REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE: A PSYCHOANALYTIC AND FAMILY‐LIFE‐CYCLE VIEW OF EMERGING ADULTHOOD IN THE FILM

The period during which grown children leave home and establish a new, self‐supporting family is called emerging adulthood. This paper uses psychoanalytic concepts and family‐life‐cycle theory to analyze the film Rebel without a Cause ( 1955 ) as a dramatic example of three families going through this phase. Freud's ( 1910 ) rescue‐motif of the child trying to save an endangered peer to repay his parents for having been nurtured is also characteristic of this period and is considered practice for parenting the next generation. Proximate conflict and support enable two of the film's families to continue the path to reproduce themselves.     

THE NEW EVANGELIZATION IN AN ECCLESIOLOGICAL CONTEXT

This paper will seek to explore some of the implications of the new evangelization from an ecclesiological perspective. A key question is, what is an appropriate ecclesiological context for the new evangelization? Any conclusions or recommendations about how to respond and contextualize the new evangelization need to be grounded in an appropriate ecclesiology; one that sits well with contemporary Catholic scholarship, especially in light of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. Following Dulles, no single approach to ecclesiology can fully explain the complex nature of the Church. Taking the ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium as a departure point a number of perspectives will be addressed, but an argument will be made for understanding the new evangelization within an ecclesiology of communion and of discipleship.     

ARE WE GETTING FOOLED AGAIN? COMING TO TERMS WITH LIMITATIONS IN THE USE OF PERSONALITY TESTS FOR PERSONNEL SELECTION

We recently published an article in which we highlighted a number of issues associated with the use of self-report personality tests in personnel selection contexts ( Morgeson et al., 2007 ). Both Ones, Dilchert, Viswesvaran, and Judge (2007) and Tett and Christiansen (2007) have written responses to this article. In our response to these articles we address many of the issues raised by Ones et al. and Tett and Christiansen. In addition to a detailed response, we make the following 4 key points: (1) Our criticisms of personality testing apply only to the selection context, not to all research on personality; (2) the observed validities of personality tests predicting job performance criteria are low and have not changed much over time; (3) when evaluating the usefulness of using personality tests to select applicants, one must not ignore the observed, uncorrected validity; and (4) when discussing the value of personality tests for selection contexts, the most important criteria are those that reflect job performance. Implications for personality testing research and practice are discussed.