Posts in category: Dating Tips, Guide and Advice

Alcoholic parents (now referred to as parents with alcohol use disorder or AUD) affect their children in many ways, some so profound that the kids never outgrow them. Here’s a look at the psychological, emotional, interpersonal, and behavioral effects of being raised by parents who are struggling with alcohol use.

Unclear Sense of Normalcy

Children whose parents use alcohol may not have had a good example to follow from their childhood, and may never have experienced traditional or harmonious family relationships. So adult children of parents with AUD may have to guess at what it means to be “normal.”

Because alcohol use is normalized in families with alcoholism, children can often struggle to distinguish between good role models and bad ones. As a result, many will end up feeling conflicted, confused, and self-conscious when they realize that drinking is not considered normal in other families.

Trust Issues

After growing up in an atmosphere where denial, lying, and keeping secrets may have been the norm, adult children can develop serious trust problems. Broken promises of the past tell them that trusting someone will backfire on them in the future.

If a child’s parent was mean or abusive when they were drunk, adult children can grow up with a fear of all angry people. They may spend their lives avoiding conflict or confrontation of any kind, worrying that it could turn violent.

Self-Judgement

Some adult children of parents with AUD take themselves very seriously, finding it extremely difficult to give themselves a break. If they had a tumultuous upbringing, they may have little self-worth and low self-esteem and can develop deep feelings of inadequacy.

Children of a parent with AUD may find themselves thinking they are different from other people and therefore not good enough. Consequently, they may avoid social situations, have difficulty making friends, and isolate themselves.

Follow Now: Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts / Amazon Music

Interpersonal Effects

Growing up with a parent who has an alcohol use disorder can change how an adult child interacts with others. It can cause problems in their relationships with friends, family members, and romantic partners.

In addition to judging themselves too harshly, some adult children of people with AUD constantly seek approval from others. They can become people-pleasers who are crushed if someone is not happy with them and live in fear of any kind of criticism.

Perhaps to avoid criticism or the anger of their parent with AUD, many children tend to become super-responsible or perfectionistic overachievers or workaholics. On the other hand, people often go in the opposite direction, mirroring the same bad behaviors they witnessed during childhood.

Behavioral Effects

Although evidence is conflicting, some behavioral changes appear to occur in children, adolescents, and adults who had a parent with AUD. Although the roles of genetics and childhood experiences are intertwined, these children may be more susceptible to substance use and other issues.

Alcohol Use

Some studies have shown that children of parents with AUD are more likely to misuse alcohol themselves in adolescence or adulthood. They may begin drinking alcohol at a younger age than other people and progress quickly to a problematic level of consumption. When both parents have AUD, teens may be at still higher risk.

Internal and External Behavior Issues

Children of parents who misuse alcohol are at higher risk for anxiety, depression, and unexplained physical symptoms (internalizing behaviors). They are also more likely to display rule-breaking, aggressiveness, and impulsivity (externalizing behaviors) in childhood.

In a study of more than 25,000 adults, those who had a parent with AUD remembered their childhoods as “difficult” and said they struggled with “bad memories” of their parent’s alcohol misuse. Some people experience this as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), like other people who had different traumatic childhood experiences.

Poor Academic Performance

Parents’ use of alcohol and teens’ lower performance in school have shown an association in research. This could be related in part to the behavior issues among children of parents with an AUD. It could also be complicated by other family circumstances.

How to Cope When Your Parent Misuses Alcohol

If you’re the child of a parent who has or had an alcohol use disorder or other substance use problems, seek out support, especially if you suspect it’s causing issues for you. Therapists and other mental health professionals with experience dealing with addiction can help.

Keep in Mind

Research suggests that about one in 10 children lives with a parent who has an alcohol use disorder, and about one in 5 adults lived with a person who used alcohol when they were growing up. Parents with an AUD may have difficulty providing children with a safe, loving environment, which can lead to long-term emotional and behavioral consequences. If your family is affected by alcohol use, it is important to seek help.

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) is an intelligence test first published in 1955 and designed to measure intelligence in adults and older adolescents. The test was designed by psychologist David Wechsler, who believed that intelligence was made up of a number of different mental abilities rather than a single general intelligence factor.

Below, learn more about the history of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, the different versions of the test, how it is used, and its benefits and limitations.

History of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale

Wechsler was dissatisfied with what he believed were the limitations of the Stanford-Binet intelligence test. Among his chief complaints about that test was the single score that emerged, its emphasis on timed tasks, and the fact that the test had been designed specifically for children and was therefore invalid for adults.

As a result, Wechsler devised a new test during the 1930s, known as the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scales. The test was later revised and became known as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, or WAIS.

WAIS vs. Stanford Binet

One interesting thing to note is that Alfred Binet, the developer of the world’s first intelligence test, also believed that intelligence was far too complex a subject to be sufficiently described by a single number.

The goal of his original test was to help identify children who needed specialized help in school. Binet felt that a variety of individual factors, including a child’s level of motivation, could influence test scores.

In a sense, Wechsler’s test was a return to many of the ideas that Binet had also espoused. Instead of giving a single overall score, the WAIS provides a profile of the test-taker’s overall strengths and weaknesses.

One benefit of this approach is that the pattern of scores can also provide useful information. For example, scoring high in certain areas but low in others might indicate the presence of a specific learning disability.

How the WAIS Is Scored

Like the traditional Stanford-Binet test, the WAIS also provides an overall score. However, Wechsler utilized a different approach to calculating this number. As you might remember from reading about the history of intelligence testing, scores on the early Stanford-Binet were derived from dividing mental age by chronological age.

On the WAIS, Wechsler instead compared the scores of the test-taker to those of others in their general age group. The average score is fixed at 100, with approximately two-thirds of all scores falling somewhere between 85 and 115.

Versions of the WAIS

There have been four different versions of the WAIS over the years. These include:

• WAIS (1955): The original test was a revision of the Wechsler-Bellvue Intelligence Scale, a test that was first released in 1939.
• WAIS-R (1981): The first revision of the test added new norms but relied on validity data from the original test. It also included six verbal and five information subtests and provided a verbal IQ score, performance IQ score, and overall IQ score.
• WAIS-III (1997): This test version included seven verbal and six performance subtests. Along with providing scores for verbal, performance, and overall IQ, the test also includes secondary scores for perceptual organization, processing speed, verbal comprehension, and working memory.
• WAIS-IV (2008): This version of the WAIS consists of 10 main subtests and five supplemental tests. The core subtests are used to obtain two overall summary scores, including a Full-Scale IQ and a General Ability Index. Similar to the WAIS-IV, individual index scores are provided for perceptual reasoning, processing speed, verbal comprehension, and working memory.
• WAIS-5 (2024): This version consists of 7 primary subtests, which are used to calculate the full-scale IQ score, and 10 secondary subtests for expanded clinical use.

Current Version: The WAIS-5

The current version of the WAIS will be released in the fall of 2024 and includes seven core subtests as well as ten supplemental subtests. Additionally, the WAIS-5 test provides five major index scores.

The WAIS surpassed the Stanford-Binet in use during the 1960s. Today, it is the most frequently used intelligence test worldwide for both adolescents and adults.

Benefits of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale is widely used for a number of reasons. Some benefits include the following:

• The test is well-established and has good test-retest reliability. 
• It accurately measures a person’s current intellectual status and functioning.
• Research suggests that the WAIS can be a useful clinical tool for assessing mild, moderate, and severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Limitations of the Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale

While the WAIS can be a useful clinical tool, it does have some limitations and drawbacks. Some of these include:

• The test does not assess non-academic skills that can play an important role in success and well-being, such as motivation, creativity, emotional intelligence, and social skills.
• The test can provide a relative measure, but it does not offer a full view of a person’s abilities, talents, or potential. 
• The tests cannot be utilized with individuals with vision, auditory, or motor impairments.
• Versions of the test for non-English speakers are limited. There are currently two Spanish versions (one for Spanish speakers from Spain and one for Spanish speakers from Mexico).
• Scores on subtests may also differ for neurodivergent adults. People may score higher or lower on certain subtests depending on their unique traits and characteristics.
• It may not be suitable for older adults, especially those over the age of 89.

Current Uses

Today, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale continues to be one of the most widely used clinical instruments. In addition to being used to measure adult and adolescent intelligence, clinicians use the test to:

• Assess cognitive functioning in people with psychiatric conditions
• Assess functioning in people with brain injury
• Evaluating patterns of brain dysfunction
• Diagnostic purposes

Final Thoughts

The Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale can be a useful tool for clinicians to assess cognitive functioning. It may be used to assess intelligence, but it is frequently utilized to look at cognitive abilities in people who have experienced brain trauma or psychiatric illness. If you are interested in taking the WAIS, it is crucial for it to be given by a trained and experienced administrator who is familiar with the standardized testing and scoring protocols.

Does it ever seem like the office is a hub for budding romances? Plenty of our favorite fictional couples certainly started out as office flirtations or coworker crushes. Think Jim and Pam from “The Office,” Mulder and Scully from “The X-Files,” or David and Patrick from “Schitt’s Creek.” 

After all, most adults spend a third of their lives on the job; it’s little wonder that sparks might fly with a cute colleague. While such romances are common, dating a coworker can disrupt office etiquette and create challenges in your work and love life. Some workplaces even have strict guidelines prohibiting office romances.

While online dating has changed how people meet romantic partners, the workplace still ranks as one of the top five places for heterosexual couples to meet. One survey found that more than 60% of U.S. adults have dated a co-worker at some point during their career. While the same survey found that 43% of these office romances ultimately ended in marriage, that doesn’t mean that workplace relationships don’t have the potential to create problems.

Assessing the Worthiness of the Relationship

The first challenge before you date someone in the workplace is perhaps the most important; deciding whether it’s worth the risk. Jumping into a whirlwind romance might seem romantic; the reality can be much less gratifying if you later realize you’re all wrong for each other.

There are plenty of great reasons why people decide that dating in the workplace is worthwhile. After all, you spend the bulk of your day interacting with them, so you probably feel comfortable with them and have gotten to know them pretty well. Your initial romantic first impressions can be good predictors of how successful a relationship might be. 

Because you work together, you also have a well of shared experiences to draw you together. Such connections can give you plenty of stories (and inside jokes) that can help you bond outside of work. 

But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t seriously consider some of the risks of dating a colleague. Potential challenges you might face while dating a coworker include:

• Workplace gossip
• Perceptions of favortism
• Problems with human resources
• Conflict or discomfort following a breakup
• Negative effects on your work
• Risks to your job

Understanding Formal Policy

Let’s say you’ve weighed the risks and decided that, yes, this person is worth pursuing. You’re interested and they’re interested, so what’s stopping you? 

Even if the relationship has plenty of promise, you also need to consider your company’s formal workplace dating policies. 

“I know it sounds corny, but…my biggest piece of advice is read the handbook! Everything you need to know about relationships at work should be explained in detail, including any legal issues that might arise due to your actions or lack thereof,” advises Tramelle D. Jones, a career and resume coach, wellness expert, and founder of TDJ Consulting.

Office romances may be forbidden in some workplaces, while others stipulate that a relationship must be disclosed to a manager or human resources. Always check to find out the official policy before starting a relationship to avoid possible repercussions.

It’s important to note that employers should utilize special discretion for LGBTQIA+ workplace relationships. Company policy may require people to disclose their relationship to HR, but this can be complicated for employees who do not want other people at work to know their sexual orientation.

According to the Society for Human Resource Management, workplaces should treat LGBTQIA+ employees the same as other employees but utilize discretion to avoid disclosing a person’s identity.

Sexual Harassment and Discrimination

Workplace dating isn’t illegal–but sexual harassment and discrimination are. Dating a coworker isn’t a legal violation as long as the relationship does not violate federal rules against sexual harassment. But it’s that potential risk of harassment accusations and lawsuits that concern employers. Plus, there is the worry of any potential legal ramifications they may face if the relationship turns sour. 

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a relationship crosses the line if it involves:

• Unwanted sexual advances
• Conduct that constitutes sexual harassment
• Interferes with a person’s work
• Creates a hostile, intimidating, or offensive work environment
• Involves requests for sexual favors

Taking It Slow

Even after you’ve weighed the risks and checked company policy, it’s still important to proceed with care after you’ve decided to date your coworker.

Rushing into a romance with someone at work can be a recipe for disaster. To build a solid romantic relationship (and avoid risking your professional relationship), it’s important to take things slow and build a solid foundation first.

For example, if you move too quickly, things could become very awkward at work if you suddenly realize they aren’t a good match for you. On the other hand, you might find yourself so besotted that it’s hard to focus on your work–which might put both of your jobs in peril.

Talking it out and making a plan is the best way to avoid problems. Discuss how you’ll approach the relationship, why taking things slowly is important, and how you’ll keep things strictly professional at the office.

Maintaining Professionalism

In addition to taking it slow, it is essential to set some ground rules. Maintaining professionalism is key. That means establishing and maintaining some clear boundaries between your personal and professional lives.

“People can maintain professionalism in the workplace while dating if they have the emotional stability and resilience to handle a breakup,” says Frank Thewes, LCSW, a therapist and owner of Path Forward Therapy.  “If either party can’t handle that extreme outcome, then maybe the relationship has to be reconsidered.”

Skip the Office PDA

Keep it strictly professional in the workplace. That means no public displays of affection or discussions of personal matters while at work. Treat each other the same way you’d treat colleagues when you are on the clock or in the presence of your officemates. (And lay off any pet names when you’re at work).

Keep Firm Boundaries

Create a clear separation between your careers and your personal lives. That means not talking about your personal life at work and vice versa. 

“Get clear about the nature of your relationship with your partner and ensure that both of you are on the same page regarding your expectations and boundaries,” Jones suggests.

Strong boundaries can minimize the risk of any conflicts of interest arising that might jeopardize your job or relationship. Plus, it helps support a healthier work-life balance.

Don’t Show Favoritism

Be cautious about treating your partner and coworkers equally. “If possible, avoid discussing your relationship with other colleagues or involving them in personal matters to avoid any unfair judgment from others in the workplace,” Jones suggests.

 If your coworkers know that you are dating, they are likely to feel resentful if they think that either of you is getting special treatment based on your relationship status. Circumvent the issue by being fair and equitable to everyone.

Dealing With Challenges

Dating a coworker is more common than you might think, but that doesn’t mean it’s always easy. Some challenges that can throw a wrench in your work life and your love life include:

• Unwanted attention and office gossip
• Difficulty staying professional
• Personal conflicts that bleed over into the workplace
• Workplace conflicts that boil over into arguments during your personal time together
• Awkwardness or discomfort from colleagues
• Jealousy or anger from coworkers who think the relationship is leading to favoritism
• Difficult power dynamics, particularly if one partner is in a position of authority over the other
• Increased stress from trying to juggle workplace obligations, the relationship, and the need to keep things strictly professional
• Distress and conflict if the relationship ends in a breakup

Not every workplace romance will end in a long-term commitment, so be professional if things don’t work out. If the relationship ends in a breakup, you need to keep your eye on the bigger picture. Focus on your work, and don’t let any personal drama lead to disruptions in the workplace. 

While you might be tempted to avoid (or seek out) your ex at work, don’t. It might not be easy, but it’s important to treat them just like you would any other coworker. “Conflicts happen in any relationship, but it’s essential to handle them maturely and avoid arguing or discussing personal matters in the workplace,” Jones says.

Legal Considerations

There are a number of legal considerations to keep in mind before dating a coworker. These include the potential for:

• Sexual harassment: The relationship must be 100% consensual. Unwelcome comments, advances, or requests may constitute sexual harassment.
• Policy violations: While a company might not fully prohibit all workplace dating, they may have certain rules against dating subordinates.
• Privacy issues: You may have certain expectations of privacy, but it can be difficult to maintain on a day-to-day basis when you are romantically involved with a colleague. 
• Conflicts of interest: Relationships that involve a supervisor and a subordinate can create a conflict of interest, including the potential for abuse of power.
• Discrimination and retaliation: If the relationship ends, it may lead to claims of discrimination and retaliation if one person feels they are being treated unfairly.

“Most companies are concerned about workplace relationships, especially between a supervisor and a subordinate, since romantic relationships can get messy!” says Jones. “It’s the organization’s responsibility to monitor violations of company policy to prevent situations from escalating into sexual harassment claims, conflicts of interest, and/or hostile work environment lawsuits,”

Thanks to the #MeToo movement, more and more people are aware of the sort of abuses that people often experience in the workplace. That includes the often subtle ways that people may feel pressured into a relationship with a coworker.

The issue gets thornier when a subordinate employee dates someone higher up the chain of command, such as someone dating their boss. First, there is the concern that the person may have entered the relationship due to pressure or fear of retaliation if they say no. This puts the organization at risk of lawsuits due to sexual harassment creating a hostile work environment.

Plus, other employees might perceive favoritism or believe that the subordinate employee is engaging in the relationship as a way to gain professional favors or advancement. Such perceptions can lead to office gossip and undermine a person’s professional accomplishments.

Before you ask your coworker out, make sure that you’re both on the same page in terms of interest. Neither of you should be pressured or obligated to say yes to a date. Pay attention to social cues and consider the factors that might be in play, including power dynamics and workplace roles. Make sure the other person feels safe and able to turn you down if they are not interested.

Seeking Support and Advice

You may also find it helpful to talk to others about the potential relationship and what it might mean for your personal and professional life. When caught in that initial thrill of infatuation, it’s easy to get wrapped up in positive feelings about the other person and become less objective about the situation.

Consider talking to a good friend, career expert, mental health professional, or even a lawyer. 

Research suggests that how people take advice about workplace romances depends significantly on the advice itself. People are more likely to listen to advice that is positive and supportive but less receptive to advice that is unsolicited, pessimistic, vague, or critical.

If you are currently dating a coworker and it is affecting your work life in unexpected ways, consider reaching out to a mental health professional. They can help you work on establishing and maintaining boundaries. You can also develop coping strategies that will help you manage your interpersonal relationships, stress, and work-life balance more effectively.

Keep in Mind

While more and more people are making love connections online, the workplace is still one of the most common settings for romance to flourish. There’s no doubt it can be a place to meet someone you share a close connection with–but there’s also a lot of potential for things to go wrong.

Before you broach the possibility of a relationship, spend some time thinking about the personal and professional implications of an office romance. Does the other person welcome this interest? Do they feel safe turning you down? If the answer to either of those questions is anything less than an emphatic “Yes,” then a potential romance is a no-go. 

Also, consider what it might mean for your career and mental health. Could dating your coworker harm your career? Will it make it more challenging to interact with your colleagues? And how will you respond if the relationship doesn’t work out? Only you can answer those questions, but it’s worth considering the risks and benefits before deciding if dating your coworker is the right choice.

Love can be found in many places, and plenty of people have found lasting love with a colleague. Just make sure you’ve weighed the risks and consulted the official policies before you decide if this is the right choice for you.

In August of 1971, psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues created an experiment to determine the impacts of being a prisoner or prison guard. The Stanford Prison Experiment, also known as the Zimbardo Prison Experiment, went on to become one of the best-known studies in psychology’s history—and one of the most controversial.

This study has long been a staple in textbooks, articles, psychology classes, and even movies. Learn what it entailed, what was learned, and the criticisms that have called the experiment’s scientific merits and value into question.

Purpose of the Stanford Prison Experiment

Zimbardo was a former classmate of the psychologist Stanley Milgram. Milgram is best known for his famous obedience experiment, and Zimbardo was interested in expanding upon Milgram’s research. He wanted to further investigate the impact of situational variables on human behavior.

Specifically, the researchers wanted to know how participants would react when placed in a simulated prison environment. They wondered if physically and psychologically healthy people who knew they were participating in an experiment would change their behavior in a prison-like setting.

Participants in the Stanford Prison Experiment

To carry out the experiment, researchers set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University’s psychology building. They then selected 24 undergraduate students to play the roles of both prisoners and guards.

Participants were chosen from a larger group of 70 volunteers based on having no criminal background, no psychological issues, and no significant medical conditions. Each volunteer agreed to participate in the Stanford Prison Experiment for one to two weeks in exchange for $15 a day.

Setting and Procedures

The simulated prison included three six-by-nine-foot prison cells. Each cell held three prisoners and included three cots. Other rooms across from the cells were utilized for the jail guards and warden. One tiny space was designated as the solitary confinement room, and yet another small room served as the prison yard.

The 24 volunteers were randomly assigned to either the prisoner or guard group. Prisoners were to remain in the mock prison 24 hours a day during the study. Guards were assigned to work in three-man teams for eight-hour shifts. After each shift, they were allowed to return to their homes until their next shift.

Results of the Stanford Prison Experiment

So what happened in the Zimbardo experiment? While originally slated to last 14 days, it had to be stopped after just six due to what was happening to the student participants. The guards became abusive and the prisoners began to show signs of extreme stress and anxiety.

It was noted that:

• While the prisoners and guards were allowed to interact in any way they wanted, the interactions were hostile or even dehumanizing.
• The guards began to become aggressive and abusive toward the prisoners while the prisoners became passive and depressed.
• Five of the prisoners began to experience severe negative emotions, including crying and acute anxiety, and had to be released from the study early.

Even the researchers themselves began to lose sight of the reality of the situation. Zimbardo, who acted as the prison warden, overlooked the abusive behavior of the jail guards until graduate student Christina Maslach voiced objections to the conditions in the simulated prison and the morality of continuing the experiment.

Impact of the Zimbardo Prison Experiment

The experiment became famous and was widely cited in textbooks and other publications. According to Zimbardo and his colleagues, the Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrated the powerful role that the situation can play in human behavior.

Because the guards were placed in a position of power, they began to behave in ways they would not usually act in their everyday lives or other situations. The prisoners, placed in a situation where they had no real control, became submissive and depressed.

In 2011, the Stanford Alumni Magazine featured a retrospective of the Stanford Prison Experiment in honor of the experiment’s 40th anniversary. The article contained interviews with several people involved, including Zimbardo and other researchers as well as some of the participants.

In the interviews, Richard Yacco, one of the prisoners in the experiment, suggested that the experiment demonstrated the power that societal roles and expectations can play in a person’s behavior.

Criticisms of the Stanford Prison Experiment

In the years since the experiment was conducted, there have been a number of critiques of the study. Some of these include:

Ethical Issues

The Stanford Prison Experiment is frequently cited as an example of unethical research. It could not be replicated by researchers today because it fails to meet the standards established by numerous ethical codes, including the Code of Ethics of the American Psychological Association.

Lack of Generalizability

Other critics suggest that the study lacks generalizability due to a variety of factors. The unrepresentative sample of participants (mostly white and middle-class males) makes it difficult to apply the results to a wider population.

Lack of Realism

The Zimbardo Prison Experiment is also criticized for its lack of ecological validity. Ecological validity refers to the degree of realism with which a simulated experimental setup matches the real-world situation it seeks to emulate.

While the researchers did their best to recreate a prison setting, it is simply not possible to perfectly mimic all the environmental and situational variables of prison life. Because there may have been factors related to the setting and situation that influenced how the participants behaved, it may not truly represent what might happen outside of the lab.

Recent Criticisms

More recent examination of the experiment’s archives and interviews with participants have revealed major issues with the research method, design, and procedures used. Together, these call the study’s validity, value, and even authenticity into question.

Among the issues described:

• One participant suggested that he faked a breakdown so he could leave the experiment because he was worried about failing his classes.
• Other participants also reported altering their behavior in a way designed to “help” the experiment.
• Evidence suggests that the experimenters encouraged the guards’ behavior and played a role in fostering the abusive actions of the guards.

In 2019, the journal American Psychologist published an article debunking the famed experiment. It detailed the study’s lack of scientific merit and concluded that the Stanford Prison Experiment was “an incredibly flawed study that should have died an early death.”

In a statement posted on the experiment’s official website, Zimbardo maintains that these criticisms do not undermine the main conclusion of the study—that situational forces can alter individual actions both in positive and negative ways.