Is There a Relationship between Suicidal Intent and Lethality in Deliberate Self‐Poisoning?

The relationship between suicidal intent and lethality of deliberate self‐poisoning (DSP) episodes and their associations with suicide have yielded contradictory findings. The aims of this study were to investigate the association between patients’ suicidal intent and independently rated lethality of DSP episodes, and whether the association changes over time. Eighty‐nine DSP patients were investigated longitudinally. Self‐reported suicidal intent, including perceived likelihood of dying, wish to die, and whether or not the DSP was considered a suicide attempt, was measured at the time of the index episode (t1), 3 months (t2), and 12 months (t3) later. Lethality was assessed independently by three clinical toxicologists. Lethality was significantly associated with patients’ reported wish to die (p = .01) and perceived likelihood of dying (p = .04) at t1, but not at t2 and t3. No association was found between whether the episode was considered a suicide attempt or not and lethality at t1, t2, or t3. Lethality and suicidal intent should be considered as largely separate dimensions of self‐harm. Clinicians should bear this in mind during clinical assessment, especially regarding historical information.     

Defining Creativity: Don't We Also Need to Define What Is Not Creative?

I argue that any attempt to define creative ideas cannot fully succeed without also defining uncreative ideas. This argument begins by defining three parameters that characterize a potentially creative thought: the idea's initial probability (p), the final utility (u), and the creator's prior knowledge of that utility (v). The three parameters then lead to a three‐criterion multiplicative definition of personal creativity, namely, c = (1 ? p)u(1 ? v), where the first factor indicates originality and the third factor surprise. Although creativity can only maximize as originality, utility, and surprise all approach unity, the same definition indicates that there are seven different ways that creativity can minimize. These alternatives were identified as (a) routine, reproductive, or habitual ideas, (b) fortuitous response bias, (c) irrational perseveration, (d) problem finding, (e) rational suppression, (f) irrational suppression, and (g) blissful ignorance. If the third parameter v is omitted, then the number of creative and noncreative outcomes reduces to just four, making creativity indistinguishable from irrational suppression. The alternative outcomes are then illustrated using the classic two‐string problem. Besides providing a more finely differentiated conception of creativity failures, the definition has critical implications regarding the processes and procedures required to generate highly creative ideas.     

Devil's advocate versus authentic dissent: stimulating quantity and quality

Given the relationship between uniformity of views, premature adoption of a preferred solution and poor decision making, many suggestions have been aimed at fostering dissent, including the usage of a ‘devil's advocate.’ The hope is that such a mechanism will stimulate the kinds of reconsideration, better information processing and decision making as has been found to be stimulated by authentic dissent. In a prior study comparing these two processes, devil's advocate appeared to foster thinking that was primarily aimed at cognitive bolstering of the initial viewpoint rather than stimulate divergent thought. While that study left the actual position of the DA unknown, the present study compared conditions where the devil's advocate position was known (and consistent or inconsistent with the assigned position) or unknown. It further utilized quantity and quality of solutions as a dependent measure rather than simply cognitive activity. Results indicated that the authentic minority was superior to all three forms of ‘devil's advocate,’ again underscoring the value and importance of authenticity and the difficulty in cloning such authenticity by role‐playing techniques. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Father Absence and Familial Antisocial Characteristics

This study examined family antisocial characteristics according to whether biological fathers live at home and agree to be study participants. Antisocial symptoms were tabulated for 161 clinic-referred children and their parents. Families with fathers at home had fewer paternal, maternal, and child antisocial symptoms, and scored higher on multiple SES indicators, than did families with departed fathers. Antisocial characteristics were highest, and SES was lowest, when fathers could not be located or recruited. Results suggest that requiring father participation (as in family-trio genetic designs) screens out the more antisocial families. Of clinical interest, antisocial behavior in any family member is more likely if the father is absent and nonparticipating. The heightened antisocial behavior in children associated with absent biological fathers was not mitigated by presence of stepfathers and was not accounted for by lower SES. The ethical use of mother report on absent fathers is discussed.