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.     

The gap effect for eye and hand movements

A temporal gap between fixation point offset and stimulus onset typically yields shorter saccadic latencies to the stimulus than if the fixation stimulus remained on. Several researchers have explored the extent to which this gap also reduces latencies of other responses but have failed to find a gap effect isolated from general warning effects. Experiment 1, however, showed a robust gap effect for aimed hand movements (which required determination of a precise spatial location), regardless of whether the hand moved alone or was accompanied by a saccadic eye movement. Experiment 2 replicated this aimed hand gap effect and also showed a smaller effect for choice manual keypress responses (which required determination of the direction of response only). Experiment 3 showed no gap effect for simple manual keypress responses (which required no spatial determination). The results are consistent with an interpretation of the gap effect in terms of facilitation of spatially oriented responses.     

Tokens for stuttering

Four young stutterers were observed during 10 weekly sessions. Each session was divided into pretreatment, treatment, and posttreatment segments. Redeemable tokens were administered contingent upon stuttering behaviors in the treatment segment of the Experimental condition. In a Parallel Control condition, no tokens were administered during the entire session. The differences between the pretreatment and treatment segments were compared for the two conditions. Three subjects had dramatically fewer stuttering behaviors when tokens were being administered, while the fourth had more stuttering under the same condition. The subject whose stuttering increased had a history of therapy in which voluntary, “faked” stuttering had been called for, and the behaviors that increased were judged to be of this type. The decreases were interpreted as suggesting that the contingent tokens acted to countercondition the aversiveness of the stuttering experience, which reduced the anticipation of stuttering and hence the stuttering itself. The increase was felt to be simple reinforcement. The counterconditioning interpretation was borne out in two clinical applications in which money was presented contingent on stuttering behaviors judged to be aversive to the stutterer, and in which dramatically sudden, but long-lasting, improvement was seen.