Albert Ellis' personal responses to the Survey of Rational-Emotive Therapists

This article presents Albert Ellis' personal responses to the Survey of Rational-Emotive Therapists and his answers to a number of questions that the first and second authors asked Ellis regarding some of his responses. Ellis also commented on how adequately he thought the results of the survey appeared to represent the current philosophies and practices of RET.     

Conflict of interest between therapist-patient confidentiality and the duty to report sexual abuse of children

All 51 jurisdictions in the United States require physicians to report suspected child abuse. In most jurisdictions, reporting requirements override both confidentiality and privilege associated with the physician-patient relationship. The authors review the literature relevant to the conflict between privacy and reporting abuse and report the results of a national survey of therapists at sex offender treatment units. They discuss ethical problems experienced under these statutes by therapists who attempt to provide treatment for sex offenders, and by therapists who are required to report past instances of child abuse even when there is no evidence of ongoing abuse.     

Intimate homicide: An analysis of violent social relationships

Homicide which occurs in intimate social relationships was studied using data from three Western Canadian cities. Variables which may be related to the relationship and homicide are also examined. Unstable relationships are clearly differentiated from other relationships and are more likely to result in homicide. Implications for future research are discussed.     

Fallacies

Fallacies are things people commit, and when they commit them they do something wrong. What kind of activities are people engaged in when they commit fallacies, and in what way are they doing something wrong? Many different things are called fallacies. The diversity of the use of the concept of a fallacy suggests that we are dealing with a family of cases not related by a common essence. However, we suggest a simple account of the nature of fallacies which encompasses them all, viz., the term “fallacy” is our most general term for criticizing any general procedure used for the fixation of beliefs that has an unacceptably high tendency to generate false or unfounded beliefs, relative to that method of fixing beliefs. Very different sorts of things called fallacies are examined in the light of this account, e.g., denying the antecedent, circular arguments, so-called informal fallacies, and propositions said to be fallacies. We do not provide a theory of fallacies. Still, on our account pretty much all of those things that have been called fallacies are fallacies, and they have been called fallacies for pretty much the same reasons.     

Reasons for employee sabotage in the workplace

Unionized workers at a factory were asked to rate a variety of reasons which would justify the use of sabotage in an organization, as well as the justifiability of four general methods of sabotage (slowdowns, destructiveness, dishonesty, and causing chaos). Results showed that as compared to those who didn't accept a wide variety of reasons for sabotage, those who accepted a variety of reasons would more readily justify all forms of sabotage except dishonesty. The data is discussed in terms of the reasons for the lack of justification that dishonesty receives, as well as future directions for the study of sabotage.     

Unanswered questions in assessment center research

This study compared the predictive validity of two types of overall assessment center ratings (clinical and mechanical) and two types of performance ratings (supervisor and subordinate). Data were gathered on approximately 50 law enforcement agency managers over a four-year time span. Results indicated that clinical predictions were not significantly better than mechanical ones and that prior performance ratings were better predictors of future performance ratings than were assessment centers. Further, dimension ratings within the assessment center were found to be unrelated to ratings of the same dimensions on the job four years later, supporting the notion of subtle criterion contamination (Klimoski & Strickland, 1977) and raising questions about the central assumptions underlying the assessment center approach.     

Adjustment to hemodialysis treatment through behavioral controls

The present study was conducted to examine the hypothesis that compliant chronically ill patients, typically described as adjusted, reinforce more positive social environments using behavioral controls than noncompliant patients, typically described as maladjusted. Specifically, it is hypothesized that diet-compliant chronic hemodialysis patients emit significnatly more active involvement-in-treatment behaviors and more social behaviors than diet-noncompliant chronic hemodialysis patients. Subjects, who ranged in age from 30 to 77 years, were outpatients at a kidney center. Behavioral observations were conducted to assess the occurrence or frequency of (1) four involvement-in-treatment behaviors that are routinely taught to all patients and (2) two social behaviors, which were patient verbalizations and smiles. The results showed that compliant patients emitted significantly more involvement-in-treatment behaviors and smiles than noncompliant patients. Results support the proposed control framework that compliant, in contrast to non-compliant, chronically ill patients have recourse through positive behavioral controls when adjusting to the stresses of illness. It was proposed that through these controls, compliant patients reinforce positive environments rather than simply respond to life circumstances as given.