试论中医基础研究中的创造性思维

创造性思维对于中医基础研究非常重要.在中医基础研究中过分依赖高新技术,或者不敢直面问题、遇到困难退缩将阻碍创造性思维.中医基础研究的创造性思维需要研究者在传统知识、现代知识、高新技术与仪器等方面作好充分的准备.为使研究保持正确的方向,在研究中要处理好"已知"与"未知"的关系并以"和"的态度对待学术争论.     

Breaking the Solid Ground of Common Sense: Undoing “Structure” with Michael Balint

Balint's great merit was to question what, in the classical perspective, was assumed as a prerequisite for analysis and thus located beyond analysis: the maturity of the ego. A fundamental premise of his work was Ferenczi's distrust for the structural model, which praised the maturity of the ego and its verbal, social, and adaptive abilities. Ferenczi's view of ego maturation as a trauma derivative was strikingly different from the theories of all other psychoanalytic schools and seems to be responsible for Balint's understanding of regression as a sort of inverted process that enables the undoing of the sheltering structures of the mature mind. Balint's understanding of the relation between mature ego and regression diverged not only from the ego psychologists, who emphasized the idea of therapeutic alliance, but also from most of the authors who embraced the object-relational view, like Klein (who considered regression a manifestation of the patient's craving for oral gratification), Fairbairn (who gave up the notion of regression), and Guntrip (who viewed regression as a schizoid phenomenon related to the ego weakness). According to Balint, the clinical appearance of a regression would depend also on the way the regression is recognized, is accepted, and is responded to by the analyst. In this respect, his position was close to Winnicott's reformulation of the therapeutic action. Yet, the work of Balint reflects the persuasion that the progressive fluidification of the solid structure could be enabled only by the analyst's capacity for becoming himself or herself [unsolid].     

Clutching at Certainty: Thoughts on the Coercive Grip of Cult-Like Groups

This response to Richard Raubolt's article, Attack on the Self, attempts to understand the intense and enduring connection that often develops between charismatic leaders of cult-like groups and their followers in terms of their mutual need to regulate uncertainty. After describing the intersubjective regulation of uncertainty, a concept influenced by self psychology and intersubjectivity systems theory, a number of uncertainty regulating modes that emerged in the training program are examined including: 1) the denial of difference, 2) the denial of sameness, 3) alter ego relating, 4) the inflamation of passion, and 5) faith-keeping fantasies.     

Challenges in studying the effects of scientific societies on research integrity

Beyond impressionistic observations, little is known about the role and influence of scientific societies on research conduct. Acknowledging that the influence of scientific societies is not easily disentangled from other factors that shape norms and practices, this article addresses how best to study the promotion of research integrity generally as well as the role and impact of scientific societies as part of that process. In setting forth the parameters of a research agenda, the article addresses four issues: (1) how to conceptualize research on scientific societies and research integrity; (2) challenges and complexities in undertaking basic research; (3) strategies for undertaking basic research that is attentive to individual, situational, organizational, and environmental levels of analysis; and (4) the need for evaluation research as integral to programmatic change and to assessment of the impact of activities by scientific societies. This topic was initially discussed at the AAAS-Office of Research Integrity (ORI) meeting in Washington DC on the theme: “The Role and Activities of Scientific Societies in Promoting Research Integrity” held on April 10–11, 2000. Joyce Miller Iutcovich, PhD, is President of the Keystone University Research Corporation.     

高中会考等值方法的比较研究

本研究采用随机等组设计与铆测验相结合的方案。首先验证了两随机等组的平均数、方差和分布状态无显著差异,再用随机等组的等值分作为等值效标来检验其他等值方法的误差,然后比较了在铆测验设计中三种线性等值方法（在不同总体权重下）的误差值,以选出适合高中合考的等值方法及总体权重。经研究发现：会考等值宜采用Tucker观察分数线性等值方法,并宜选择总体权重W1＝1。     

Why Do Conceptual Analysts Disagree?

The practice of a priori conceptual analysis requires that the concept being analyzed be available in the analyst's mind. The difficulties of analysis and the existence of disagreements among analysts are explained by distinguishing the implicit knowledge we have of these concepts from the explicit knowledge we seek. This view of disagreement assumes that those who disagree are typically attempting to analyze a single shared concept. In this paper, reasons are developed for replacing this guiding assumption with the alternative assumption that members of a conceptual community often have similar, but not identical, concepts. Adopting this alternative requires that we rethink the nature and aims of conceptual analysis.     

Michael Balint's Group Approach: The Boston Balint Group

Michael Balint was a physician/psychoanalyst who trained in Hungary and emigrated to England in 1939 when Nazi Germany began to dominate Europe. At the Tavistock Clinic, he and his wife met with social workers and physicians around case discussion seminars. With his strong interest in medicine and his curiosity about the patient-physician relationship, he initiated research/training groups with interested physicians, which ultimately led to publication of the now-classic The Doctor, His Patient, and the Illness, a rich text that has become a virtual staple of family practice residencies, along with Balint Groups for training. Balint refrained from considering his groups psychotherapy in order to minimize resistance of his physician-students. But because the groups lasted sometimes for years and explored transference and countertransference in patient-physician relationships, he acknowledged that the result was personal growth of the participants. His techniques are described and an example of a Balint Group (Boston Group) are presented here.     

The Freedom-based Account of Solidarity and Basic Income

Real-libertarianism, as it is expressed in Philippe Van Parijs' recent monograph Real Freedom for All is characteristically committed to both self-ownership and 'solidarity’ with the infirm or handicapped. In this article it is argued that the conception of (real) freedom that is used to endorse self-ownership is inconsistent with the conception of (social) freedom or opportunity that is used to justify transfer payments to those with no or low earning capacity. The problem turns around the question whether one's freedom consists in the access one has to a share of the social product or in the measure of economic self-sufficiency one enjoys. Accordingly the role of private property in external resources as a condition for freedom is unclear: is it the basis of people's capacity for self-determination or is it the basis of people's bargaining power? Van Parijs' commitment to self-ownership suggests the former, his commitment to solidarity suggests the latter. A similar ambivalence is pointed out in his argument for a universal basic income, for which Real Freedom for All is so well-known.     

Basic research needed for stimulating the development of behavioral technologies

The costs of disconnection between the basic and applied sectors of behavior analysis are reviewed, and some solutions to these problems are proposed. Central to these solutions are collaborations between basic and applied behavioral scientists in programmatic research that addresses the behavioral basis and solution of human behavior problems. This kind of collaboration parallels the deliberate interactions between basic and applied researchers that have proven to be so profitable in other scientific fields, such as medicine. Basic research questions of particular relevance to the development of behavioral technologies are posed in the following areas: response allocation, resistance to change, countercontrol, formation and differentiation/discrimination of stimulus and response classes, analysis of low-rate behavior, and rule-governed behavior. Three interrelated strategies to build connections between the basic and applied analysis of behavior are identified: (a) the development of nonhuman animal models of human behavior problems using operations that parallel plausible human circumstances, (b) replication of the modeled relations with human subjects in the operant laboratory, and (c) tests of the generality of the model with actual human problems in natural settings.     

Establishing appropriate symptomatic control groups for the eating disorders

Two symptomatic control groups for the eating disorders were defined using high and low scores on the Dietary Restraint and Disinhibition scales of the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire. Clinical subjects diagnosed with anorexia and bulimia nervosa were compared with these symptomatic control groups using measures of body weight, bulimic symptoms, and anorexic symptoms. In comparison to the high-Restraint/low-Disinhibition group, anorexic subjects scored higher on measures of eating disorder symptoms but not on Restraint and Disinhibition. The high-Restraint/high-Disinhibition group differed from bulimia nervosa subjects on measures of eating disorder symptoms but did not differ on Restraint and Disinhibition. The results suggested that a control group defined by high Restraint and low Disinhibition formed an appropriate control group for anorexia nervosa. For bulimia nervosa, the most appropriate control group was defined by high Restraint and high Disinhibition.