Méta-analyse et efficacité des psychothérapies : faits et fictions

In a political environment increasingly concerned with the problem of escalating health care costs, the issue of psychotherapy efficacy evaluation is still debated. Historically, this debate started after Eysenck (1952) published a famous article suggesting that average improvement from pre- to post-therapy has nothing to do with psychotherapy participation, but something that would tend to happen anyway (“spontaneous remission”). Wanting to prove that psychotherapy was effective (Glass, 2000), Smith and Glass (1977) published the first meta-analysis of the psychotherapy efficacy, combining the results of several controlled clinical trials, and found that psychotherapy was remarkably efficacious. Following a brief historical introduction, the objectives of this paper is to define the principles of meta-analysis, to discuss of epistemological contextualization of this methodological approach, and finally to examine the interest and limits of the application of this method in the field of evaluation of psychotherapy.     

Rorschach et maladies somatiques : Applications et éléments de validité

The goal of this article is to review the main applications of the Rorschach to the field of physical illness. Studies are presented and discussed concerning three areas, from the most theoretical to the most empirical: (1) The most widely used content scoring procedures, namely those of Fisher and Cleveland’s (1958) and Masling et al. (1967); (2) A group of studies dealing with a psychosomatic risk factor (alexithymia); (3) A summary of results concerning investigations of how Rorschach variables correlate with and determine self-care behaviours in people with various diseases. These three research axes illustrate the different types of relations between mind and body. Their results demonstrate that research questions and methods are being renewed.     

Implicatures et développement

We summarize our work on pragmatic inference-making in children, while generally focusing on scalar implicatures. Such inferences arise when a relatively weak term implies the rejection of a stronger one. For example, some is often understood to mean not all. While adults readily draw such implicatures, children tend to rely on the terms’ minimal, lexically encoded meanings (with which some is compatible with all). Given that children’s treatments coincide with logical ones, children end up appearing more logical than adults on standard reasoning tasks. We describe this effect in detail while showing that (a) even young children can be encouraged to carry out implicatures and, that; (b) evidence of non-pragmatic behavior is best explained as due to unavailable effort.     

Théories naïves et raisonnements téléologiques sur les animaux et les plantes

The cognitive status of plants as a biological category remains unclear in the conceptual organisation. A series of five experiments investigated whether adults agree with different kinds of teleological assertions to account for attributes of animals or plants. One major finding is that adults are inclined towards explanations that evoke an advantage for other species to motivate the existence of attributes in plants, but not in animals. This supports our assumption about social-serving teleological reasoning for plants, as for artefacts, and may contribute to increase the ambiguous status of plants within the unified concept of living thing. Therefore, plants may not only differ from animals by the low relevance of an intuitive psychology to account for their properties, but also by their tendency to trigger intuitive explanations devoted to artefacts.