Commentaries, opinions, and the growth of scientific knowledge.

Comments on J. J. Christensen-Szalanski and L. R. Beach's (see record 1984-21471-001) conclusion that the attention given to commentaries and replies to articles did not justify the extra space and indicates that less than 1% of all the articles that appeared in psychology journals had commentaries. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Commentary on "Publishing opinions: A note on the usefulness of commentaries."

Comments on J. J. Christensen-Szalanski and L. R. Beach's (see record 1984-21471-001) conclusion that the attention given to commentaries and replies to articles did not justify the extra space. The author indicates that a 40% increase in space was associated with a 91% increase in citations; data do not argue against the use of commentaries. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Publishing opinions: A note on the usefulness of commentaries": Comment.

Comments on J. J. Christensen-Szalanski and L. R. Beach's (see record 1984-21471-001) conclusion that the attention given to commentaries and replies to articles did not justify the extra space and argues that citation indexes do not measure the major usefulness of these commentaries. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A personality trait model for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM): The challenges ahead.

Replies to comments (see record 2010-13810-004), (see record 2010-13810-005), (see record 2010-13810-006), (see record 2010-13810-007) on the original article Personality traits and the classification of mental Disorders: Toward a more complete integration in DSM–5 and an empirical model of psychopathology by Robert F. Krueger and Nicholas R. Eaton (see record 2010-13810-003). We were sincerely flattered to discover that John Gunderson, Michael First, Paul Costa, Robert McCrae, Michael Hallquist, and Paul Pilkonis provided commentaries on our target article. In this brief response, we cannot hope to discuss the myriad points raised by this august group. Such a task would be particularly daunting given the diversity of the commentaries. Indeed, the diversity of the commentaries provides a kind of “metacommentary” on the state of personality and psychopathology research. That is, the intellectual diversity contained in the commentaries underlines the substantial challenges that lie ahead of us, in terms of articulating a model of personality and psychopathology with both scientific validity and clinical applicability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Narrow view of attachment or broad view of protection? Rejoinder to the commentaries.

The authors address 3 general issues raised by the commentaries on S. Goldberg, J. E. Grusec, and J. M. Jenkins (see record 1999-15264-001) by J. Braungart-Rieker and J. Karrass (see record 1999-15264-003), S. Dickstein (see record 1999-15264-002), R. Isabella (see record 1999-15264-006), K. MacDonald (see record 1999-15264-004), and D. R. Pederson and G. Moran (see record 1999-15264-005). (a) In response to questions regarding the nature of protection, they outline a definition consistent with J. Bowlby's (1969) that extends beyond predation and survival to include protection in times of illness, injury, and emotional distress; (b) they argue that protective needs extend well beyond infancy into adulthood and are relevant to a lifespan perspective on attachment; and (c) the challenges of differentiating aspects of relationships are discussed, and the significance of a narrow definition of attachment in such efforts is emphasized. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Eating for optimal health: how much should we eat?": Comment.

Responds to commentaries by K. M. Vitousek and J. Gray (see record 2002-12932-011) and F. P. Manke and K. M. Vitousek (see record 2002-12932-012) on the original article (see record 2000-02781-002) that argued that because of the scarcity and unpredictability of food in nature, humans and other animals have evolved to eat to their physiological limits when food is readily available, so that excess energy can be stored in the body as a buffer against future food shortages. The current authors state that neither of the two commentaries challenged the main thesis of their article; they focused instead on its potential implications for good health. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The return of the digressed: A reply to the special section respondents.

Replies to a series of commentaries on the Special Section of Psychoanalytic Psychology, Vol 12(1), "Contemporary Structural Psychoanalysis and Relational Psychoanalysis." The reply mentions comments by J. Benjamin, A. Chrisiansen, K. Marshall, S. A. Mitchell, and C. Spezzano (see records 83-14390, 83-14392, 83-14401, 83-14402, and 83-14404, respectively). In addition to noting a general tendency of the commentaries to rely on ad hominem remarks, the author emphasizes that although interpersonal relationships are important, psychoanalysis originally focused on intrapsychic dynamics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Mental disorder as a black box essentialist concept.

This is a reply to commentaries on J. C. Wakefield's (see record 1999-03409-002) article on the evolutionary foundations of the concept of mental disorder in defense of the harmful dysfunction analysis (HDA) of disorder. The author argues that the HDA is adequate to explain disorder and nondisorder judgments and is not disconfirmed by any of the claimed counterexamples put forward by the commentators; the commentators' proposed alternatives to the HDA are inadequate to explain disorder and nondisorder judgments; and the concept of natural function is a factual, scientific concept, contrary to K. W. M. Fulford's (see record 1999-03409-004) claim that it is inherently evaluative. The foundations of the HDA are clarified by providing a black box essentialist analysis (H. Putnam, 1975; J. C. Wakefield, 1997, in press) of the concept of natural function that underlies the concept of disorder. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in judging deception: Reply to O'Sullivan (2008) and Pigott and Wu (2008).

C. F. Bond and B. M. DePaulo (see record 2008-08177-001) reported a quantitative synthesis of individual differences in judging deception. Here, the authors respond to a pair of commentaries on this synthesis: a statistical critique by T. D. Pigott and M. J. Wu (see record 2008-08177-003)and a narrative reaction by M. O'Sullivan (see record 2008-08177-002). In response to suggestions made by Pigott and Wu, the authors conduct several alternative analyses of individual differences in judging deception. Without exception, these yield results similar to those that the authors reported earlier. In response to O'Sullivan's questions, the authors point to their meta-analyses of relevant moderator variables. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Converging Toward an Integrated Theory of Self-Esteem: Reply to Crocker and Nuer (2004), Ryan and Deci (2004), and Leary (2004).

In this response to the commentaries regarding their terror management analysis of self-esteem (T. Pyszczynski, J. Greenberg, S. Solomon, J. Arndt, & J. Schimel, 2004). the authors focus on the convergence on certain points regarding self-esteem as a way of progressing toward an integrative perspective. In doing so, they briefly discuss how the need for self-esteem relates to anxiety, interpersonal relations, growth, evolution, and death. They also discuss sources of self-esteem, whether the pursuit of self-esteem is good or bad, and whether such a pursuit could fruitfully be abandoned. They conclude that self-esteem buffers anxiety, is greatly influenced by social relations, and can either facilitate or undermine growth and that the value of the pursuit of self-esteem depends on the sources on which it is based but that its pursuit is too inextricably woven into the way people manage their anxieties and regulate their behavior to ever be abandoned. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Citations to articles and commentaries: A reassessment.

In his reply to Christensen-Szalanski and Beach's (see record 1984-21471-001) note on scientific commentaries, Harnad (see record 1990-58862-001) erred in his calculation of the corrected impact factor for The Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), which he edits. There were 172 citations in 1982, producing an impact factor of 6.370. Although this is not as high as that claimed by Harnad, it places BBS in third place in the SSCI Journal Citation Reports. Even more germane to the question of the value of peer open commentary is the fact that this more careful counting of the citations allows the assignment of the remaining citations to the commentaries and to the responses. If citations are one measure of the use of scientific information by consumers, then the use of commentaries appears to be an effective marketing strategy. It may be that the readers are merely drawn to what promises to be a good controversy. A more charitable explanation is that good scientists recognize that science progresses most rapidly by building on the ideas and observations of others, by its self-correcting nature, and by the free interaction of competing ideas and evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Beyond cognition: Expanding the search for the early roots of internalization and conscience.

J. E. Grusec and J. J. Goodnow (see record 1994-25033-001) offered a new comprehensive reformulation of discipline encounters as context for children's internalization of parental views. They focused mainly on children's social information processing and how it affects perception and acceptance of parental messages. The model seems best suited for middle childhood and adolescence. This commentary suggests additional directions in research on internalization in early childhood. It is argued that processes such as social referencing, sensitivity to standard violations, emergence of self, emotional reactions to wrongdoing, early self-conscious emotions, and self-regulation may be important antecedents and signs of internalization in the 1st 3 yrs of life. The proposed shift from cognitive to affective and self-regulatory aspects of early conscience reveals children's temperament as an important but neglected contributor to early moral development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Nature, culture, and explanations for erotic plasticity: Reply to Andersen, Cyranowski, and Aarestad (2000) and Hyde and Durik (2000).

R. F. Baumeister's (2000) (see record 2000-15386-001) article on erotic plasticity was criticized by B. L. Andersen, J. M. Cyranowski, and S. Aarestad (2000) (see record 2000-15386-003) for not being biological enough and by J. S. Hyde and A. M. Durik (2000) (see record 2000-15386-002) for being too biological. Both critiques were based on drawing a polarized caricature of R. F. Baumeister's actual view, although the two caricatures are opposites. Actually, neither commentary questioned the gender difference R. F. Baumeister documented; rather, the dispute is about how to explain it, which is indeed a challenge remaining for further work. Although both commentaries provided valuable suggestions about how to approach an explanation, neither approach can provide a coherent account until various theoretical problems are resolved and seemingly contrary empirical findings are addressed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Working Memory and Intelligence: Different Constructs. Reply to Oberauer et al. (2005) and Kane et al. (2005).

The authors address agreements and disagreements with the M. J. Kane, D. Z. Hambrick, and A. R. A. Conway (2005; see record 2004-22408-004) and K. Oberauer, R. Schulze, O. Wilhelm, and H.-M. Sü? (2005; see record 2004-22408-003) commentaries on P. L. Ackerman, M. E. Beier, and M. O. Boyle (2005; see record 2004-22408-002). They discuss the following issues: (a) the relationship between working memory (WM) and general intelligence (g), (b) the reanalyses included in the comments, (c) the use of a fixed-effects model versus a random-effects model for the meta-analysis, (d) the use of structural equation modeling analyses and structural coefficients as equivocal evidence for the relationship between WM and intelligence, and (e) the problem of confirmation bias in research on WM. Although the authors disagree with their commentators about the magnitude of the relationship between WM and g, in the final analysis it appears that all concerned parties agree that WM and intelligence are different constructs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Discipline and internalization.

J. E. Grusec and J. J. Goodnow (see record 1994-25033-001) made interesting suggestions about discipline variables that may effect internalization. Unfortunately, (1) their ideas are not integrated into a theory; (2) their definition of internalization is limited because parent–child similarity may result from children's attributing their values to parents; and (3) their ideas seem too heavily cognitive (e.g., the importance assigned to level of generality of parental reprimands, children's understanding of meta-rules, and children's viewing parental interventions as fair and reasonable). A theory linking discipline and internalization must encompass children's capacity for empathy and their feelings of anxiety, fear, and resentment at being interrupted by parents. In this article, the author's own theory of internalization and children's affective and cognitive responses in discipline encounters is summarized, and some of its shortcomings are noted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Theoretical psychology as a subdiscipline: The conversation continues.

Replies to the commentaries of N. Abi-Hashem, M. O. Meux, E. E. Grant, J. L. Brand, R. C. Grace and I. G. Farreras, C. F. Weems, R. W. Howard, H. J. Stam, and M. H. Quinn (all 1998) concerning B. D. Slife and R. N. Williams' article (see record 84-17550) on theoretical psychology as a new subdiscipline of psychology, with the focus being on the more critical commentaries. It is agreed that every psychologist should be a theorist; however, not every psychologist has the same interest or inclination toward theory. The notion of theoretical psychology requires an integral relation with psychology. A legitimization of this subdiscipline could legitimize rather than facilitate fragmentation. One of the roles of theoretical psychology would be to facilitate the voices of all factions of psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Creativity as a decision": Comment.

Responds to the comments by T. B. Kashdan and F. D. Fincham (see record 2002-12932-014), J. C. Kaufman (see record 2002-12932-016 and J. Raven (see record 2002-12932-015) on the articles that discussed creativity in the April 2001 issue of American Psychologist. The current author does not disagree with any of the comments made. He states that although creative people differ in an astonishing number of ways, there is, in fact, one key attribute that they all possess, an attribute consistent with the original articles in American Psychologist's special section on creativity and consistent with these new commentaries as well. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

More on the psychology of false confessions.

Responds to comments by J. T. McCann (see record 1998-00122-001) and A. Reifman (see record 1998-00122-002) concerning S. M. Kassin's article (see record 1997-07781-003) on the psychology of false confessions. It is stated that these commentaries offer interesting perspectives with which to expand what is currently known about the psychology of confession evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reaping the Benefits of Pursuing Self-Esteem Without the Costs? Reply to DuBois and Flay (2004), Sheldon (2004), and Pyszczynski and Cox (2004).

The commentaries on J. Crocker and L. E. Park's (2004) review suggested that Crocker and Park exaggerated the costs of pursuing self-esteem (K. M. Sheldon, 2004), that it is impossible not to pursue self-esteem (T. Pyszczynski & C. Cox, 2004), and that it is possible to pursue self-esteem in healthy ways, reaping the benefits without the costs (D. L. DuBois & B. R. Flay, 2004). In addressing the comments, the authors first clarify (a) what it means to pursue self-esteem, (b) the connection between having and pursuing self-esteem, and (c) what it means to let go of the pursuit of self-esteem. They then highlight points of overall agreement and disagreement between their view and those expressed in the commentaries and, finally, end with a discussion of future research directions to address the areas of disagreement and to shed further light onto the costs and benefits of pursuing self-esteem. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

From the editors.

Presents issue highlights which includes the first debate in the journal's history. Several commentaries are presented in response to the target article "Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods," by Paul J. Silvia, Beate P. Winterstein, John T. Willse, Christopher Barona, Joshua Cram, Karl I. Hess, Jenna L. Martinez, and Crystal A. Richard (see record 2008-05954-001). These responses raised numerous insightful questions, new ideas, and pointed critiques to the lead article. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)