An analytic hierarchy process model to apportion co-author responsibility

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) can be used to determine co-author responsibility for a scientific paper describing collaborative research. The objective is to deter scientific fraud by holding co-authors accountable for their individual contributions. A hiearchical model of the research presented in a paper can be created by dividing it into primary and secondary elements. The co-authors then determine the contributions of the primary and secondary elements to the work as a whole as well as their own individual contributions. They can use the results to determine authorship order.     

The mind-brain relationship: the emergent self

This paper explores the mind-brain relationship, using insights from contemporary neuroscience. It seeks to investigate how our brains become who we are, how subjective experience arises. In order to do this some explanation is given of the basic concepts of how the brain produces our subjective mental life. Current neuropsychological and neurobiological understanding of early brain development, memory, emotion and consciousness are explored. There is also an attempt at mapping the mind-brain-self relationship from a uniquely Jungian perspective. Clinical material is included in order to show the relevance of these insights to our work in the consulting room, arguing the value of the affect-regulating, relational aspects of the analytic dyad that forge new neural pathways through emotional connection. Such experience forms the emotional scaffolding necessary for the emergence of reflective function.     

Complexities and paradoxes in our organizational life

This paper (a version of which was delivered at the North/South Conference of California Jungians in 1997) delineates some of the effects of the complex relationships that occur within and between analytic institutes, particularly when there are training programmes in the institutes. It notes how confidentiality is handled, discusses the pair structures within the institutes and focuses on developing awareness of organizational relationships and how colleagues treat one another.     

Critical Notice

Book reviewed in this article:
Alister, Ian and Hauke, Christopher (eds.), Contemporary Jungian Analysis. Post-Jungian Perspectives from the Society of Analytical Psychology     

Generosity: a psychological and interpersonal motivational factor of therapeutic relevance

This paper examines the role of generosity in analysis. Generosity represents a complex constellation of cognitions and affects that is antithetical to those states of super-ego harshness that characterize many forms of human psychopathology. In development, generosity is evoked by idealization, and a dynamic axis of idealization-generosity promotes relational proximity between the child and its caretakers, and eventually fosters separation and individuation. Generosity is highly sensitive to adverse conditions, and requires environmental conditions that are conducive to psychosomatic well-being. The imaginal basis of generosity is rooted in the myth of the 'hero and the return', which is the mythic foundation of the analyst's role as psychopomp. It is argued that the generosity of the analyst is a cardinal therapeutic factor in treatment.     

Books received

Analytical Psychology
Guggenbühl, Allan., The Incredible Fascination of Violence: Dealing with Aggression and Brutality Among Children.
Bradway, Kay & McCoard, Barbara., Sandplay – Silent Workshop of the Psyche.
Psychoanalysis
Segal, Hanna., Psychoanalysis, Literature and War.
Psychotherapy
White, Andy., Going Mad to Stay Sane – The Psychology of Self-Destructive Behaviour.
Reeve, Gillian & Nesbitt, Jo., The Desperate Woman's Guide to Therapy.
Miscellaneous
Schmidt Neven, Ruth., Emotional Milestones – From Birth to Adulthood: A Psychodynamic Approach.     

The Unreal Child1

Unrepresented mental states lead to an impaired ability to feel emotions and trust in oneself, one’s history and in the world. The article explores the question of how representations of oneself and the relevant other, the mother, become possible in the course of therapy when dissociative processes previously made this impossible, and what role unconscious communication plays in the analytic realm. This question will be explored by examining the theories of André Green, Philip Bromberg, and Howard Levine.     

Commentaries on “Beyond statistical significance: Five principles for the new era of data analysis and reporting”

Three commentaries below provide different perspectives on data analysis and reporting. They generally focus on how the quality of the measures and manipulations determines the value of the analysis. Norbert Schwarz and Fritz Strack's comment is less on the right statistic and more on “sloppy reasoning, gaps between theoretical concepts and their operationalizations, and blissful ignorance of the situated nature of human thinking, feeling, and doing contribute more to the limited reproducibility of empirical findings than the choice of a particular test statistic.” They propose that particular effects are contextual and inappropriately labeled as true or false. Instead, our job is to focus on general constructs that make sense of the diversity of human experience and psychological reactions. Too often studies replicating psychological effects in the noisy and confounded conditions of the marketplace result in statistical uncertainty of garbage in, garbage out. Researchers instead need to look toward tests of specific interactions, which can clarify the influencing factors based on theoretical considerations. The second comment is by Andrew Gelman, an outstanding psychological statistician. He proposes that “once the data have been collected, the most important decisions have already been done.” He then provides four recommendations that enable the statistics to work appropriately. The first requirement of an effective study is to be sure that the measures address the construct of interest. Similar to the position of Schwarz and Strack, it is important to articulate the relevance of a statistically significant finding. The second recommendation seeks to curb large number of studies with inflated effect sizes built from narrow studies and unwarranted optimism. The third recommendation is to simulate data from a model and consider the distribution of possible results. That is often done to test a new analysis method, but it can be even more important in marketplace studies where novel characteristics of the sample and experimental conditions are included in the analysis. Finally, he recommends that one consider likely analyses needed before getting the data. Such foresight would encourage, for example, thinking about the kind of data needed to defend the equality of the control demographics against the treatment. The final commentary is by Stijn van Osselaer. He agrees that p-values reflect the detailed methods from a given study but do not focus on the problem of generalizability. Like Gelman, he sees designs focused on effect sizes may have generated too many studies that do not replicate. He contrasts broad explorations with narrowly defined existence tests that provide evidence that an effect exists somewhere but are mute on other contexts where they may apply. For theoretical problems relevant to applications, it is important to identify moderators through broad sampling across population characteristics, stimuli, and situations. He proposes that consumer psychologists should not try to do everything in one paper, but to build practically relevant, applicable knowledge across multiple articles. Different articles, authors, and research methods play various roles, with each article focusing on important stages in the process from generating hypotheses, providing existence proofs, and exploring their broad applicability. That pragmatic approach can integrate theoretical silos that seek to resolve complex human problems and has promise as a criterion for relevant publications.     

Identity and Difference: A Hundred Years of Analytic Philosophy

At its origins, analytic philosophy is an interest in language, science, logic, analysis, and a systematic rather than a historical approach to philosophical problems. Early analytic philosophers were famous for making clear conceptual distinctions and for couching them in comprehensible and lucid sentences. It is argued that this situation is changing, that analytic philosophy is turning into its mirror image and is thereby becoming more like the kind of philosophy that it used to oppose.