Welcome to the Psychiatric Hotline. If you are obsessive-compulsive, please press 1 repeatedly.

If you are co-dependent, please ask someone to press 2. If you have multiple personalities, please press 3, 4, 5, and 6. If you are paranoid-delusional, we know who you are and what you want. Just stay on the line so we can trace the call. If you are schizophrenic, listen carefully and a little voice will tell you which number to press. If you are depressed, it doesn't matter which number you press. No one will answer. If you are delusional and occasionally hallucinate, please be aware that the thing you are holding on the side of your head is alive and about to bite off your ear. Two elderly couples were enjoying friendly conversation when one of the men asked the other, "Fred, how was the memory clinic you went to last month?" "Outstanding," Fred replied. "They taught us all the latest psychological techiniques visualization, association - it made a huge difference for me." "That's great! What was the name of the clinic?" Fred went blank. He thought and thought, but couldn't remember. Then a smile broke across his face and he asked, "What do you call that red flower with the long stem and thorns?" "You mean a rose?" "Yes, that's it!" He turned to his wife. . ."Rose, what was the name of that clinic?" Once I had multiple personalities, but now we are feeling well. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute. I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure. The best thing about being schizophrenic is that I'm never alone. Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get you! Hypochondria is the only illness that I don't have. I've always been a hypochondriac. As a little boy, I'd eat my M&M's one by one with a glass of water. Psychiatrist to his nurse: "Just say we're very busy. Don't keep saying 'It's a madhouse.'" A guy goes in to see a psychologist. He says, "It seems I can't make any friends. Can you help me, you fat slob?" Why is psychoanalysis a lot quicker for a man then for a women? Because when it's time to go back to childhood, a man is already there.

A psychologist returned from a confrence in Aspen lodge, where all the psychologists were permited to ski for free. Her husband asked her, "How it went?". She replied, "Fine, but I've never seen so many Freudians slips." Two psychologists meet at their twentieth college reunion. One of them looks like he just graduated, while the other psychologist looks old, worried and withered. The older looking one asks the other, "What's your secret? Listening to other people's problems every day, all day long, for years on end, has made an old man of me." The younger looking one replies, "Who listens?" When the new patient was settled comfortably on the couch, the physiatrist began his therapy session, "I'm not aware of your problem," the doctor said. "So perhaps, you should start at the very beginning." "Of course." replied the patient. "In the beginning, I created the Heavens and the Earth..." In a psychiatrist's waiting room two patients are having a conversation. One says to the other, "Why are you here?" The second answers, "I'm Napoleon, so the doctor told me to come here." The first is curious and asks, "How do you know that you're Napoleon?" The second responds, "God told me I was." At this point, a patient on the other side of the room shouts, "NO I DIDN'T!" A man who thinks he's George Washington has been seeing a psychiatrist. He finishes up one session by telling him, "Tomorrow, we'll cross the Delaware and surprise them when they least expect it." As soon as he's gone, the psychiatrist picks up the phone and says, "King George, this is Benedict Arnold. I have the plans." Joe has been seeing a psychoanalyst for four years for treatment of the fear that he had monsters under his bed. It had been years since he had gotten a good night's sleep. Furthermore, his progress was very poor, and he knew it. So, one day he stops seeing the psychoanalyst and decides to try something different. A few weeks later, Joe's former psychoanalyst meets his old client in the supermarket, and is surprised to find him looking well-rested, energetic, and cheerful. "Doc!" Joe says, "It's amazing! I'm cured!" "That's great news!" the psychoanalyst says. "you seem to be doing much better. How?" "I went to see another doctor," Joe says enthusiastically, "and he cured me in just ONE session!" "One?!" the psychoanalyst asks incredulously. "Yeah," continues Joe, "my new doctor is a behaviorist."

"A behaviorist?" the psychoanalyst asks. "How did he cure you in one session?" "Oh, easy," says Joe. "He told me to cut the legs off of my bed." A psychologist was walking along a Hawaiian beach when he kicked a bottle poking up through the sand. Opening it, he was astonished to see a cloud of smoke and a genie smiling at him. "For your kindness," the genie said, "I will grant you one wish!" The psychologist paused, laughed, and replied, "I have always wanted a road from Hawaii to California." The genie grimaced, thought for a few minutes and said, "Listen, I'm sorry, but I can't do that! Think of all the pilings needed to hold up the highway and how long they'd have to be to reach the bottom of the ocean. Think of all the pavement. That's too much to ask." "OK," the psychologist said, not wanting to be unreasonable. "I'm a psychologist. Make me understand my patients. What makes them laugh and cry, why are they temperamental, why are they so difficult to get along with, what do they really want? Basically, teach me to understand what makes them tick!" The genie paused, and then sighed, "Did you want two lanes or four?" One behaviorist to another after lovemaking: "Darling, that was wonderful for you. How was it for me?" How do you tell the difference between the staff and the inmates at a psychiatric hospital? The patients get better and leave. Not everyone of the patients thinks he is God. The staff have the keys! Doctor, doctor, I keep thinking I am a set of curtains! Pull yourself together, man! Doctor, doctor, I keep thinking I'm a bell. Well, just go home and if the feeling persists, give me a ring. Doctor, doctor, people tell me I'm a wheelbarrow. Don't let people push you around.

Doctor, doctor, I keep thinking I'm invisible. Who said that?! Doctor, doctor, nobody understands me. What do you mean by that? Doctor, doctor, People keep ignoring me! Next! Doctor, doctor, No one believes a word I say. Tell me the truth now, what's your REAL problem? Doctor, doctor, I feel like a pack of cards. I'll deal with you later. Doctor, doctor, people keep telling me I'm ugly! Lay on the couch, face down. Doctor, Doctor, I can't stop stealing things. Take these pills for a week; if that doesn't work I'll have a color TV! Doctor, doctor, I keep thinking I'm a spoon. Sit there and don't stir. Doctor, doctor, I'm manic-depressive. Calm down. Cheer up. Clam down. Cheer up. Calm... Doctor, doctor, I keep trying to get into fights. And how long have you had this complaint? Who wants to know? Doctor, doctor, I can't concentrate, one minute I'm ok, and the next minute, I'm blank! And how long have you had this complaint? What complaint? Doctor, doctor, I feel so short! No problem. Hop up on the couch. Doctor, doctor, I feel like a small bucket. You do look a little pail. Doctor, doctor, I've only got 59 seconds to live. Wait a minute please. Doctor, I have a ringing in my ears. Don't answer!

Patient: Doctor, you must help me. I'm under such a lot of stress, I keep losing my temper with people. Doctor: Tell me about your problem. Patient: I JUST DID, DIDN'T I, YOU STUPID BASTARD!!! Doctor, Doctor, I think I'm a bridge. What's come over you? Oh, two cars, a large truck and a coach. Doctor, Doctor, I think I'm a cat. How long has this been going on? Oh, since I was a kitten! Doctor, doctor, I keep thinking I'm a dog. Lie down on the couch and I'll examine you. I can't, I'm not allowed on the furniture. How psychiatrists do it... Psychiatrists do it on the couch. Psychiatrists think they do it. Psychiatrists do it for at least fifty dollars per session. How many psychologists does it take to change a light bulb? None. The light bulb will change itself when it's ready. Just one, but the light bulb really has to want to change. Just one, but it takes nine visits. How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb? "How long have you been having this phantasy?" "Why does the light bulb necessarily have to change?" One, but he must consult the DSM-IV. How many psychoanalysts does it take to change a light bulb? "How many do you think it takes?" Sir, What is the secret of your success?" "Two words"

"And, Sir, what are they?" "Right decisions." "And how do you make right decisions?" "One word." "And, What is that?" "Experience." "And how do you get Experience?" "Two words" "And, Sir, what are they?" "Wrong decisions." Participants" wanted A Stanford Medical research group advertised for participants in a study of obsessivecompulsive disorder. They were looking for therapy clients who had been diagnosed with this disorder. The response was gratifying; they got 3,000 responses about three days after the ad came out. All from the same person. [Original title: "Pavlov's birds" - obviously not from a psycholgist] An MIT student spent an entire summer going to the Harvard football field every day wearing a black and white striped shirt, walking up and down the field for ten or fifteen minutes throwing birdseed all over the field, blowing a whistle and then walking off the field. At the end of the summer, it came time for the first Harvard home football game, the referee walked onto the field and blew the whistle, and the game had to be delayed for a half hour to wait for the birds to get off of the field. The guy wrote his thesis on this, and graduated. Three patients at a psychiatric clinic are up for release. The shrink informs them that they will have to pass a simple test. Asking the first patient: Q. How much is two plus two? A: Blue. At which the kind doctor calls in the orderly to escort the patient back to his room.

Turning to the second patient, he asks what is six minus three? To which the patient replies: Square. Once again the orderly is called in to remove the patient. Turning to the third and last patient, he asks, "How much is five plus five?" The patient answers very confidentally: Ten. The doctor, amazed then inquires how did you figure it out? The patient: "Easy.Blue multiplied by square equals ten." -800-PSYCH Hello, Welcome to the Psychiatric Hotline. If you are obsessive-compulsive, please press 1 repeatedly. If you are co-dependent, please ask someone to press 2. If you have multiple personalities, please press 3, 4, 5 and 6. If you are paranoid-delusional, we know who you are and what you want. Just stay on the line so we can trace the call. If you are schizophrenic, listen carefully and a little voice will tell you which number to press. If you are delusional, press 7 and your call will be transferred to the mother ship. If you have a nervous disorder, please fidget with the # key until a representative comes on the line. If you are dyslexic, press 696969696969. If you have amnesia, press 8 and state your name, address, phone, date of birth, social security number and your mother's maiden name. If you have post-traumatic stress disorder, slowly and carefully press 000. If you have short-term memory loss, press 9. If you have short-term memory loss, press 9. If you have short-term memory loss, press 9. If you have short-term memory loss, press 9. If you are menopausal, hang up, turn on the fan, lie down & cry. You won't be crazy forever. If you have a masochistic complex, please press "0" for the operator. There are 200 calls ahead of you. If you are depressed, it doesn't matter which number you press. No one will answer.
Daily Affirmations for the Unstable I no longer need to punish, deceive or compromise myself. Unless, of course, I want to stay employed. A good scapegoat is nearly as welcome as a solution to the problem. As I let go of my feelings of guilt, I can get in touch with my Inner Sociopath. I have the power to channel my imagination into ever-soaring levels of suspicion and paranoia. Today, I will gladly share my experience and advice, for there are no sweeter words than "I told you so." I need not suffer in silence while I can still moan, whimper and complain.

As I learn the innermost secrets of the people around me, they reward me in many ways to keep me quiet. I assume full responsibility for my actions, except the ones that are someone else's fault. I honor my personality flaws, for without them I would have no personality at all. Joan of Arc heard voices too. When someone hurts me, forgiveness is cheaper than a lawsuit, but not nearly as gratifying. The first step is to say nice things about myself. The second, to do nice things for myself. The third, to find someone to buy me nice things. As I learn to trust the universe, I no longer need to carry a gun. Just for today, I will not sit in my living room all day watching TV. Instead I will move my TV into the bedroom. Who can I blame for my own problems? Give me just a minute... I'll find someone. Why should I waste my time reliving the past when I can spend it worrying about the future? I will find humor in my everyday life by looking for people I can laugh at. I am willing to make the mistakes if someone else is willing to learn from them.

Christmas Carols for the Psychiatrically Challenged SCHIZOPHRENIA - Do You Hear What I Hear? MULTIPLE PERSONALITY - We Three Queens Disoriented Are. DEMENTIA - I Think I'll Be Home For Christmas. NARCISSISTIC - Hark The Herald Angels Sing (About Me) MANIA - Deck the Halls and Walls and House and Lawn and Streets and Stores and Office and Town ...or Deck the Halls and Spare No Expense!

PARANOIA - Santa Claus is Coming To Get Me. PERSONALITY DISORDER - You Better Watch Out, I'm Gonna Cry, I'm Gonna Pout, then MAYBE I'll tell you why. OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE - Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell Rock, Jingle Bell... PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE - On the First Day of Christmas My True Love Gave to Me (and then took it all away). Comedy Collective - Dora by Kim Morrissey Although it's very funny, this play is also a suggested text for the Open University in England. In this scene, Freud can find many, many words for a man's member, and no word at all for 'toilet.' Freud on Seuss The following list of phrases and their definitions might help you understand the mysterious language of science (including psychology) and medicine. These special phrases are also applicable to anyone reading a PhD dissertation or academic paper. "IT HAS LONG BEEN KNOWN"... I didn't look up the original reference. "A DEFINITE TREND IS EVIDENT"... These data are practically meaningless. "WHILE IT HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE DEFINITE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS"... An unsuccessful experiment, but I still hope to get it published. "THREE OF THE SAMPLES WERE CHOSEN FOR DETAILED STUDY"... The other results didn't make any sense. "TYPICAL RESULTS ARE SHOWN"... This is the prettiest graph. "THESE RESULTS WILL BE IN A SUBSEQUENT REPORT"... I might get around to this sometime, if pushed/funded. "IN MY EXPERIENCE"... Once "IN CASE AFTER CASE"... Twice "IN A SERIES OF CASES"... Thrice

"IT IS BELIEVED THAT"... I think. "IT IS GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT"... A couple of others think so, too. "IT MIGHT BE ARGUED THAT" ... I have such a good answer for this objection that I now raise it. [Thanks to Brendan Keefe.] "CORRECT WITHIN AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"... Wrong. "ACCORD1NG TO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS"... Rumour has it. "A STATISTICALLY-ORIENTED PROJECTION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE FINDINGS"... A wild guess. "A CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF OBTAINABLE DATA"... Three pages of notes were obliterated when I knocked over a glass of beer. "IT IS CLEAR THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL WORK WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THIS PHENOMENON OCCURS"... I don't understand it "AFTER ADDITIONAL STUDY BY MY COLLEAGUES"... They don't understand it either. "THANKS ARE DUE TO JOE BLOGGS FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THE EXPERIMENT AND TO CINDY ADAMS FOR VALUABLE DISCUSSIONS"... Mr. Bloggs did the work and Ms. Adams explained to me what it meant. "A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT AREA FOR EXPLORATORY STUDY"... A totally useless topic selected by my committee. "IN AN IMPORTANT PAPER BY SMITH AND JONES, ..." This obscure paper by Smith and Jones agrees supports my theory. "IT IS HOPED THAT THIS WILL STIMULATE FURTHER WORK IN THIS FIELD" ... This paper isn't very good, but neither are any others on this miserable subject. [Thanks to Brendan Keefe.] "IT IS HOPED THAT THIS STUDY WILL STIMULATE FURTHER 1NVESTIGATION IN THIS FIELD"... I quit. To: Editor, Archives of General Psychiatry Dear Sir, Madame, or Other:

Enclosed is our latest version of MS #85-02-22-RRRRR, that is, the re-re-re-revised version of our paper. Choke on it. We have again rewritten the entire manuscript from start to finish. We even changed the goddamned running head! Hopefully we have suffered enough by now to satisfy even your bloodthirsty reviewers. I shall skip the usual point-by-point description of every single change we made in response to the critiques. After all, it is fairly clear that your reviewers are less interested in details of scientific procedure than in working out their personality problems and sexual frustrations by seeking some sort of demented glee in the sadistic and arbitrary exercise of tyrannical power over hapless authors like ourselves who happen to fall into their clutches. We do understand that, in view of the misanthropic psychopaths you have on your editorial board, you need to keep sending them papers, for if they weren't reviewing manuscripts they'd probably be out mugging old ladies or clubbing baby seals to death. Still, from this batch of reviewers, C was clearly the most hostile, and we request that you not ask her or him to review this revision. Indeed, we have mailed letter bombs to four or five people we suspected of being reviewer C, so if you send the manuscript back to them the review process could be unduly delayed. Some of the reviewers comments we couldn't do anything about. For example, if (as reviewer C suggested), several of my ancestry were indeed drawn from other species, it is too late to change that. Other suggestions were implemented, however, and the paper has improved and benefited. Thus, you suggested that we shorten the manuscript by 5 pages, and we were able to do this very effectively by altering the margins and printing the paper in a different font with a smaller typeface. We agree with you that the paper is much better this way. One perplexing problem was dealing with suggestions #13-28 by reviewer B. As you may recall (that is, if you even bother reading the reviews before doing your decision letter), that reviewer listed 16 works the he/she felt we should cite in this paper. These were on a variety of different topics, none of which had any relevance to our work that we could see. Indeed, one was an essay on the Spanish-American War from a high school literary magazine. the only common thread was that all 16 were by the same author, presumably someone reviewer B greatly admires and feels should be more widely cited. To handle this, we have modified the introduction and added, after the review of relevant literature, a subsection entitled "Review of Irrelevant Literature" that discusses these articles and also duly addresses some of the more asinine suggestions by other reviewers. We hope that you will be pleased with this revision and finally recognize how urgently deserving of publication this work is. If not, then you are an unscrupulous, depraved monster with no shred of human decency. You ought to be in a cage. May whatever heritage you come from be the butt of the next round of ethnic jokes. If you do accept it, however, we wish to thank you for your patience and wisdom throughout this process and to express our appreciation of you scholarly insights. To repay you, we would be happy to review some manuscripts for you; please send us the next manuscript that any of these reviewers sends to your journal.

Assuming you accept this paper, we would also like to add a footnote acknowledging your help with this manuscript and to point out that we liked this paper much better the way we originally wrote it but you held the editorial shotgun to our heads and forced us to chop, reshuffle, restate, hedge, expand, shorten, and in general convert a meaty paper into stir-fried vegetables. We couldn't or wouldn't, have done it without your input. Sincerely, Dear Dr. Thank you for your thoughtful response to my decision letter concerning the abovereferenced piece of excrement. I have asked several experts who specialize in the area of research you dabble in to have a look at your pathetic little submission, and their reviews are enclosed. I shall not waste my LaserJet ink reiterating the details of their reviews, but please allow me to highlight some of the more urgent points of contention they raise: 1. Reviewer A suggests that you cite his work EXCLUSIVELY in the introduction. He has asked me to remind you that he spells his name with a final "e" (i.e., Scumbage), not as you have referenced him in the last version. 2. Reviewer C indicates that the discussion can be shortened by at least 5 pages. Given the fact that the present Discussion is only three pages long, I am not certain how to advise you. Perhaps you might consider eliminating all speculation and original ideas. 3. Reviewer D has asked that you consider adding her as a co-author. Although she has not directly contributed to the manuscript, she has made numerous comments that have, in her view, significantly improved the paper. Specifically, she believes that her suggestions concerning the reorganization of the acknowledgments paragraph were especially important. Please note that she spells her name with an em-dash, and not with the customary hyphen. 4. Reviewer B has asked that I inform you that, even though his suggestions were not mentioned in my decision letter, this doesn't mean that he is an imbecile. 5. My own reading of the manuscript indicates that the following problems remain: a. By "running head," we do not mean a picture of your son's face with legs attached. Please provide a four- or five-word title for the paper that summarizes the report's most important point. May I suggest, "Much Ado About Nothing"? b. Please make certain that you have adhered to APA stylebook guidelines for publication format. Please direct your attention to the section entitled, "Proper Format for an Insignificant Paper" (1995, p.46).

c. Please submit any revision of the paper on plain, blank stationery. Submitting the article on Yale University letterhead will not increase your chances of having the article accepted for publication. d. Please doublecheck the manuscript for spelling and grammatical errors. Our experience at the Archives is that "cycle-logical" slips through most spell-check programs undetected. e. Although I am not a quantitative scientist, it is my understanding that the "F" in F-test does not stand for "f___ing". Please correct the manuscript accordingly. Yours sincerely, Prof. Art Kives If your original submission had been as articulate as your most recent letter, we might have avoided this interchange. It is too bad that tenure and promotion committees at your university do not have access to authors' correspondence with editors, for it is clear that you would be promoted on the basis of your wit alone. Unfortunately, it's the publication that counts, and I'm sorry to say that the Archives is not prepared to accept this revision. We would be perfectly ambivalent about receiving a ninth revision from you. I Libretto for "Il Destino di Grant Applicationio," by Giuseppe Linguini
Cast (in order of vocal appearance) Alfredo, a professor ........................... Baritone Wu Li, a post-doc ............................. Tenor Kathy, another post-doc ........................ Alto Nicolette, Alfredo's secretary ................. Soprano Adriana, Alfredo's wife ........................ Soprano Bubba, Alfredo's son ........................... Tenor Julieta, Alfredo's daughter .................... Soprano Stephano, Scientific Review Administrator ...... Bass Erminio, another professor...................... Bass

Act I, Alfredo's Office: The curtain rises showing Alfredo sitting in his office with two post-docs, working on a manuscript which has been rejected by Nature. In a dramatic opening aria, they lament the fact that the reviewers found the manuscript unexciting ("I reviewers sono malto stupidi"). Nicolette, the secretary arrives with a box of NIH grant applications for Alfredo to review. Alfredo opens it, and finding only 12 grant applications, rejoices. He is joined by the two post-docs and the secretary in a quartet in which they sing of the virtues of having to review only 12 applications ("Il lighto loado"). Their happiness soon turns to sorrow when Alfredo discovers a note indicating that he is primary reviewer on an additional 18 applications which will arrive at a later date ("Il grande boxo di granti"). The four lament the twist of fate, Murphy's law, and the Peter Principle. Alfredo, realizing that he will have no time to spend with his lab group or family for the next 6 weeks, sadly departs for home carrying the box of applications.

Act II - Scene 1, Alfredo's office: One month later, Alfredo is still hard at work on the applications, having completed only 4, and these were the short R15 applications. He sings a sad aria, reflecting on the fact that the Scientific Review Administrator wants the triage list the next day ("Il listo crappo"). Nicolette enters with an envelope from NIH. Alfredo, thinking it contains yet another supplement, tosses it onto a pile, and tries to find his place in the application he was reading. Just then, Wu Li enters with some important data that needs to be published immediately, before the competitors beat them to it. They sing a duet ("La publicazione o il scoopo") in which Alfredo laments that he has no time to help write the manuscript as he really must get through 26 more applications before the meeting next week. Wu Li leaves, and Alfredo returns to the grant application, only to be interrupted by Kathy. She is distraught that she hasn't gotten a raise in the two years since she has been with Alfredo. He promises her a large raise if his own application is funded, explaining that he is waiting for the summary statement ("Il sheeto pinko"). After their duet, Kathy leaves and Alfredo returns once again to the application. Within a minute, he jumps out of his seat and grabs the envelope he hastily tossed onto his desk, realizing that it is the long-awaited summary statement ("La posta junko il sheeto pinko"). Trembling, Alfredo tears open the envelope and lets out a cry upon seeing the score, which is clearly not in the fundable range. He sings a moving aria lamenting the lack of sufficient funding for basic science ("Mio granto finito"). Unable to concentrate anymore, Alfredo goes home. Scene 2, Alfredo's home: Later that night, Alfredo arrives home. His wife and children are ecstatic that Alfredo has come home before they have gone to sleep. However, their happiness is short-lived as they learn the reason for his surprise homecoming. His family is not sympathetic to the fact that only a small number of people actually get their grant applications funded, and are upset that Alfredo's application was only considered 'excellent' ("Papa un nincompoopo"). Disheartened, Alfredo sits down at his desk and begins to read an application. However, just as at work, he can't read for more than a minute until his children or wife interrupt him for something. This continues for a couple of hours, at which point Alfredo has nearly finished reading an entire page of the application, but unfortunately falls asleep before getting to the next page. Act III, A Holiday Inn in Valhalla, home of the Gods and Goddesses of NIH: The scene opens to reveal a large table surrounded by serious looking men and women. Alfredo is among the mortals, who have been invited to Valhalla to decide the fate of 137 grant applications. At the side of the room are the Gods and Goddesses of NIH, the program officers of the various agencies, dressed in white tunics. They are feeding from a large tray of grapes, and drinking decaf coffee. Stephano, the Scientific Review Administrator begins the meeting with an hour-long aria about the grant review process and the need for confidentiality ("Non asko, non tello"). The first grant application to be reviewed is one with Alfredo as the primary reviewer. Alfredo likes this grant application since it describes an imaginative series of experiments that concern an important but not well studied biological question ("Se succeede, il Nobel Prizo"). Furthermore, this application described all of the key points in a single page, the limit of Alfredo's attention span with all of the interruptions he gets. His enthusiasm is countered by the other reviewer in what is probably the most famous aria of the opera ("Non hypothesiso, non preliminary dato").

Other reviewers join in with other comments regarding the lack of independence of the applicant, the lack of feasibility studies, and the general observation that the area must not be very important or else others would be working on it. Finally, the Grants Technical Assistant rises and joins in the singing ("Givmi il floppi disko"). Everybody in the room finally joins in except for the Gods and Goddesses, who have moved from the tray of grapes to a large table filled with melon balls, which they eat with toothpicks, and a man in a Holiday Inn uniform who is restocking the toothpicks. As it is clear that no new comments have been made for at least 45 minutes, a vote is finally called for, and in a dramatic moment, Alfredo sings out "1.0", while the other reviewers vote for a worse score ("Il granto non-competitivo"), finally arriving at a consensus of 2.0. During the aria discussing the score, the man in a Holiday Inn uniform becomes noticeably distressed and begins consuming vast quantities of coffee, until he collapses just as the aria ends. One of the NIH Goddesses identifies the man as Erminio, the applicant of the grant that just went down the tubes. Even though Erminio is fatally poisoned, he is still able to sing a moving aria reflecting on the weaknesses of the current grant review system ("Il reviewers screwed-upo"). The opera ends with the reviewers placing Erminio's lifeless body in the boxes that hold the discarded grant applications, and covering him with glossy photos of his data. As the curtain is being slowly lowered, one of the reviewers comments that it's a good thing the application wasn't given a really bad score, or who knows what the applicant would have done. Psycholinguistics to the resku Having chosen English as the preferred language in the EEC, the European Parliament has commissioned a feasibility study in ways of improving efficiency in communications between Government departments. "European officials have often pointed out that English spelling is unnecessarily difficult, for example: cough, plough, rough, through and thorough. What is clearly needed is a phased programme of changes to iron out these anomalies. The programme would, of course, be administered by a committee staff at top level by participating nations. In the first year, for example, the committee would suggest using 's' instead of the soft 'c'. Sertainly sivil servants in all sities would resieve this news with job. Then the hard 'c' could be replaced by 'k' sinse both letters are pronounsed alike. Not only would this klear up konfusion in the minds of klerikal workers, but typewriters kould be made with one less letter. There would be growing enthusiasm when in the sekond year, it was announsed that the troublesome 'ph' would henseforth be writtne 'f'. This would make words like fotograf' twenty persent shorter in print. In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reash the stage where more komplikated shanges are possible. Governments would enkourage the removal of double leters whish have always been a deterent to akurate speling.

We would al agre that the horible mes of silent 'e's in the languag is disgrasful. Therefor we kould drop them and kontinu to read and writ as though nothing had hapend. By this tim it would be four years sins the skem began and peopl would be reseptive to steps sutsh as replasing 'th' by 'z'. Perhaps zen ze funktion of 'w' kould be taken on by 'v', vitsh is, after al, half a 'w'. Shortly after zis, ze unesesary 'o' kould be dropd from vords kontaining 'ou'. Similar arguments vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. Kontinuing zis proses yer after yer, ve vud eventuli hav a reli sensibl riten styl. After tventi yers zer vud be no mor trubls, difikultis and evrivun vud find it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drems of the Guvermnt vud finali hav kum tru." Why God never received a PhD: 1. He had only one major publication. 2. It wasn't published in a refereed journal. 3. Some even doubt he wrote it by himself. 4. It may be true that he created the world, but what has he done since then? 5. His cooperative efforts have been quite limited. 6. The scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results. 7. He never applied to the ethics board for permission to use human subjects. 8. When one experiment went awry he tried to cover it by drowning his subjects. 9. When subjects didn't behave as predicted, he deleted them from the sample. 10. He rarely came to class, just told students to read the book. 11. Some say he had his son teach the class. 12. He expelled his first two students for learning. 13. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students failed his tests. 14. His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountain top, without a hotel or heated pool.
Revised from anonymous original with help from George Quattrone

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:38:40 GMT From: Jim Chinnis (jchinnis@earthlink.net) Subject: Opportunity... Dear Fellow Scientist: This letter has been around the world at least seven times. It has been to many major conferences. Now it has come to you. It will bring you good fortune. This is true even if you don't believe it. But you must follow these instructions:

include in your next journal article the citations below. remove the first citation from the list and add a citation to your journal article at the bottom. make ten copies and send them to colleagues.

Within one year, you will be cited up to 10,000 times! This will amaze your fellow faculty, assure your promotion and improve your sex life. In addition, you will bring joy to many colleagues. Do not break the reference loop, but send this letter on today. Dr. H. received this letter and within a year after passing it on she was elected to the National Academy of Sciences. Prof. M. threw this letter away and was denied tenure. In Japan, Dr. I. received this letter and put it aside. His article for Trans. on Nephrology was rejected. He found the letter and passed it on, and his article was published that year in the New England Journal of Medicine. In the Midwest, Prof. K. failed to pass on the letter, and in a budget cutback his entire department was eliminated. This could happen to you if you break the chain of citations. 1. Miller, J. (1992). Post-modern neo-cubism and the wave theory of light. Journal of Cognitive Artifacts, 8, 113-117. 2. Johnson, S. (1991). Micturition in the canid family: the irresistable pull of the hydrant. Physics Quarterly, 33, 203-220. 3. Anderson, R. (1990). Your place or mine?: an empirical comparison of two models of human mating behavior. Psychology Yesterday 12, 63-77. 4. David, E. (1994). Modern Approaches to Chaotic Heuristic Optimization: Means of Analyzing Non-Linear Intelligent Networks with Emergent Symbolic Structure. (doctoral dissertation, University of California at Santa Royale El Camino del Rey Mar Vista bythe-sea.)
How to identify scientists: Chem Prof: Wears a white lab coat. This may actually be clean but does not have to be. P-chem profs have a brand new coat that has never been in the lab; polymer chem profs have strange glop on their coat, and intro chem profs have acid holes. Physics Prof: Wears blue jeans and a flannel shirt. May sometimes forget to wear shirt altogether. If a professor is wearing blue jeans and suspenders, ten to one he is a physicist. Physics profs often have German accents, but this is not a distingushing characteristic. Be wary of psychologists with fake Viennese accents which can sound similar to the unwary. Bio Prof: Sometimes wears a lab coat, though usually this is the sign of a biochemist. Marine biologists walk around in hip boots for no explainable reason, even in the middle of winter. They are apt to wear grey slacks and smell like fish, as opposed to most biologists, who smell strongly of formalin. Microbiology instructors go around in spotless white coats, refuse to drink beer on tap, and wipe all their silverware before using it. Never loan money to a bio prof, no matter how much he asks. CS Prof: Most CS profs are from India or Pakistan. You can tell by the gestures and accents. This is not a bad thing, though many

of the American CS professors tend to pick up Indian accents which confounds more specific identification. Like mushrooms, CS students only come out at night, and, if not Indian, tend to take on a pasty appearance. CS professors do not use computers and therefore can be easily identified by their comparative good health with respect to their students. Many CS professors do not even know how to use computers, and are actually mathematicians or psychologists in disguise. Avoid these people. Math Prof: Math profs are like physics professors except without any practical bent. A math professor will have only books and pencils in his office, as opposed to the piles of broken equipment that physicists keep. Mathematicians scorn the use of computers and calculators and often have difficulty splitting bills in restaurants. The easy way to identify a mathematician is by the common use of the phrases "It can be shown that..." and "Is left as an exercise to the student..." Psych Prof: Psychologists are not real scientists, and can be easily identified by their screams of protest whenever anyone questions whether psychology is a science. Psych people have beady little eyes and don't laugh at jokes about psychology. If you are not sure whether a person is a scientist or a comparative religion instructor, he is probably a psychologist.

The Professor's Wish A grad student, a post-doc, and a professor are walking through a city park and they find an antique oil lamp. They rub it and a Genie comes out in a puff of smoke. The Genie says, "I usually only grant three wishes, so I'll give each of you just one." "Me first! Me first!" says the grad student. "I want to be in the Bahamas, driving a speedboat with a gorgeous woman who sunbathes topless." Poof! He's gone. "Me next! Me next!" says the post-doc. "I want to be in Hawaii, relaxing on the beach with a professional hula dancer on one side and a Mai Tai on the other." Poof! He's gone. "You're next," the Genie says to the professor. The professor says, "I want those guys back in the lab after lunch." Where to Publish Your Paper 1) If you understand it and can prove it, then send it to a journal of mathematics. 2) If you understand it, but can't prove it, then send it to a physics journal. 3) If you can't understand it, but can prove it, then send it to an economics journal. 4) If you can neither understand it nor prove it, then send it to a psychology journal. 5) If it attempts to make something important out of something trivial, then send it to a journal of education. 6) If it attempts to make something trivial out of some-thing important, send it to a journal of metaphysics.
One out of every four people is suffering from some form of mental illness. Check three friends. If they're OK, then it's you.

From the following sixteen facts, try to determine: A. Who drinks the water? B. Who owns the zebra? 1. There are five houses. 2. The Englishman lives in the red house 3. The Spaniard owns a dog 4. Coffee is drunk in the green house 5. The Ukranian drinks tea 6. The green house is immediately to the right of the ivory house 7. The Old Gold smoker owns snails 8. Kools are smoked in the yellow house 9. Milk is drunk in the middle house 10. The Norwegian lives in the first house 11. The Chesterfields smoker lives next door to the man with the fox 12. Kools are smoked in the house next to the house with the horse 13. The Lucky Strike smoker drinks orange juice 14. The Japanese smokes Parliaments 15. The Norwegian lives next door to the blue house. 16. In each house there is one nationality, one pet, one cigarette smoker and one liquid drink. President Kennedy solved this problem in 21 minutes. The Advertising Director of a famous national magazine took over 2 hours to solve it...how about you? Love Test Do NOT read ahead!!!! It will ruin it. Questions first... 1. You are walking to your boy/girlfriend's house.. There are two roads to get there. One is a straight path to take you there quickly, but is very plain and boring. The other is significantly longer but is full of wonderful sights and interesting things. Which one do you take to get your significant other's house, short or long? 2. On the way you see 2 rose bushes. One is full of red roses, the other full of white. You decide to pick 20 roses for your boy/girlfriend, of any color combination. What number of white and red do you pick? (you can pick all of one or any combo of the two) 3. You finally get to their house. A family member answers the door. You can have them get your boy/girlfriend or go get them yourself. Which do you do? 4. You go up to you boy/girlfriend's room, but nobody is there. You decide to leave the roses. Do you leave them by the windowsill or on the bed? 5. Later, it's time for bed. You and your boy/girlfriend go to sleep in separate rooms. In the morning when its time to wake up you go in their room and check on them. When you arrive, are they awake or asleep? 6. Now it's time to go back home. Do you take the short, plain road orthe longer, more interesting road? * * * * * *

* * * * * * Now the Answers 1. The road represents your attitude towards falling in love. If you take the short road, you fall in love quickly and easily. If you take the long road, you take your time and do not fall in love as easily. 2. The number of red roses represents how much you give in a relationship, while the number of white represents what you expect in return. For example, if you chose 18 red and 2 white, you give 90% and expect 10% in return. 3. This question represents your attitude towards handling relationship problems. If you asked the family member to get your significant other, then you like to avoid problems and hope that they will solve themselves. If you went to get them yourself, then you are a more direct person and like to work out problems immediately. 4. The placement of roses determines how much you like to see your boy/girlfriend. Placing them on the bed means you like to see them a lot, while placing them on the windowsill means that you are alright with not seeing them as much. 5. This is representative of your attitude towards their personality. If you find them asleep, you love your boy/girlfriend the way they are. If you find them awake, you expect them to change for you. 6. The road to home tells how long you stay in love with someone. If you chose the short road, you fall out of love easily. If you chose the longer one, you will tend to stay in love for a long time. QUIZ Read the top before you scroll down................... You are in a desert. You have with you the following five animals: A lion, a cow, a horse, a sheep, and a monkey. To escape the desert you are going to have to get rid of one of your animals. Which one do you drop? (You can use whatever logic you like BUT > keep track of which animal is discarded when!) You have 4 animals left. The desert is burning up! It goes on for miles. Sand is everywhere. You realize, to get out, you are going to have drop another animal. Which do you drop? You have 3 animals left. Walk, walk, walk. Hot, hot, hot. Disaster! The Oasis that you were looking for is dried up! You have no choice but to drop another animal. You have 2 animals left. Ok, it's a long hot walk. You can see the edge of the desert way on the horizon. Unfortunately, you can only leave the desert with ONE animal. Which one do you drop and which one do you keep?

Before looking at the answers below, make sure you know which animal you dropped in what order. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * These answers are based on Japanese Archetypes. The desert represents a hardship. The animals represent . . . Lion = Pride Monkey = Your Children Sheep = friendship Cow = Basic Needs Horse = Your Passion.

So, in the face of hardship, you will sacrifice each of these things in turn. Your last animal represents that thing which you cling to at the expense of all others.

QUIZ Answer each question in order without peeking ahead!! Read the following questions, imagine the scenes in your mind, and write down the FIRST thing that you visualize. Do not think about the questions excessively. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. You are walking in the woods. Who are you walking with? You are walking in the woods. You see an animal. What kind of animal is it? What interaction takes place between you and the animal? You walk deeper into the woods. You enter a clearing and before you is your dream house. Describe its size. Is your dream house surrounded by a fence? You enter the house. You walk to the dining area and see the dining room table. Describe what you see on and around the table. You exit the house through the back door. Lying in the grass is a cup. What material is the cup made of (ceramic, glass, paper, etc.)? What do you do with the cup?

9. You walk to the edge of the property, where you find yourself standing at the edge of a body of water. What type of body of water is it (creek, river, ocean, etc...) 10. How will you cross the water? This has been a relational psychology test. The answers given to the questions have been shown to have a relevance to values and ideals that we hold in our personal lives. The analysis follows: 1. The person who you are walking with is the most important person in your life. 2. The size of the animal is representative of your perception of the size of your problems. 3. The severity of the interaction you have with the animal is representative of how you deal with your problems (passive, aggressive). 4. The size of your dream home is representative of the size of your ambition to resolve your problems. 5. No fence is indicative of an open personality. People are welcome at all times. The presence of a fence is more indicative of a closed personality. You'd prefer people to not drop by unannounced. 6. If your answer did not include food, people, or flowers then your are generally unhappy. 7. The durability of the material with which the cup is made is representative of the perceived durability of your relationship with the person from number 1. For example, styrofoam, plastic, and paper are disposable; Styrofoam, paper, and glass (ceramics) are not durable; and metal and plastic are durable. 8. Your disposition of the cup is representative of your attitude toward the person in number 1. 9. The size of the body of water is representative of the size of your sexual desire. 10. How wet you get in crossing the water is indicative of the relative importance of your sex life. QUIZ: HOW SMART ARE YOU? READ this sentence: FINISHED FILES ARE THE RESULT OF YEARS OF SCIENTIFIC STUDY COMBINED WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF YEARS. Now count aloud the F's in that sentence. Count them ONLY ONCE; do not go back and count them again.

scroll down...

ANSWER There are six F's in the sentence. One of average intelligence finds three of them. If you spotted four, you're above average. If you got five, you can turn your nose at most anybody. If you caught six, you are a genius. There is no catch. Useful Research Phrases and what they Really Mean "It has long been known" . . . [I didn't look up the original reference.] "A definite trend is evident" . . . [These data are practically meaningless.] "Of great theoretical and practical importance" . . . [Interesting to me.] "While it has not been possible to provide definite answers to these questions" . . . [An unsuccessful experiment but I still have to get it published.] "Three of the samples were chosen for detailed study" . . . [The results of the others didn't make any sense.] "Typical results are shown" . . . [The best results are shown.] "These results will be shown in a subsequent report" . . . [I might get around to this sometime if I'm pushed.] "The most reliable results are those obtained by Jones" . . . [He was my graduate assistant.] "It is believed that" . . . [I think] "It is generally believed that" . . . [A couple of other guys think so, too.] "It is clear that much additional work will be required before a complete understanding occurs" . . . [I don't understand it.] "Correct within an order of magnitude" . . . [Wrong] "It is hoped that this study will stimulate further investigations in this field" . . . [This is a lousy paper, but so are all the others on this

miserable topic.] "Thanks are due to Joe Blotz for assistance with the experiment and to George Frink for valuable assistance" . . . [Blotz did the work and Frink explained to me what it meant.] "A careful analysis of obtainable data" . . . [Three pages of notes were obliterated when I knocked over a glass of beer.]

What did the sign on Pavlov's lab door say? Please knock. DON'T ring the bell.

HOW TO WRITE GOOD by Frank L. Visco My several years in the word game have learnt me several rules: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Always avoid alliteration. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with. Avoid cliches like the plague. (They're old hat.) Employ the vernacular. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary. It is wrong to ever split an infinitive. Contractions aren't necessary. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos. One should never generalize. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson once said: "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." Comparisons are as bad as cliches. Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous. Profanity sucks. Be more or less specific. Understatement is always best. Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement. One-word sentences? Eliminate. Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake. The passive voice is to be avoided. Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms. Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed. Who needs rhetorical questions?

A conclusion is simply the place where you got tired of thinking.

Psychology is actually biology. Biology is actually chemistry. Chemistry is actually physics. And physics is actually math.

When I first started college, the Dean came in and said "Good Morning" to all of us. When we echoed back to him, he responded "Ah, you're Freshmen." He explained. "When you walk in and say good morning, and they say good morning back, it's Freshmen. When they put their newspapers down and open their books, it's Sophomores. When they look up so they can see the instructor over the tops of the newspapers, it's juniors. When they put their feet up on the desks and keep reading, it's seniors." "When you walk in and say good morning, and they write it down, it's graduate students."