Joining with all members of a family system: The rhetoric of antilogic in family therapy dialogue

Family therapists face a significant rhetorical challenge in working with families that disagree about the problematic life-situation which brought them to therapy. Therapists must find a way to join with disagreeing family members and then find a way to engage in a therapeutically useful conversation with them. Thus, they must deal resourcefully with contradictions. This article explores the ways that the Sophistic rhetorical concept of antilogic may be employed in helping therapists join and then engage in a therapeutically useful conversation with families who hold contradictory views concerning the problem that brought them to therapy.The author wishes to thank Ronald Chenail, PhD, Douglas Flemons, PhD, and Shelly Green, PhD, for their assistance in the development of this project.     

A plea for more intervision

The author presents an argument for tolerance, mutual understanding and reconciliation in psychotherapy, instead of a continued emphasis of schools. Psychotherapists' work with clients is proposed as a likely area for mutual understanding, rather than continued emphasis on their particular theories and academic matters. Psychotherapeutic intervision groups in which a small number of therapists voluntarily discuss their cases with peers from various backgrounds have become increasingly common again in recent years.Slightly revised version of a presentation made at the Georgetown Family Center Symposium in November 1995.     

A critical review of theS/L reliability index

The meaning and properties of a commonly used index of reliability, S/L,were examined critically. It was found that the index does not reflect any conventional concept of reliability. When used for an identical behavioral observation session, it is not statistically correlated with other reliability indices. Within an observation session, the standardizing measure of Lis beyond the control of the investigator. Furthermore, the reason for the choice of Las the standard is unclear. The role of chance agreement in S/Lis not known. The exact interpretation of the index depends on which observer reports L.Overall the conceptual and mathematical meaning of S/Lis dubious. It is suggested that the S/Lindex should not be used until its nature is shown to be a measure of reliability. Other approaches such as the intraclass correlations and generalizability coefficients should be used instead.The authors are indebted to Johnny Matson for his critique of an earlier version of this paper.     

Further tests of a meta-model of youthful marijuana use

This paper tests a meta-model of youthful marijuana use on students in Grades 11, 12 and 13. Although the specific models for each grade varied in detail, all followed a meta-model making the following assumptions: (1) that use or nonuse of marijuana depends primarily on attitude towards use; (2) that attitude largely reflects the perceived functional and dysfunctional consequences of use; and (3) that what people perceive as functional or dysfunctional depends on relevant personality characteristics. All three models showed satisfactory goodness-of-fit in terms of nonsignificant overidentification tests (minimum P > 0.25) and small discrepancies between observed correlations and the corresponding theoretically implied correlations. A notable feature of the Grade 13 data in contrast to those for Grade 12 and previously reported findings was the seeming unimportance of the perceived value of marijuana use for gaining acceptance from peers. It was suggested that this might reflect the selective survival into Grade 13 in the sampled community of more independently-oriented students.     

Children's responses to stories with male and female characters

The sex of the main character was varied in six children's stories which were then read by fourth, sixth and eighth graders. The children answered four questions about the stories. Both boys and girls responded more positively to the questions “Would you like to be (character's name?)” and “Would you like to do the things (character's name) did?” when the main character was a male. Boys preferred stories about males, and this preference increased with grade level. A preference for stories about females was marginally significant only for the older girls. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.