About postmodernism: Reply to Gergen and others.

In his reply, M. B. Smith comments on the issues between K. J. Gergen (see record 1994-37275-001) and himself (see record 1994-37277-001) and replies to comments by R. L. Russell and M. D. Gaubatz (see record 1995-36714-001); B. Denner (see record 1995-36711-001); D. Mente (see record 1995-36713-001); and D. White and A. Wang (see record 1995-36716-001). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Is free will a process or a content: Both? Neither? Are we free to affirm a position on this question?

Comments on the views on free will (FW) offered by B. D. Slife (see record 1995-13451-001), M. Gergen (see record 1995-14294-001), R. N. Williams (see record 1995-12851-001), M. S. Richardson (see record 1995-14311-001), and G. S. Howard (see record 1995-13446-001) in light of the classical definition of FW as being capable of doing otherwise. It is argued that FW interpretations differ markedly depending on whether they are viewed as due to a process or to contents within some process. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

From agency/empowerment to embodied empowerment.

Comments on the agency papers by B. D. Slife (see record 1995-13451-001), M. Gergen (see record 1995-14294-001), R. N. Williams (see record 1995-12851-001), and G. S. Howard (see record 1995-13446-001). In response to these papers, M. S. Richardson states that the construct of agency/empowerment is replaced with embodied empowerment, the idea of which needs to be developed in a moral concept. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

And binding nature fast in fate, left free the human will.

Suggests that the papers by B. D. Slife (see record 1995-13451-001), M. Gergen (see record 1995-14294-001), R. N. Williams (see record 1995-12851-001), and M. S. Richardson (see record 1995-14311-001) demonstrated no simple solution to the free will (FW) problem. How humans achieve some limited exercise of FW in a world of nonagentic, coercive forces remains unclear, especially as human nature and lives represent complex phenomena in which the person who exercises FW is anything but omnipotent, ahistorical, self-contained, and acultural. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The possibility of possibility.

Comments that B. D. Slife (see record 1995-13451-001), M. Gergen (see record 1995-14294-001), R. N. Williams (see record 1995-12851-001), and M. S. Richardson (see record 1995-14311-001) all seem to suggest that the contextless nature of the traditional conception of free will is problematic. Although each author attempts to contextualize this traditional conception, many of their explanations reveal that the underlying problem remains. It is suggested that a radically new assumption of time, such as Heidegger's temporality, is necessary. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day? An appreciative appraisal.

Seeks to find the appreciative, positive inquiry aspects of and similarities in the papers by B. D. Slife (see record 1995-13451-001), R. N. Williams (see record 1995-12851-001), M. S. Richardson (see record 1995-14311-001), and G. S. Howard (see record 1995-13446-001) without critical academic judgment, applauding the removal, although insufficient, of the linear time metaphor, suggesting the allowance of agency as a characteristic of people-in-relations, and lamenting the commentary gap on relational unit of client and therapist. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The case of Gary: In search of post-hoc quixotic flexibility.

Responds to M. F. Hoyt's (see record 1995-22250-001) commentary on T. F. Van Denburg and E. J. Van Denburg's (see record 1994-18427-001) response to Hoyt's (see record 1994-18395-001) commentary on Van Denburg and Van Denburg's (see record 1993-06526-001) article about a case of premature therapy termination. Issues related to limits and flexibility in treatment are addressed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The fan effect: New results and new theories.

The fan effect (J. R. Anderson, see record 1975-06644-001) has been attributed to interference among competing associations to a concept. Recently, it has been suggested that such effects might be due to multiple mental models (G. A. Radvansky, D. H. Spieler, & R. T. Zacks, see record 1993-16287-001) or suppression of concepts (M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, see record 1995-16174-001); A. R. A. Conway & R. W. Engle, see record 1994-08314-001). It was found that the Adaptive Control of Thought—Rational (ACT-R) theory, which embodies associative interference, is consistent with the results of G. A. Radvansky et-al. and that there is no evidence for concept suppression in a new fan experiment. The ACT-R model provides good quantitative fits to the results, as shown in a variety of experiments. The 3 key concepts in these fits are (a) the associative strength between 2 concepts reflects the degree to which one concept predicts the other, (b) foils are rejected by retrieving mismatching facts; and (c) participants can adjust the relative weights they give to various cues in retrieval. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Work assessment of psychiatric patients: A critical review of published scales.

Critically examines 7 published scales designed for rating the work performance of psychiatric patients: (a) Minnesota Follow-up Study Rehabilitation Evaluation Scale; (b) M-R Fergus Falls Patient-Employee Rating Scale; (c) D. Ethridge scale (see record 1968-15840-001); (d) M. Distefano and M. Pryer scale (see record 1970-21324-001); (e) A. Cheadle, D. Cushing, C. Drew, and R. Morgan scale (see record 1968-00995-001); (f) A. Burger scale; and (g) J. Clark, B. Koch, and R. Nichols scale (see record 1965-10332-001). Special reference is made to concurrent and predictive validation. Suggestions for the design of such scales are presented. (33 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"A bit more light on Ferenczi and Freud": Response to Tabin.

Comments on the response by J. K. Tabin (see record 1995-43797-001) to the critique by L. Aron and J. B. Frankel (see record 1994-41100-001) of her article on Freud's motivation for rethinking his seduction theory (see record 1994-05584-001). Freud's priority in citing the relationship between splitting of the ego and childhood sexual trauma and his treatment of Ferenczi are highlighted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

'The structure of phenotypic personality traits": Author's reactions to the six comments.

L. R. Goldberg replies to the comments by R. O. Kroger and L. A. Wood (see record 1994-17497-001), S. Guastello (see record 1994-17488-001), D. R. Comer (see record 1994-17481-001), H. J. Eysenck (see record 1994-17486-001), W. D. Shadel and D. Cervone (see record 1994-17520-001), and H. E. Cattell (see record 1994-17479-001) on Goldberg's (PA, Vol 80:17546) article on the Big Five personality traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Primate research, family politics, and social policy: Transforming 'cads' into 'dads' ": Reply.

Responds to the comments of S. Sperling (see record 1994-17265-001), J. Belsky (see record 1994-17245-001), V. Phares (see record 1994-17261-001), and M. E. Lamb (see record 1994-17257-001) on the work of L. B. Silverstein (see record 1994-17264-001) on evolutionary biology and human paternal behavior, father involvement, father absence, and biological determinism. Silverstein asserts that her overriding goal was to dramatize how extrascientific factors (e.g., political ideology) shape the construction of scientific knowledge. It is argued that the experience of nurturing and caring for young children has the power to change the cultural construction of masculinity into something less coercive and oppressive. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stalked by the postmodern beast.

Compares the philosophical positions of K. J. Gergen (see record 1994-37275-001) and M. B. Smith (see record 1994-37277-001) concerning the impact of postmodernism on psychology's scientific foundations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Toward differentiating client attachment from working alliance and transference: Reply to Robbins (1995).

S. B. Robbins (see record 1995-42475-001) provided a thought-provoking response to the article (B. Mallinckrodt, D. L. Gantt, and H. M. Coble; see record 1995-42468-001) that described the development of the Client Attachment to Therapist Scale (CATS). In this reply, recent elaborations of attachment theory are reviewed as applied to adult close personal relationships, and points of similarity and difference between the attachment-based constructs measured by the CATS and measures of client working alliance and transference are clarified. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Further reflections on publishing multiple journal articles from the same data set: Reply to Bray (1994) and Parke (1994).

J. H. Bray's (see record 1995-11196-001) and R. D. Parke's (see record 1995-11204-001) comments on M. A. Fine and L. A. Kurdek's (see record 1995-11198-001) article are constructive, and their efforts have extended the dialogue on the important issue of publishing multiple journal articles from a single data set. This article identifies areas of agreement with Bray and Parke and comments on additional issues that they raised. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Selected views of family assessment: A commentary.

Comments on articles concerning family assessment by H. D. Grotevant (see record 1990-12120-001); R. B. Hampson et al (see record 1990-12122-001); D. C. Bell and L. G. Bell (see record 1990-12106-001); C. I. Carlson (see record 1990-12110-001); and T. L. Huston and J. K. Rempel (see record 1990-12126-001). It is suggested that theory needs to be related to research and practice more consistently. It would be useful to identify the principle theories in family science and critically examine the unique assessment issues raised by each perspective. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Rational explanation of the selection task.

M. Oaksford and N. Chater (O&C, see record 1995-08271-001) presented the first quantitative model of R C. Wason's (1966) selection task in which performance is rational. J. St. B. T. Evans and D. E. Over (see record 83:25190) reply that O&C's account is normatively incorrect and cannot model K. N. Kirby's (see record 1995-04302-001) or R Pollard and J. St. B. T. Evans's (see record 1984-30572-001) data. It is argued that an equivalent measure satisfies their normative concerns and that a modification of O&C's model accounts for their empirical concerns. D. Laming (see record 83:25220) argues that O&C made unjustifiable psychological assumptions and that a "correct" Bayesian analysis agrees with logic. It is argued that O&C's model makes normative and psychological sense and that Laming's analysis is not Bayesian. A. Almor and S. A. Sloman (see record 83:25168) argue that O&C cannot explain their data. It is argued that Almor and Sloman's data do not bear on O&C's model because they alter the nature of the task. It is concluded that O&C's model remains the most compelling and comprehensive account of the selection task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Change and be ready to change again.

Replies to comments by M. B. Bailey and R. B. Bailey (see record 1994-07941-001) and by J. Garcia (see record 1994-07943-001) that were issued in response to the article by J. T. Todd and E. K. Morris (see record 1993-11918-001) on mythology and folklore in behavior analysis. Todd and Morris welcome the comments by Bailey and Bailey but take issue with the stance of Garcia, who refuses to acknowledge the conceptual importance of species similiarities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Whose truth? Whose goodness? Whose beauty?

In his comment on the articles by M. B. Smith (see record 1994-37277-001) and K. J. Gergen (see record 1994-37275-001), D. Mente explores Smith's charge of relativism and the positions of Gergen, N. Goodman (1984), P. Feyerabend (1987), and R. Rorty (1991). Concerning Smith's wish to sustain the struggle toward truth, goodness, and beauty as meaningful ideals, Mente concludes that Smith must realize that the inevitable questions are Whose truth? Whose goodness? Whose beauty? (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Buss and sexual selection: The issue of culture.

Comments on D. M. Buss' (see record 1995-21138-001) comment on A. H. Eagly's (see record 1995-21141-001) discussion comparing the sexes in scientific research. The author disputes Buss' use of particular assumptions as facts and his concepts of culture, social behavior, and sexual selection. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)