Speaking truth to power: Empowerment ideology as social intervention and policy

The popularity, and subsequent ambiguity, in the use of the term “empowerment” has created an even greater need for reassessment in the applied context than in the theory and research literatures. This paper outlines some of the areas of community, organizational, and societal level social intervention and policy ostensibly based on the concept of empowerment. These include neighborhood voluntary associations (for environmental protection, community crime prevention, etc.), self-help groups, competence-building primary prevention, organizational management, health care and educational reforms, and national and international community service and community development policies. Issues in applying social research to community organizations and to legislative and administrative policy making are reviewed. Ten recommendations are offered, including the value of a dialectical analysis, for helping researchers and policy makers/administrators make more effective use of empowerment theory and research. Humpty Dumpty: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean neither more nor less.” King of Hearts: “If there's no meaning in it, that saves a world of trouble, you know, as we needn't try to find any.”—Lewis Carroll Portions of this paper were first presented in the program “Empowerment Theory, Research and policy” at the Biennial Conference on Community Research and Action, Williamsburg, Virginia, June 18, 1993. The author thanks Barbara B. Brown, Jo Ann Lippe, Ken Maton and his students, David V. Perkins, Marc A. Zimmerman, and the anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts.     

REALISM AND OPENNESS IN SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY

Abstract. Intrinsic to rigorous knowledge of God is the recognition that positive theological concepts and statements about God arising under the compelling claims of God's reality upon the human mind must have an open revisable structure. A similar combination of critical realism and ontological openness is apparent in the profound change that has taken place in the rational structure of rigorous science from the radical dualism and closed causal system of classical mechanics to the unifying world view and open dynamic field-theories of modern physics. It is argued that the intersection of theological and natural science in their epis-temological foundations can enhance their ontological commitment and heuristic thrust.     

Memory for a dialectical and a nondialectical prose passage in young and older adults

Age differences in adults' processing of a dialectical or nondialectical prose passage were explored. Twenty young and 20 older adults read a dialectical or mechanistic passage and were tested for free recall and recognition after a 30-min delay (filled with vocabulary and paradigm belief scale). Older (vs. young) adults had significantly lower formistic and mechanistic scores and showed greater relative preference for relativistic and dialectical beliefs (paradigm scale). There were no age differences in amount of free recall or number of correct responses (hits) on recognition, but older adults produced more spontaneous dialectical distortions in recall of the mechanistic passage and more paradigm-congruent false alarms on recognition. There was also a move from absolute toward dialectical thinking on the paradigm scale and, among males, on the recognition measure. Dialectical scores (paradigm scale) were positively correlated, and mechanistic scores negatively correlated, with number of dialectical distortions on free recall (mechanistic passage), while dialectical scores were positively correlated with number of dialectical false alarms (dialectical passage).     

Argument Structure and Disciplinary Perspective

Many in the informal logic tradition distinguish convergent from linked argument structure. The pragma-dialectical tradition distinguishes multiple from co-ordinatively compound argumentation. Although these two distinctions may appear to coincide, constituting only a terminological difference, we argue that they are distinct, indeed expressing different disciplinary perspectives on argumentation. From a logical point of view, where the primary evaluative issue concerns sufficient strength of support, the unit of analysis is the individual argument, the particular premises put forward to support a given conclusion. Structure is internal to this unit. From a dialectical point of view, where the focus concerns how well a critical discussion comes to a reasoned conclusion of some disputed question, the argumentation need not constitute a single unit of argument. The unit of dialectical analysis will be the entire argumentation made up of these several arguments. The multiple/co-ordinatively compound distinction is dialectical, while the linked/convergent distinction is logical. Keeping these two pairs of distinctions separate allows us to see certain attempts to characterize convergent versus linked arguments as rather characterizing multiple versus co-ordinatively compound arguments, in particular attempts of Thomas, Nolt, and Yanal, and to resolve straightforwardly conflicts, tensions, or anomalies in their accounts. Walton's preferred Suspension/Insufficient Proof test to identify linked argument structure correctly identifies co-ordinatively compound structure. His objection to using the concept of relevance to explicate the distinction between linked and convergent structure within co-ordinatively compound argumentation can be met through explicating relevance in terms of inference licenses. His counterexample to the Suspension/No Support test for identifying linked structure which this approach supports can itself be straightforwardly dealt with when the test is explicated through inference licenses.     

试论骨科辐射效应的线性与非线性关系

放射界对于辐射效应一直沿用线性无阈理论,但近年来,低剂量辐射效应却让其表现出非线性特征。而且对于骨折以及骨科其他疾病来说不同剂量辐射所产生的效应是不同的,即其在骨科中也存在线性与非线性的对立统一,只有认清这两者的辩证关系,才能抓住其本质,最终产生深远的意义和临床应用。     

Changes in personality in pre‐ and post‐dialectical behaviour therapy borderline personality disorder groups: A question of self‐control

Dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) is an evidence‐based therapy for people with borderline personality disorder (BPD). Past research has identified behavioural changes indicating improved functioning for people who undergo DBT. To date, however, there has been little research investigating the underlying mechanism of change. The present study utilised a between‐subjects design and self‐report questionnaires of Self‐Control and the five factor model of personality and drew participants from a metropolitan DBT program. We found that pre‐treatment participants were significantly lower on Self‐Control, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness when compared to both the post‐treatment assessment and the norms for each questionnaire. Neuroticism was significantly higher both before and after treatment when compared to the norms. These findings suggest that Self‐Control may play a role in both the presentation of this disorder and the effect of DBT. High levels of Neuroticism lend weight to the Linehan biosocial model of BPD development.     

A Guide to Women in Management

The majority of occupational therapists are female clinicians who tend to be motivated by human service. They do not tend to be motivated by administrative or managerial responsibilities beyond those essential to local disciplines functions. More occupational therapists may become interested in management once they are aware of sociocultural assumptions and prejudices as well as the specific qualifications and competencies involved. Sex role stereotyping and some roles are reviewed. Assertiveness training and basic management competencies are listed as pertinent skill acquisitions.