Roles of causation and meaning for interpreting correlations

The essays by Tougas and Willeford address, among other things, a number of ways to understand causation, which play crucial roles in the framework of thinking proposed by Pauli and Jung. The intention of my following reply is to say a few words about how these options are related to one another within our reconstruction of the Pauli‐Jung conjecture. In the tradition of the sciences, looking for causation has become a virtually innate reflex to interpret empirically observed correlations. The concept of synchronicity suggests looking for meaningful coincidences as an alternative, complementary interpretation, particularly appropriate for psychophysical correlations.     

Externalising behaviour from infancy to mid-adolescence: Latent profiles and early predictors

The overall aim of the current study was to identify typical trajectory classes of externalising behaviour, and to identify predictors present already in infancy that discriminate the trajectory classes. 921 children from a community sample were followed over 13 years from the age of 18 months. In a simultaneously estimated model, latent class analyses and multinomial logit regression analyses suggested a five-class solution for developmental patterns of externalising problem behaviours: High stable (18% of the children), High childhood limited (5%), Medium childhood limited (31%), Adolescent onset (30%), and Low stable (16%). Six risk factors measured at 18 months significantly discriminated among the classes. Family stress and maternal age discriminated the High stable class from all the other classes. The results suggest that focusing on enduring problems in the relationship with the partner and partners' health may be important in preventive and early intervention efforts.     

Werden Psychotherapeuten,Psychiater oder die Psychotherapie stigmatisiert?

Background

In the last decades much has been found out about the stigmatization of persons with mental illnesses. Recently, a potential stigmatization of psychologists, psychiatrists and psychotherapy has been debated.

Aim

The question should be answered whether there is any scientific evidence for stigmatization of psychologists, psychiatrists and psychotherapy by using the conceptualization of stigma as brought forward by Link and Phelan (Ann Rev Sociol 2001; 27:363–385).

Material and methods

For the systematic literature search in 2013 a databank search was carried out in Web of Science using the search terms stigma or discrimination or stereotypes or prejudice AND psychiatrist or psychotherapist or psychotherapy or mental health professional. A total of 2013 publications were identified which were systematically arranged according to the title and abstract with respect to the relevance for the question whether psychotherapy or associated professional groups are stigmatized. Only four of the articles were considered to be relevant. After advice from experts six further relevant articles could be found which did not appear in the databank search.

Results

The review found evidence for both positive and negative stereotypes but not for other components of the stigmatization process.

Conclusion

At present there is no evidence for a stigma related to psychotherapy or to the professions of psychotherapists and psychiatrists.     

Begutachtung bei sozialrechtlichen Fragen

Expert opinions in social law are extraordinarily frequent. The expert opinion is the decisive basis for a decision whether a social benefit has to be granted. The importance of social legal assessment for those affected and for society in general is substantial and psychiatric experts carry a high responsibility for the expert opinions in social law. In order to be able to justify this responsibility, psychiatric experts must possess expert knowledge with respect to the current scientific debate in the respective field as well as the individual fields of social law and the various problems associated with them. This article describes the examination and structure of expert opinions. The problem of the so-called critical examination of the will and the problem of malingering are discussed. The important fields in social law are described.     

Indikation zur Gruppenpsychotherapie

Current scientific evidence on the criteria for indications for group psychotherapy is mainly based on clinical evidence or on expert assessments. Nevertheless, a wide range of inclusion and exclusion criteria have been described, which especially concern disorder and illness behavior-related features as well as emotional and interpersonal variables. The selection of patients for group treatment is just as important as their preparation with information material or pre-group training in order to reduce the comparatively high dropout rates.