A technique for correlating measurable traits with freely observed social behaviors

In much research in social psychology it is impractical to get quantitative measure of the degree of effectiveness of certain social behaviors, yet associates can sense that effectiveness sufficiently well to detect those who manifest the behavior in very high or in very low degree. This paper develops a technique of biserial correlation from wide-spread classes to deal statistically with such situations, develops standard error formulas for it, and points to a wide range of usefulness for this type of technique.     

Meta-analysis of consultation outcome studies

The results of 54 controlled studies of psychological consultation using mental health, behavioral, and organization development models were synthesized using meta-analysis. The results supported the continued use of consultation as an effective practice in modifying consultee and, to a lesser extent, client behavior and attitudes. On the average, consultees showed improvements greater than 71% and clients showed improvements greater than 66% of untreated comparable groups. No differences were found in terms of effectiveness among the three models.     

How sensitive are handedness prevalence figures to differences in questionnaire classification procedures?

Questionnaire data from 572 subjects show that the proportion of right-handers to nonright-handers varies greatly (from 1:100 to 92:8) as a function of questionnaire length, graded or forced response to items, and cut-off criteria. For this reason, the right-handed/nonright-hander dichotomy is singularly unsuited as a basis for classification when handedness is to be related to some other neuropsychological factor as an independent variable. This is especially the case when very strict cut-off criteria are used to define right-handedness (e.g., only those individuals who prefer the right hand for all activities listed).     

Science and Religion: Ten Models of War,Truce, and Partnership

Public discourse today continues to propagate the simplistic idea that science and religion are engaged in a hopelessly unwinnable war. This is misleading. Science and religion interact at so many different junctures and in so many different ways that any simple generalization misguides us. This essay provides an updated inventory of ten popular conceptual models for relating science and theology, when theology is understood as rational reflection on religion. Four influential models assume that a war is taking place: (1) scientism; (2) scientific imperialism; (3) theological authoritarianism; and (4) the evolution controversy. Six additional preferred models assume a truce or even more, a partnership: (5) the Two Books; (6) the Two Languages; (7) ethical alliance; (8) dialogue accompanied by creative mutual interaction; (9) naturalism; and (10) theology of nature. Special attention will be given to creative mutual interaction within a framework of a theology of nature.