Assessing reliability: Critical corrections for a critical examination of the Rorschach Comprehensive System.

J. M. Wood et al (see records 84-17678 and 84-17679) argued that the Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) lacked many essential pieces of reliability data and that the available evidence indicated that scoring reliability may be little better than chance. Contrary to their assertions, the author suggests why rater agreement should focus on responses rather than summary scores, how field reliability moves away from testing CS scoring principles, and how no psychometric distinction exists between a percentage correct and a percentage agreement index. Also, after reviewing problematic qualities of kappa, a meta-analysis of published data is presented indicating that the CS has excellent chance-corrected interrater reliability (Estimated κ, M?=?.86, range?=?.72–.96). Finally, the author notes that Wood et al ignored at least 17 CS studies of test-retest reliability that contain many of the important data they said were missing. The author concluded that Wood et al's erroneous assertions about the more elementary topic of reliability make suspect their assertions about the more complex topic of validity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Clinical Judgment in Science: Reply.

Replies to comments published by M. S. Schulz and R. J. Waldinger (see record 2005-11115-010), J. M. Wood and M. T. Nezworski (see record 2005-11115-011), and H. N. Garb and W. M. Grove (see record 2005-11115-012) on the original article by D. Westen and J. Weinberger (see record 2004-19091-002). Schulz and Waldinger (2005) make the important point that just as researchers can capitalize on the knowledge of experienced clinical observers through aggregation, they can aggregate the judgment of lay observers in assessing phenomena such as emotion. The reason, as they articulate, is that skills such as "reading" emotion from facial expression, tone of voice, posture, and the constellation of cues provided in everyday life are an area of expertise for most people, one that is now often called social or emotional intelligence. As psychometricians have known for years, one can increase reliability in many different ways. The comments by Wood and Nezworski (2005) and Garb and Grove (2005) do not address our central thesis--namely, the importance of distinguishing two meanings of clinical. The point of the sentence around which Wood and Nezworski (2005) build their comment was simply that the same biases widely attributed to clinicians are common in scientists as well--a point for which we would be delighted to take credit, but it is one that was actually made much more elegantly by the historian and philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn (1962). The authors respond to Wood and Nezworski's (2005) specific concerns about misrepresentation. In their comment, Garb and Grove (2005) challenge us to document our view that anticlinician prejudice is widespread among many academic clinical psychologists. As research on implicit prejudice suggests, surveys of academic clinical psychologists might indicate little about their implicit attitudes, as evident in Garb and Grove's apparent lack of recognition of the offensive nature of comparing a clinician's attempt to revise his or her understanding when the patient says "I don't think what you just said is right" to astrology and Barnum effects. We appreciate Garb and Grove's (2005) point about potential differential effects of training and experience on reliability and validity of clinical judgment. The data they cite are important and bear consideration. We would offer two caveats, however. Finally, we cannot help but note that this series of comments and our reply to them provide a prototypical example of "clinical" judgment in science--that is, subjective, informal aggregation of data, often leading to a "gestalt" judgment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the origins of sex differences in social behavior: Darwinian and non-Darwinian accounts.

Responds to the comments made by A. H. Eagly (1997), D. G. Cornell (1997), and M. Schaller (1997) on the author's 1996 article comparing the explanations given by social role theory and evolutionary psychology on human sex differences. The author restates the position adopted in his article and believes that there are certain misunderstandings from which the comments stem. He believes that one major point of confusion is between ultimate explanations (of origins) and proximate explanations (of causation). The author further believes that Schaller is thinking of causation or development and clarifies the original position he took in his article. The author believes that Eagly is focusing on proximate issues and he argues against that view, especially when discussing aggression, though he concedes her theories are worth considering in discussing other issues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Using research to determine the efficacy and modes of treatment in university counseling centers: Comment on Jobes, Jacoby, Cimbolic, and Hustead (1997) and Hayes (1997).

The articles by D. A. Jobes, A. M. Jacoby, P. Cimbolic, and L. A. T. Hustead (1997) and J. A. Hayes (1997) in the Special Section on Research in Counseling Centers are reviewed in the context of changes in college and university counseling centers. D. A. Jobes et al.'s study dealt with the development and application of the Suicide Status Form; J. A. Hayes's study reported the results of a factor analysis of the Brief Symptom Inventory that used data gathered specifically from college students. Suggestions are offered as to how the results of these studies might be applied to current counseling center work. A greater role for research in counseling centers is argued for, and examples of how research might abet counseling center personnel in their attempts to be both efficient and efficacious are offered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Introduction to symposium on constructing self with others.

The notion that the self is interpersonally embedded can be found throughout psychology's history. This article presents convergent work from different areas of contemporary psychology that supports and elaborates this notion. M. Baldwin's (1997) experimental work in social cognition demonstrates that self-evaluation varies with the relational schema that is activated. C. R. Snyder and R. L. Higgins (1997) present a social–cognitive personality theory of how people maintain their self theories to satisfy internal and external audiences. S. J. Blatt, J. S. Auerbach, and K. N. Levy's (1997) object-relations theory of the role of mental representations of self and others in psychopathology is supported by research that changes in these representations are associated with improvement in psychotherapy. J. Martin and J. Sugarman's (1997) social–cognitive theory of counseling and psychotherapy as conversational reconstructions of self theories also has research support and raises the issue of whether the self is agentic if socially constructed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Military are essential.

In his outburst against Meredith Crawford's (1970) article on military psychology (see record 1970-17677-001), M. J. Saks (see record 1990-56844-001) quotes from the APA's Ethical Standards: the psychologist "protects the welfare of any person who may seek his service . . . ." He then claims that "military psychology is clearly in conflict" with this principle. Saks is, of course, entitled to his personal opinion. But evidence is amply at hand to indicate that he does not represent the overwhelming majority of his fellow citizens who believe that the military are essential for the defense of their welfare in the present-day world. In their opinion, military psychology would further, rather than violate, the above-quoted principle. It would seem wise, therefore, to express gratitude to Crawford and military psychology for the aid they give in making our armed forces more efficient in protecting the welfare of the United States. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Distinguished Scientific Award for the Applications of Psychology: Harold Stevenson.

Discusses the contributions made by Harold Stevenson, recipient of the 1997 American Psychological Association (APA) Distinguished Scientific Award for the Applications of Psychology. Stevenson is recognized for his research on cognitive development and school learning. These studies fundamentally altered psychology's understanding of how societies respond to the challenge of developing basic cognitive competence in children and the developmental consequences of those societal choices. He also has altered society's view of education instilling both realism and hope into the debate on how to improve schools and children's lives. A selected bibliography is appended. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Looking down on human intelligence.

Replies to comments by R. J. Sternberg (1997) and D. A. Washburn and D. M. Rumbaugh (1997) on the authors' (I. J. Deary and C. Stough, see record 83-29472) article regarding the use of inspection time as a measure of intelligence. The authors focus their responses on Sternberg's criticisms of their work, and reiterate their position that inspection time is unique with regard to its combination of level of correlation, simplicity, and theoretical tractability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Edward J. Haupt (1936–2001).

Presents an obituary for Edward J. Haupt, a member of the psychology department at Montclair State University for 32 years. Haupt was known to the community of researchers in the history of psychology primarily through his regular attendance at meetings and conventions in the United States, Canada, and, frequently, Europe during the past 20 years. He was especially interested in one historical topic: the life and work of Georg Elias Müller (1850 –1934), pioneer experimental psychologist of the University of G?ttingen. Details on his scholarly pursuits and accomplishments are provided. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Opinions or Data?

Replies to comments by W. Wood (1962) to the original article by M. R. Feinberg and J. Lefkowitz (see record 1963-02029-001), which assessed the image of industrial psychology among corporate executives. The author discusses five points made by Wood, including issues regarding opinion vs. research findings and original study's methodology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Termination revisited.

Comments on articles on the topic of termination by M. S. Bergmann, S. E. Chazan, S. J. Ellman, K. A. Garcia-Lawson and R. C. Lane, J. H. Golland, D. M. Kaplan, J. Novick, and W. S. Poland (see records 1997-05806-002, 1997-05806-007, 1997-05806-005, 1997-05806-008, 1997-05806-009, 1997-05806-003, 1997-05806-001, and 1997-05806-004, respectively). Termination is examined not just as the ending of a treatment where loose ends are ties up, so to say, but as a unique opportunity to work on the unconscious meaning of this ending for the patient. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Consulting in the midst of differences and similarities: Related tensions and complexities.

As a context for exploring the evolution of his work in the diversity arena, the author briefly describes community and academic milieus that have shaped his personal development and also his professional approach to diversity. He also shares some of the challenges he has encountered going about his consulting endeavors and managing client-consultant relationships. The author reviews what his responses to these challenges have been, and how the milieus that influenced his development have informed his strategies for managing client-consultant interactions. He concludes by recommending that consultants view relationship challenges with their clients as diversity issues and advocates that consultants practice "what they preach" about diversity to address these challenges--that is, that they should apply their diversity models to these difficulties. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A better approach to goodness: Reply to Wagemans (1999).

In P. A. van der Helm and E. L. J. Leeuwenberg (see record 1996-01780-002), the authors presented a representation model for the goodness, or detectability, of visual regularities such as mirror symmetry and repetition. J. Wagemans (see record 1999-03499-009) acknowledged that this holographic goodness model has considerable explanatory power, but he also argued that it is not good enough yet. He challenged van der Helm and Leeuwenberg to qualify some open ends of their representation model, in particular those concerning its process assumptions. He also questioned the authors' assessment of previous goodness accounts such as S. E. Palmer's (1982, 1983) transformational approach and his own bootstrap model. He concluded that it is expedient to aim at a synthesis of useful aspects of diverse accounts of goodness, but he did not establish such a synthesis. Van der Helm and Leeuwenberg agree with his conclusion that such a synthesis is a worthy cause, but they disagree with his evaluation of the issues involved. This article is a reply with an alternative evaluation of these issues, advancing the discussion to a process-representation synthesis called holographic bootstrapping. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Harry Levinson.

Recognizes Harry Levinson for his contributions to knowledge in professional practice, which derive from his unique skill in taking psychological theory and knowledge and showing how it applies to the everyday functioning of organizations. He embarked on a lifetime career of helping people to better understand the functioning of people in organizations and to use that understanding to help themselves and their organizations function both more effectively and more humanely. A citation is presented for Levinson, along with a biography and selected bibliography of his works. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Neural plasticity and exaptation.

Comments that S. J. Gould (see record 1992-11754-001) posed something of a problem for D. M. Buss et al (see record 1998-01669-001) in his argument that human psychology links not to past evolutionary adaptations but to the coopting of previously evolved functions to do new things, or exaptation. The present author states that Buss et al observed that Gould failed to document this exaptation for any of the examples he mentioned because he could not demonstrate any "special design for the hypothesized function." He suggests that neural plasticity strongly links the brain, exaptation and human psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social psychology of false confessions: Bem's early contribution.

Comments that S. M. Kassin's (see record 1997-07781-003) article on coerced confessions will likely emerge as an important reference on the topic, providing as it does an overview of the phenomonon from the perspectives of the police, the suspect, jurors, and judges. It is noted, however, that social psychologist D. J. Bem's line of research in this area, from the perspective of his self-perception theory (Bem, 1966, 1970), was not cited in the article. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Aptitude Tests: Will the Debate Ever End?

In his article, Linn (March 1982) revives the controversy over the validity of aptitude tests. He spends much of his time refuting Nairn's (1980) claim that "for 88% of the applicants (though it is impossible to know which ones) an SAT score will predict their grade rank no more accurately than a pair of dice" (p. 65). I believe it is time we stopped arguing about the use of aptitude tests and stopped trying to justify tests with all their weaknesses. Instead, we should be putting our energies into improving on the instruments that we do have. Let's face it, most of our tests could be improved. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Lawrence M. Stolurow (1918–2009).

Lawrence M. Stolurow died at home in La Jolla, California, on August 14, 2009, at the age of 91. He was professor of education and director of the Center for Educational Experimentation, Development, and Evaluation at the University of Iowa from 1977 to 1989, when he became emeritus professor. Previously, Stolurow held positions at the University of Pittsburgh (1947–1953), the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign (1953–1966), Harvard University (1966 –1971), and the State University of New York (SUNY) at Stony Brook (1971–1977). He was born in St. Paul, Minnesota, on August 3, 1918, the son of Ruth M. and Peter J. Stolurow. During his long academic career, Stolurow made many contributions to learning theory and research, the study of individual differences in abilities and mental retardation, computer-aided instruction, educational technology, and techniques for teaching foreign languages and basic information (e.g., WATTOO). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)