The long-term evaluation of a behavioral treatment program for child molesters

Recidivism data derived from various sources over a follow-up period of 1–11 yr, provided the basis for appraising the effectiveness of a comprehensive cognitive-behavioral treatment program for familial and nonfamilial child molesters. Unofficial records held by police and Children's Aid Societies proved to be the best data for estimating recidivism. These data revealed increases in recidivism with longer follow-up periods, but there were consistent advantages for the treated over the untreated patients. Men who had sexually abused the daughters of other people demonstrated the clearest treatment benefits. The younger offenders and those who had engaged in genital-genital contact with their victims were more likely to reoffend even if they were treated. Contrary to the expectations of behavior therapists, indices of deviant sexual preferences did not predict outcome.     

Temporal memory over the adult lifespan

Performances of noncollege student young adults, middle-aged adults, and elderly adults were contrasted on word temporal memory and paired-associate learning tasks. A comparison group of college-student subjects was also evaluated on each task. Significant effects for age variation were found for each task. The age sensitivity for temporal memory conflicts with one of the criteria commonly established for determining the automaticity of a memory task. In addition, moderately high positive correlations were found for each age group between word temporal memory scores and paired-associate learning scores, implying the involvement of effortful processes over the adult lifespan in word temporal memory.     

Remembering Your Parents: Reflections on the Retrospective Method

In the present paper, I critique the use of the retrospective method when it is used as a proxy for actual longitudinal data on personality development. Studies on the constructive nature of memory cast strong doubts about the meaning of retrospective data. There are good reasons, both theoretical and empirical, to distrust the accuracy of such recall concerning parenting, whether recalled by parents, children, or siblings. Instead of using the method as a shortcut to developmental data, studies examining individual differences in accuracy and distortion and the factors that moderate them may inform us of the various meanings of retrospective data.     

Progress in Psychoblography

ABSTRACT Progress in psychobiography What is it? Has there been any? And what processes contnbute to it? The issue of progress in psychobiography is pursued from two different perspectives The first section briefly reviews the historical growth of the field, including the range of disciplines involved, the rise of associated professional organizations and publication outlets, and a quantitative analysis of the increase in books, articles, and dissertations in psychobiography The second section argues that progress in psychobiographical understanding can be analyzed into eight component processes, such as the collection of additional evidence, the formulation of fresh interpretations, critical examination of prior explanations, and the application of new theoretical advances These processes are illustrated with an examination of the course of debate about the physical and psychological disturbances of King George III Personality psychology is concerned with the four basic tasks of developing general theories of personality, analyzing individual and group differences, understanding individual persons, and studying selected processes and classes of behavior In that developing a better understanding of individual persons is one of the ultimate objectives of personality psychology, progress in psychobiography is intimately related to progress in personality psychology as a whole     

The Public and Private Use of Consensus-Raising Excuses

ABSTRACT Two experiments tested the proposition that people use consensus-raising excuses more in private than in public when the audience has information that could refute subjects' claims about others In Experiment 1, subjects received success or failure feedback and made public or private attributions to ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck In Experiment 2, subjects received positive or negative feedback and evaluated themselves and others on the trait Task difficulty attributions and evaluations of others are consensus-raising measures Consistent with our hypothesis, subjects receiving negative feedback in Experiment 1 claimed that the task was more difficult, and in Experiment 2 evaluated the other more negatively in private than in public.