty and improve outcomes for children and youth. And we have become a key resource for evaluating these initiatives.

          Geoffrey Canada likes us!

          The White House has a ceremony celebrating the Promise Neighborhoods and we are invited.  (Don’t forget to take a souvenir napkin.)

          We have succeeded in getting additional funding.  Some of the funding is for an NIH funded center on prevention in high poverty neighborhoods. The rest is for specific groups of investigators who are conducting various trials in multiple sets of neighborhoods; they are all part of the Center.

          What else?

Five Years

          Published papers are beginning to accumulate that show the benefits of a variety of interventions in high poverty neighborhoods.  One of those papers reports on the impact of massive diffusion of kernels in a series of neighborhoods.

Thanks to the use of kernels and programs like positive action that increase positive reinforcement (caring, support, warmth, appreciation, love, and forgiveness) the levels of violence are found to be declining in neighborhoods where we have succeeded in disseminating these programs and practices.

          The Center for the Promise Neighborhood Consortium has continued to articulate and disseminate programs, policies, and practices that are making a difference in the lives of now millions of people. All around the world people come to our website for the most useful information about what works, how to implement it, and how to evaluate.

          Our Center has succeeded in creating a “marketplace” in which neighborhood and community leaders, neighborhood residents, policymakers, and early career and established scientists can connect with each other exchange information, support each other’s efforts, and form new teams.

Ten Years

          Histories have begun to be written about the eight years of the Obama administration. One of the most impressive accomplishments that is widely noted is that concentrated poverty has begun to decline and there has been a marked increase the proportion of children living in poverty who are succeeding in school and in their social relations. Violence in poverty neighborhoods has declined.  Thanks to the adoption of new policies the proportion of families living in poverty is declining across America.  At the same time, there is an increased sense across the nation that we are all one people and that it is in everyone’s interest to support the successful development of children—even when they are different from us in race, ethnicity, or economic situation. The vision of one nation that Obama articulated in his first campaign has begun to be achieved.

          In many of the accounts of this progress, mention is made of the Promise Neighborhood Research Consortium, which brought the knowledge and tools of the behavioral science community to bear on the problem of neighborhood poverty and contributed to the increased use of data to guide the evolution of more nurturing family, school, workplace, and neighborhood environments.

Looking back over this, I can think of one reason, why we have not generally done this.  It can turn into a burden of expectations.  That is where the ACT stuff comes in handy.  We can have such fears and still work to try and make the world a little bit more like what we can envision and a little bit less like the one we now have.

I got back to Eugene after briefing Virginia legislators on the IOM report and prevention. After three flights, United Airlines had lost my luggage. As I waited in vain for it, I saw a Dad and his two young sons pull a soft bag off the conveyer that had been ripped open in several places. There was a small stuffed animal hanging out of it.

After a little more waiting I went to the United counter to give them my claim check.  (Believe me I know the routine.)  The Dad and his two sons were there ahead of me. The youngest son–maybe four–was holding his stuffed owl and crying quietly. It had been damaged–not too badly to my adult eye–but I suspect that to him–his dear friend had been hurt. (more…)