A Method for Analyzing Videotaped Genetic Counseling Sessions

This study describes the development and evaluation of a multi-item scale for analyzing the genetic counseling process, the Manchester Observation Code (MOC) for genetic counseling. The instrument is specific to the field of genetic counseling and is designed for analysis of the communication between counselor and client. Coding is done directly from videotaped sessions. Because communication is the means by which genetic counseling is accomplished, the method measures four relevant components of communication: (1) grammatical form, (2) purpose, (3) subject, and (4) cue source. The instrument enables an observer to code the counselor's statements into these four components. Three videotaped sessions were used to measure interrater reliability, or the consistency of rating for each of the four communication domains using this method. Three videotaped sessions were also used to measure test-retest reliability, or the consistency of the designed method from one time to another. A total of 21 videotaped sessions were tested using the method. A statistical measure of reliability established consistency of the designed method; Cohen's kappa yielded 0.7 for interrater reliability and 0.79 for test-retest reliability. These findings suggest this instrument may be used to identify important elements of the genetic counseling process.     

On the nature of meaning and its indeterminacy: Davidson''s view in perspective

In order to illustrate the nature of the indeterminacy of meaning, Donald Davidson sometimes compares it to the fact that we can measure length or temperature on different scales. In the following paper I try to explain first why we are supposed to expect such an analogy, given the semantics of the word meaning and of the word length or temperature. In the second part I examine how close the analogy is by distinguishing different forms of indeterminacy of meaning (viz., the indeterminacy of reference and the indeterminacy of truth) and ask whether both forms have an equivalent in a theory of measurement. I shall conclude that this is indeed the case.I would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for his or her detailed comments on a first version of this paper, which helped me to clarify my views considerably.     

The Politics of Paradox: Leo Strauss’s Biblical Debt to Spinoza (and Kierkegaard)

The political philosopher Leo Strauss is famous for contending that any synthesis of reason and revelation is impossible, since they are irreconcilable antagonists. Yet he is also famous for praising the secular regime of liberal democracy as the best regime for all human beings, even though he is well aware that modern philosophers such as Spinoza thought this regime must make use of biblical morality to promote good citizenship. Is democracy, then, both religious and secular? Strauss thought that Spinoza was contradictory in teaching that reason and revelation should be separated from each other while also insisting that a secular democratic politics still requires the biblical morality of charity (love thy neighbor as thyself). The paradox that liberal democracy is both religious and secular, which is central to Spinoza, was dismissed by Strauss as a Machiavellian subterfuge or the cynical attempt to use religion for political purposes. In order to adhere to his dualistic separation of reason and revelation, Strauss turned to ancient Greek political philosophy, particularly the ideas of Plato and Aristotle, as the true ground of liberal democracy since this classical tradition was never exposed to biblical revelation. Yet, the illiberal and hierarchical implications of Greek political thought, which clash with Strauss’s modern views on human individuality and dignity, ultimately take him back to the biblically based philosophies of Spinoza and Kierkegaard, who teach the paradox that the Bible is the true foundation of human freedom.     

Writers Blocked: On the Wrongs of Research Co-authorship and Some Possible Strategies for Improvement

The various problems associated with co-authorship of research articles have attracted much attention in recent years. We believe that this (hopefully) growing awareness is a very welcome development. However, we will argue that the particular and increasing importance of authorship and the harmful implications of current practices of research authorship for junior researchers have not been emphasised enough. We will use the case of our own research area (bioethics) to illustrate some of the pitfalls of current publishing practices—in particular, the impact on the evaluation of one’s work in the area of employment or funding. Even where there are explicit guidelines, they are often disregarded. This disregard, which is often exemplified through the inflation of co-authorship in some research areas, may seem benign to some of us; but it is not. Attribution of co-authorship for reasons other than merit in relation to the publication misrepresents the work towards that publication, and generates unfair competition. We make a case for increasing awareness, for transparency and for more explicit guidelines and regulation of research co-authorship within and across research areas. We examine some of the most sensitive areas of concern and their implications for researchers, particularly junior ones, and we suggest several strategies for future action.     

Partiality and distributive justice in African bioethics

African ethical theories tend to hold that moral agents ought to be partial, in the sense that they should favour members of their family or close community. This is considered an advantage over the impartiality of many Western moral theories, which are regarded as having counterintuitive implications, such as the idea that it is unethical to save a family member before a stranger. The partiality of African ethics is thought to be particularly valuable in the context of bioethics. Thaddeus Metz, in particular, argues that his African-derived theory best accounts for a number of plausible intuitions, such as the intuition that health care practitioners ought to be biased towards the patients for whom they are directly responsible. In this article, I claim that the plausible intuitions drawn on in favour of partiality can be satisfactorily explained on the basis of impartial moral theories. Moreover, I argue that blanket acceptance of partiality has problematic consequences for distributive justice in resource allocation in biomedical contexts. By contrast, impartial theories can justify plausible instances of partiality whilst avoiding the pitfalls of fully partial moral theories. Although this provides grounds for abandoning partiality in principle, I claim that this finding should not be seen as damaging to African medical ethics. Instead, it prompts investigation of underexplored possibilities of impartial African moral theories. To demonstrate the value of this direction, I sketch some novel and attractive conceptions that combine impartiality with elements of African ethics.     

Win-shift and win-stay learning in the short-beaked echidna (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Tachyglossus aculeatus</Emphasis>)

Numerous previous investigators have explained species differences in spatial memory performance in terms of differences in foraging ecology. In three experiments we attempted to extend these findings by examining the extent to which the spatial memory performance of echidnas (or "spiny anteaters") can be understood in terms of the spatio-temporal distribution of their prey (ants and termites). This is a species and a foraging situation that have not been examined in this way before. Echidnas were better able to learn to avoid a previously rewarding location (to "win-shift") than to learn to return to a previously rewarding location (to "win-stay"), at short retention intervals, but were unable to learn either of these strategies at retention intervals of 90 min. The short retention interval results support the ecological hypothesis, but the long retention interval results do not. Electronic Publication     

Mindful Mates: A Pilot Study of the Relational Effects of Mindfulness‐Based Stress Reduction on Participants and Their Partners

Very little is currently known about how increases in dispositional mindfulness through mindfulness training affect the quality of participants’ romantic relationships, and no previous studies have examined how increases in specific facets of mindfulness differentially contribute to relationship health. Additionally, even less is known about how an individual's development of mindfulness skills affects the relationship satisfaction of his or her romantic partner. Thus, the purpose of this pilot study was to examine associations between changes in facets of mindfulness and relationship satisfaction among participants enrolled in a Mindfulness‐Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) course and their nonenrolled romantic partners. Twenty MBSR participants and their nonenrolled partners (n = 40) completed measures of mindfulness and relationship satisfaction pre‐ and post‐enrolled partners’ completion of an MBSR course. Results indicated that enrolled participants significantly improved on all facets of mindfulness and relationship satisfaction, while nonenrolled partners did not significantly increase on any facet of mindfulness or relationship satisfaction. Moreover, enrolled participants’ increases in Acting with Awareness were positively associated with increases in their own and their nonenrolled partners’ relationship satisfaction, whereas increases in enrolled participants’ Nonreactivity were positively associated with increases in their nonenrolled partners’ (but not their own) relationship satisfaction. These results suggest that increasing levels of mindfulness (particularly specific aspects of mindfulness) may have positive effects on couples’ relationship satisfaction and highlight mindfulness training as a promising tool for education and intervention efforts aimed at promoting relational health.