Misplaced Pages

#179820

58-498: LGAT may refer to: Large-group awareness training , activities which are usually offered by groups with links to the human potential movement LGAT, the ICAO code for Ellinikon International Airport , a defunct airport in Athens, Greece Topics referred to by the same term [REDACTED] This disambiguation page lists articles associated with

116-517: A monograph or in the proceedings of an academic conference . If the identities of authors are not revealed to each other, the procedure is called dual-anonymous peer review. Medical peer review may be distinguished in four classifications: Additionally, "medical peer review" has been used by the American Medical Association to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in health care organizations, but also to

174-406: A "detailed written plan" that does not vary from one training to the next. In his book Life 102 , LGAT participant and former trainer Peter McWilliams describes the basic technique of marathon trainings as pressure/release and asserts that advertising uses pressure/release "all the time", as do " good cop/bad cop " police-interrogations and revival meetings . By spending approximately half

232-576: A 1982 peer-reviewed article published in Annual Review of Psychology , sought to summarize literature on the subject of LGATs and to examine their efficacy and their relationship with more standard psychology . This academic article describes and analyzes large group awareness training as influenced by the work of humanistic psychologists such as Carl Rogers , Abraham Maslow and Rollo May . LGATs as commercial trainings took many techniques from encounter groups . They existed alongside but "outside

290-469: A call for "objective and rigorous research" and stating that unknown variables might have accounted for some of the positive accounts. Psychologists advised borderline or psychotic patients not to participate. Psychological factors cited by academics include emotional " flooding ", catharsis , universality (identification with others), the instillation of hope, identification and what Sartre called "uncontested authorship". In 1989 researchers from

348-477: A certain threshold, and effective peer review requires a certain level of expertise. For non-professional writers, peer review feedback may be overlooked, thereby affecting its effectiveness. Elizabeth Ellis Miller, Cameron Mozafari, Justin Lohr and Jessica Enoch state, "While peer review is an integral part of writing classrooms, students often struggle to effectively engage in it." The authors illustrate some reasons for

406-557: A fundamental process in academic and professional writing, serving as a systematic means to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and credibility of scholarly work. However, despite its widespread use, it is one of the most scattered, inconsistent, and ambiguous practices associated with writing instruction. Many scholars questioning its effectiveness and specific methodologies. Critics of peer review in classrooms express concerns about its ineffectiveness due to students' lack of practice in giving constructive criticism or their limited expertise in

464-415: A longitudinal study comparing two groups of students (one majoring in writing and one not) to explore students' perceptions of authority. This research, involving extensive analysis of student texts, concludes that students majoring in non-writing fields tend to undervalue mandatory peer review in class, while those majoring in writing value classmates' comments more. This reflects that peer review feedback has

522-496: A means of critiquing each other's work, peer review is often framed as a way to build connection between students and help develop writers' identity. While widely used in English and composition classrooms, peer review has gained popularity in other disciplines that require writing as part of the curriculum including the social and natural sciences . Peer review in classrooms helps students become more invested in their work, and

580-448: A time and given an amount of time to present the topic that they have researched. Each speaker may or may not talk about the same topic but each speaker has something to gain or lose which can foster a competitive atmosphere. This approach allows speakers to present in a more personal tone while trying to appeal to the audience while explaining their topic. Peer seminars may be somewhat similar to what conference speakers do, however, there

638-457: A time. Though early definitions cited LGATs as featuring unusually long durations, more recent texts describe trainings lasting from a few hours to a few days. Forsyth and Corazzini cite Lieberman (1994) as suggesting "that at least 1.3 million Americans have taken part in LGAT sessions". In 2005 Rubinstein compared large-group awareness training to certain principles of cognitive therapy , such as

SECTION 10

#1732891764180

696-525: Is a type of engineering review. Technical peer reviews are a well defined review process for finding and fixing defects, conducted by a team of peers with assigned roles. Technical peer reviews are carried out by peers representing areas of life cycle affected by material being reviewed (usually limited to 6 or fewer people). Technical peer reviews are held within development phases, between milestone reviews, on completed products or completed portions of products. The European Union has been using peer review in

754-479: Is common in the field of health care, where it is usually called clinical peer review . Further, since peer review activity is commonly segmented by clinical discipline, there is also physician peer review, nursing peer review, dentistry peer review, etc. Many other professional fields have some level of peer review process: accounting, law, engineering (e.g., software peer review , technical peer review ), aviation, and even forest fire management. Peer review

812-586: Is incorporated into the California Health and Safety Code Section 57004. Peer review, or student peer assessment, is the method by which editors and writers work together in hopes of helping the author establish and further flesh out and develop their own writing. Peer review is widely used in secondary and post-secondary education as part of the writing process. This collaborative learning tool involves groups of students reviewing each other's work and providing feedback and suggestions for revision. Rather than

870-551: Is more time to present their points, and speakers can be interrupted by audience members to provide questions and feedback upon the topic or how well the speaker did in presenting their topic. Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. Peer review in writing is a pivotal component among various peer review mechanisms, often spearheaded by educators and involving student participation, particularly in academic settings. It constitutes

928-410: Is significantly impaired". Lieberman's 1987 study, funded partially by Lifespring, noted that 5 out of a sample of 289 participants experienced " stress reactions" including one "transitory psychotic episode". He commented: "Whether [these five] would have experienced such stress under other conditions cannot be answered. The clinical evidence, however, is that the reactions were directly attributable to

986-413: Is still a method used in classrooms to help students young and old learn how to revise. With evolving and changing technology, peer review will develop as well. New tools could help alter the process of peer review. Peer seminar is a method that involves a speaker that presents ideas to an audience that also acts as a "contest". To further elaborate, there are multiple speakers that are called out one at

1044-432: Is that peer review is not just about improving writing but about helping authors achieve their writing vision." Feedback from the majority of non-professional writers during peer review sessions often tends to be superficial, such as simple grammar corrections and questions. This precisely reflects the implication in the conclusion that the focus is only on improving writing skills. Meaningful peer review involves understanding

1102-479: Is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work ( peers ). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field . Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia , scholarly peer review is often used to determine an academic paper 's suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by

1160-502: Is the only U.S. state to mandate scientific peer review. In 1997, the Governor of California signed into law Senate Bill 1320 (Sher), Chapter 295, statutes of 1997, which mandates that, before any CalEPA Board, Department, or Office adopts a final version of a rule-making, the scientific findings, conclusions, and assumptions on which the proposed rule are based must be submitted for independent external scientific peer review. This requirement

1218-450: Is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field. Peer review is widely used for helping the academic publisher (that is, the editor-in-chief , the editorial board or the program committee ) decide whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected for official publication in an academic journal ,

SECTION 20

#1732891764180

1276-399: Is used in education to achieve certain learning objectives, particularly as a tool to reach higher order processes in the affective and cognitive domains as defined by Bloom's taxonomy . This may take a variety of forms, including closely mimicking the scholarly peer review processes used in science and medicine. Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing)

1334-464: The Landmark Forum , Lifespring, Actualizations, MSIA /Insight and PSI Seminars . In Cults in our Midst , Singer differentiated between the usage of the terms cult and Large Group Awareness Training , while pointing out some commonalities. Elsewhere she groups the two phenomena together, in that they both use a shared set of thought-reform techniques. Peer review Peer review

1392-529: The University of Connecticut received the "National Consultants to Management Award" from the American Psychological Association for their study: Evaluating a Large Group Awareness Training . Psychologist Chris Mathe has written in the interests of consumer-protection , encouraging potential attendees of LGATs to discuss such trainings with any current therapist or counselor, to examine

1450-467: The "Open Method of Co-ordination" of policies in the fields of active labour market policy since 1999. In 2004, a program of peer reviews started in social inclusion . Each program sponsors about eight peer review meetings in each year, in which a "host country" lays a given policy or initiative open to examination by half a dozen other countries and the relevant European-level NGOs . These usually meet over two days and include visits to local sites where

1508-813: The "claimed benefits" of Large Group Awareness Training actually take the form of "a kind of therapy placebo effect". Jarvis described Large Group Awareness Training as "educationally dubious" in the 2002 book The Theory & Practice of Teaching . Tapper mentions that "some [unspecified] large group-awareness training and psychotherapy groups" exemplify non-religious "cults". Benjamin criticizes LGAT groups for their high prices and spiritual subtleties. Specific techniques used in some Large Group Awareness Trainings may include: LGATs utilize such techniques during long sessions, sometimes called " marathon " sessions. Paglia describes "EST's Large Group Awareness Training": "Marathon, eight-hour sessions, in which [participants] were confined and harassed, supposedly led to

1566-751: The American Psychological Association (APA) subsequently rejected and strongly criticised the 1986 DIMPAC report, which included large group awareness trainings as one example of what it called " coercive persuasion ". In 1997 the APA characterized Singer's hypotheses as "uninformed speculations based on skewed data". It stated in 1987 that the report generally lacked "the scientific rigor and evenhanded critical approach necessary for APA imprimatur." The APA also stated that "the specific methods by which Drs. Singer and Benson have arrived at their conclusions have also been rejected by all serious scholars in

1624-845: The Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. “That’s boring.” This is also particularly evident in university classrooms, where the most common source of writing feedback during student years often comes from teachers, whose comments are often highly valued. Students may become influenced to provide research in line with the professor’s viewpoints, because of the teacher’s position of high authority. The effectiveness of feedback largely stems from its high authority. Benjamin Keating, in his article "A Good Development Thing: A Longitudinal Analysis of Peer Review and Authority in Undergraduate Writing," conducted

1682-490: The LGAT as referring to programs claiming "to increase self-awareness and facilitate constructive personal change". Coon further defines Large Group Awareness Training in his book Introduction to Psychology . Coon and Mitterer emphasize the commercial nature of several LGAT organizations. Lou Kilzer, writing in The Rocky Mountain News , identified Leadership Dynamics (in operation 1967–1973) as "the first of

1740-429: The author's writing intent, posing valuable questions and perspectives, and guiding the author to achieve their writing goals. Magda Tigchelaar compares peer review with self-assessment through an experiment that divided students into three groups: self-assessment, peer review, and no review. Across four writing projects, she observed changes in each group, with surprisingly results showing significant improvement only in

1798-462: The breakdown of conventional ego, after which they were in effect born again ." Finkelstein's 1982 article provides a detailed description of the structure and techniques of an Erhard Seminars Training event—techniques similar to those used in some group therapy and encounter groups. The academic textbook, Handbook of Group Psychotherapy regards Large Group Awareness Training organisations as "less open to leader differences", because they follow

LGAT - Misplaced Pages Continue

1856-431: The classroom environment at large. Understanding how their work is read by a diverse readership before it is graded by the teacher may also help students clarify ideas and understand how to persuasively reach different audience members via their writing. It also gives students professional experience that they might draw on later when asked to review the work of a colleague prior to publication. The process can also bolster

1914-426: The confidence of students on both sides of the process. It has been found that students are more positive than negative when reviewing their classmates' writing. Peer review can help students not get discouraged but rather feel determined to improve their writing. Critics of peer review in classrooms say that it can be ineffective due to students' lack of practice giving constructive criticism, or lack of expertise in

1972-571: The domains of academic psychology or psychiatry. Their measure of performance was consumer satisfaction and formal research was seldom pursued." The article describes an est training, and discusses the literature on the testimony of est graduates. It notes minor changes on psychological tests after the training and mentions anecdotal reports of psychiatric casualties among est trainees. The article considers how est compares to more standard psychotherapy techniques such as behavior therapy , group and existential psychotherapy before concluding with

2030-531: The feedback with either positive or negative attitudes towards the text, resulting in selective or biased feedback and review, further impacting their ability to objectively evaluate the article. It implies that subjective emotions may also affect the effectiveness of peer review feedback. Pamela Bedore and Brian O’Sullivan also hold a skeptical view of peer review in most writing contexts. The authors conclude, based on comparing different forms of peer review after systematic training at two universities, that "the crux

2088-645: The field." Singer sued the APA, and lost on June 17, 1994. Despite the APA rejection of her task-force's report, Singer remained in good standing among psychology researchers. Singer reworked much of the DIMPAC report material into the book Cults in Our Midst (1995, second edition: 2003), which she co-authored with Janja Lalich . Singer and Lalich state that "large group awareness trainings" tend to last at least four days and usually five. Their book mentions Erhard Seminars Training ("est") and similar undertakings, such as

2146-419: The genre psychologists call 'large group awareness training'". Leadership Dynamics directly or indirectly influenced several permutations of large-group transformation trainings. Werner Erhard (successively associated with Erhard Seminars Training (est or EST), WE&A and Landmark Education ) trained as an instructor with Mind Dynamics. Michael Langone notes that Erhard Seminars Training (est) became in

2204-764: The idea that people can change their lives by reinterpreting the way they view external circumstances. In the 1997 collection of essays Consumer Research: Postcards from the edge , discussing behavioral and economic studies, the authors contrast the "enclosed locations" used in Large Group Awareness Trainings with the relatively open environment of a " variety store ". The Handbook of Group Psychotherapy (1994) characterised LGAT as focusing on "philosophical, psychological and ethical issues" relating "to personal effectiveness , decision-making , personal responsibility , and commitment." Psychologist Dennis Coon's textbook, Psychology: A Journey , defines

2262-627: The inefficiency of peer review based on research conducted during peer review sessions in university classrooms: This research demonstrates that besides issues related to expertise, numerous objective factors contribute to students' poor performance in peer review sessions, resulting in feedback from peer reviewers that may not effectively assist authors. Additionally, this study highlights the influence of emotions in peer review sessions, suggesting that both peer reviewers and authors cannot completely eliminate emotions when providing and receiving feedback. This can lead to peer reviewers and authors approaching

2320-508: The large group awareness training." In 2003 the Vatican reported its study results about New Age training courses: New Age training courses (what used to be known as "Erhard seminar trainings" [EST] etc.) marry counter-cultural values with the mainstream need to succeed, inner satisfaction with outer success ... In Coon's psychology textbook ( Introduction to Psychology ) the author references many other studies, which postulate that many of

2378-540: The participants to make them more susceptible to the trainer's message, whether in the participants' best interests or not. Although extremely critical of some LGATs, McWilliams found positive value in others , asserting that they varied not in technique but in the application of technique. After commissioning a report in 1983 by the APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Methods of Persuasion and Control (DIMPAC) chaired by anti-cult psychologist Margaret Singer ,

LGAT - Misplaced Pages Continue

2436-424: The peer review process can be segmented into groups, where students present the papers to be reviewed, while other group members take notes and analyze them. Then, the review scope can be expanded to the entire class. This widens the review sources and further enhances the level of professionalism. With evolving and changing technology, peer review is also expected to evolve. New tools have the potential to transform

2494-441: The peer review process. Mimi Li discusses the effectiveness and feedback of an online peer review software used in their freshman writing class. Unlike traditional peer review methods commonly used in classrooms, the online peer review software offers a plethora of tools for editing articles, along with comprehensive guidance. For instance, it lists numerous questions peer reviewers can ask and allows for various comments to be added to

2552-471: The policy can be seen in operation. The meeting is preceded by the compilation of an expert report on which participating "peer countries" submit comments. The results are published on the web. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe , through UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews , uses peer review, referred to as "peer learning", to evaluate progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies. The State of California

2610-482: The popular mind the archetype for LGATs. While working for Holiday Magic , Lifespring founder John Hanley attended a course at Leadership Dynamics. Chris Mathe, at the time a PhD candidate in clinical psychology , wrote that most of the current commercial forms of Large Group Awareness Training as of 1999 were modeled after the Leadership Dynamics Institute. "Large Group Awareness Training",

2668-576: The principles underlying the program, and to determine pre-screening methods, the training of facilitators, the full cost of the training and of any suggested follow-up care. One study noted the many difficulties in evaluating LGATs, from proponents' explicit rejection of certain study models to difficulty in establishing a rigorous control group . In some cases, organizations under study have partially funded research into themselves. Not all professional researchers view LGATs favorably. Researchers such as psychologist Philip Cushman, for example, found that

2726-462: The process of rating clinical behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards. The clinical network believes it to be the most ideal method of guaranteeing that distributed exploration is dependable and that any clinical medicines that it advocates are protected and viable for individuals. Thus, the terminology has poor standardization and specificity, particularly as a database search term. In engineering , technical peer review

2784-419: The program he studied "consists of a pre-meditated attack on the self". A 1983 study on Lifespring found that "although participants often experience a heightened sense of well-being as a consequence of the training, the phenomenon is essentially pathological", meaning that, in the program studied, "the training systematically undermines ego functioning and promotes regression to the extent that reality testing

2842-579: The self-assessment group. The author's analysis suggests that self-assessment allows individuals to clearly understand the revision goals at each stage, as the author is the most familiar with their own writing. Thus, self-checking naturally follows a systematic and planned approach to revision. In contrast, the effectiveness of peer review is often limited due to the lack of structured feedback, characterized by scattered, meaningless summaries and evaluations that fail to meet author's expectations for revising their work. Stephanie Conner and Jennifer Gray highlight

2900-403: The time making a person feel bad and then suddenly reversing the feeling through effusive praise, the programs cause participants to experience a stress-reaction and an " endorphin high". McWilliams gives examples of various LGAT activities called processes with names such as "love bomb", "lifeboat", "cocktail party" and "cradling", which take place over many hours and days, physically exhausting

2958-509: The title LGAT . If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LGAT&oldid=1076296302 " Category : Disambiguation pages Hidden categories: Short description is different from Wikidata All article disambiguation pages All disambiguation pages Large-group awareness training LGAT programs may involve several hundred people at

SECTION 50

#1732891764180

3016-473: The type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e.g., medical peer review . It can also be used as a teaching tool to help students improve writing assignments. Henry Oldenburg (1619–1677) was a German-born British philosopher who is seen as the 'father' of modern scientific peer review. It developed over the following centuries with, for example, the journal Nature making it standard practice in 1973. The term "peer review"

3074-442: The value of most students' feedback during peer review. They argue that many peer review sessions fail to meet students' expectations, as students, even as reviewers themselves, feel uncertain about providing constructive feedback due to their lack of confidence in their own writing. The authors further offer numerous improvement strategies across various dimensions, such as course content and specific implementation steps. For instance,

3132-505: The writer or the editor to get much out of the activity. As a response to these concerns, instructors may provide examples, model peer review with the class, or focus on specific areas of feedback during the peer review process. Instructors may also experiment with in-class peer review vs. peer review as homework, or peer review using technologies afforded by learning management systems online. Students that are older can give better feedback to their peers, getting more out of peer review, but it

3190-616: The writing craft at large. Peer review can be problematic for developmental writers, particularly if students view their writing as inferior to others in the class as they may be unwilling to offer suggestions or ask other writers for help. Peer review can impact a student's opinion of themselves as well as others as sometimes students feel a personal connection to the work they have produced, which can also make them feel reluctant to receive or offer criticism. Teachers using peer review as an assignment can lead to rushed-through feedback by peers, using incorrect praise or criticism, thus not allowing

3248-488: The writing craft overall. Academic peer review has faced considerable criticism, with many studies highlighting inherent issues in the peer review process. The editorial peer review process has been found to be strongly biased against ‘negative studies,’ i.e. studies that do not work. This then biases the information base of medicine. Journals become biased against negative studies when values come into play. “Who wants to read something that doesn’t work?” asks Richard Smith in

3306-527: Was first used in the early 1970s. Since 2017 a monument to peer review is at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. In academia, peer review is used to inform decisions related to faculty advancement and tenure. A prototype professional peer review process

3364-547: Was recommended in the Ethics of the Physician written by Ishāq ibn ʻAlī al-Ruhāwī (854–931). He stated that a visiting physician had to make duplicate notes of a patient's condition on every visit. When the patient was cured or had died, the notes of the physician were examined by a local medical council of other physicians, who would decide whether the treatment had met the required standards of medical care. Professional peer review

#179820