Treatment with Unethical Practitioners; Caveat Emptors

Therapists who are trained at psychoanalytic institutes often foster unethical relationships between trainees and senior therapists. This practice may pass on the damage to the unsuspecting population of patients at large. One way in which trainees are harmed, at these institutes, is in their failure to develop a clear sense of the importance of boundaries in treatment. In not learning how to develop a secure frame from their own treatment, neophyte therapists are often unable to recognize the need for appropriate boundaries in their treatment of others. As a result, their patients may be in danger. The therapist who does not value the struggle to maintain a healthy balance between independence and dependence in their own treatment will probably not be able to help their patients find the proper balance either. One can only wonder how such a therapist could help their own patients know when the time to end treatment is at hand. My own research seems to indicate that unethical treatment practices at these institutes cut across ideological and theoretical differences within the analytic community. Consequently, the problem is not one of individuals who are poorly analyzed and poorly trained. Rather, the focus is a wider one, in which a serious blindspot seems to be endemic to a system that fosters a lack of regard for appropriate boundaries in treatment.     

Reducing MMPI-2 defensiveness: the effect of specialized instructions on retest validity in a job applicant sample

The MMPI-2 is often used for screening job applicants when public safety or security are at risk. Inherent in such applications is concern for profile validity and test defensiveness. In this study, we examine the impact of revised instructions on profile validity for a group of job applicants who initially produced invalid profiles. Participants were 271 male applicants for airline pilot positions. Of these, 72 produced invalid defensive MMPI-2 profiles during preemployment screening. The MMPI-2 was readministered to these applicants with instructions informing them of validity scales and instructing them to respond in a more open, honest manner. Comparisons were made between valid and invalid profiles for initial administrations and between valid and invalid profiles at readministration. Some clinical scales were more elevated for valid, nondefensive profiles. Most content scales showed more elevation for valid profiles, and 12% of the applicants who were retested produced significant elevations (T>or=65) on the content scales. Profiles were similar to those produced by employed pilots of a previous study.     

Davidson on First-Person Authority

Davidson's explanation of first-person authority in utterance of sentences of the form 'I V that p ' derives first-person authority from the requirements of interpretation of speech. His account is committed to the view that utterance sentences are truth-bearers, that believing that p is a matter of holding true an utterance sentence, and that a speaker's knowledge of what he means gives him knowledge of what belief he expresses by his utterance. These claims are here faulted. His explanation of first-person authority by reference to the requirements of interpretability is committed to the view that all understanding involves interpretation. This is argued to be a misconception of understanding and of speaker's meaning. Davidson's account involves acceptance of the cognitive assumption that normally when a person V s that p , he knows that he does. This assumption is challenged. Throughout, Davidson's conception is compared and contrasted with Wittgenstein's.     

Fuzzy Logic and Arithmetical Hierarchy,II

A very simple many-valued predicate calculus is presented; a completeness theorem is proved and the arithmetical complexity of some notions concerning provability is determined.     

The Use of Contextual Information by Right Brain-Damaged Individuals in the Resolution of Ambiguous Pronouns

Two experiments were conducted with the primary purpose of investigating the ability of right brain-damaged (RBD) individuals to use contextual information—at the level of the single sentence, in terms of the integration of information between clauses, and at the level of a minimal discourse (i.e., two sentences)—in the resolution of ambiguous pronouns. The investigation was extended to a group of left brain-damaged (LBD) and non-brain-damaged (NBD) individuals. Contrary to the prevailing view that RBD patients have difficulty in the use of contextual information to process language, both experiments were consistent in demonstrating that the RBD group was influenced by contextual information in a manner similar to that demonstrated by both the LBD and NBD groups.     

Effects of Different Telephone Intervention Styles with Suicidal Callers at Two Suicide Prevention Centers: An Empirical Investigation

To determine the relative effectiveness of telephone intervention styles with suicidal callers, researchers listened unobtrusively to 617 calls by suicidal persons at two suicide prevention centers and categorized all 66,953 responses by the 110 volunteer helpers according to a reliable 20-category checklist. Outcome measures showed observer evaluations of decreased depressive mood from the beginning to the end in 14% of calls, decreased suicidal urgency ratings from the beginning to the end in 27% of calls, and reaching a contract in 68% of calls, of which 54% of contracts were upheld according to follow-up data. Within the context of relatively directive interventions, a greater proportion of Rogerian nondirective responses was related to significantly more decreases in depression. Reduction in urgency and reaching a contract were related to greater use of Rogerian response categories only with nonchronic callers.     

Automation bias: decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits

Automated aids and decision support tools are rapidly becoming indispensable tools in high-technology cockpits and are assuming increasing control of"cognitive" flight tasks, such as calculating fuel-efficient routes, navigating, or detecting and diagnosing system malfunctions and abnormalities. This study was designed to investigate automation bias, a recently documented factor in the use of automated aids and decision support systems. The term refers to omission and commission errors resulting from the use of automated cues as a heuristic replacement for vigilant information seeking and processing. Glass-cockpit pilots flew flight scenarios involving automation events or opportunities for automation-related omission and commission errors. Although experimentally manipulated accountability demands did not significantly impact performance, post hoc analyses revealed that those pilots who reported an internalized perception of "accountability" for their performance and strategies of interaction with the automation were significantly more likely to double-check automated functioning against other cues and less likely to commit errors than those who did not share this perception. Pilots were also lilkely to erroneously "remember" the presence of expected cues when describing their decision-making processes.