StopLGAT's wrote:
"As far as I'm aware these are psychology methods that are long-discredited and now deemed unethical (or at least ethically dubious) - even in an academic experimental environment with the informed consent of the subjects and not involving sensitive personal information. These are probably on par with the horrific experiments that were once conducted in psychiatric hospitals early in the 20th century and before. Electric shock therapy, lobotomies, and such.
However trained professionals (at least ought to) know what methods are suitable for use and what are no longer acceptable. For example a GU Doctor knows that you don't treat syphilis with mercury vapour - even though that was thought the best cure a few hundred years ago."
This is a reasonable assumption, but my own experience in the human development field informs me that it is not true. "Sensitivity Training" did seem to be a big bust in the 60's, 70's, in that these programs resulted in numerous suicides among participants. Groups in which suicides occurred were very diverse and included American schoolchildren subjected to what was called the "Minnesota Model", and Japanese corporate executives ('78-81), NTL T-group programs. To the best of my knowledge, these tragedies were not investigated.
I am aware of many executive development and coach training programs being offered in universities, and corporate contexts that incorporate "sensitivity training/encounter group"-style exercises. I would say that anytime you see the terms, "transformational", "transpersonal", "integrative", "holistic", or "ontological" attached to a development program, you can count on it containing elements of LGAT.
I am happy to provide you with a list of the names of these providers.
Bakkagirl
"As far as I'm aware these are psychology methods that are long-discredited and now deemed unethical (or at least ethically dubious) - even in an academic experimental environment with the informed consent of the subjects and not involving sensitive personal information. These are probably on par with the horrific experiments that were once conducted in psychiatric hospitals early in the 20th century and before. Electric shock therapy, lobotomies, and such.
However trained professionals (at least ought to) know what methods are suitable for use and what are no longer acceptable. For example a GU Doctor knows that you don't treat syphilis with mercury vapour - even though that was thought the best cure a few hundred years ago."
This is a reasonable assumption, but my own experience in the human development field informs me that it is not true. "Sensitivity Training" did seem to be a big bust in the 60's, 70's, in that these programs resulted in numerous suicides among participants. Groups in which suicides occurred were very diverse and included American schoolchildren subjected to what was called the "Minnesota Model", and Japanese corporate executives ('78-81), NTL T-group programs. To the best of my knowledge, these tragedies were not investigated.
I am aware of many executive development and coach training programs being offered in universities, and corporate contexts that incorporate "sensitivity training/encounter group"-style exercises. I would say that anytime you see the terms, "transformational", "transpersonal", "integrative", "holistic", or "ontological" attached to a development program, you can count on it containing elements of LGAT.
I am happy to provide you with a list of the names of these providers.
Bakkagirl
