Definitional and Research Issues in the Common Factors Approach to Psychotherapy Integration: Misconceptions, Clarifications, and Proposals

This paper focuses on two common misconceptions of common factors in therapy. The first misconception entails the confusion between common factors and therapeutic factors, and thus the inappropriate and misleading use of the term therapeutic common factors in various situations. The second misconception is the mixing of commonalities of different kinds and levels in proposed lists and studies of common factors. These areas are discussed and clarified, and recommendations designed to facilitate conceptual and methodological improvements relative to each misconception are offered. The selection of best levels and kinds of common factors to be studied are further explored (i.e., the study of client change events and antecedent therapist behaviors across different therapies), and specific proposals for their research are outlined.     

The Client Is the Most Important Common Factor: Clients' Self-Healing Capacities and Psychotherapy

I first briefly review the dodo bird verdict and suggest that we should be responding to it by looking for a new way to conceptualize how therapy works. Then I describe the dominant medical or treatment model of psychotherapy and how it puts the client in the position of a dependent variable who is operated on by supposedly potent therapeutic techniques. Next I argue that the data do not fit with this model. An alternative model is that the client is the most important common factor and that it is clients' self-healing capacities which make therapy work. I then argue that therapy has two phases—the involvement phase and the learning phase—and that the involvement phase is the most important. I next review the five learning opportunities provided by therapy. Finally, I argue that a relational model of therapy focused on consultation, collaboration, and dialogue is better than a treatment model.     

The Role of Families and Care Givers as Risk and Protective Factors in Preventing Youth Violence

This paper reviews research which discusses the risk and protective functions that families and other caregivers provide in influencing the development of aggressive behavior in youth. Currently, there is an emphasis on providing violence prevention programs in the school environment, typically with little parental or caregiver involvement. By enhancing the role of families and caregivers in youth violence prevention programs, we assert that an unique opportunity exists to both address specific risk factors for violence while enhancing the protective features of the family. Relatedly, the risk literature on youth violence indicates that the most influential risk factors (i.e., the family, community, and peers) have their principle impact on youth aggression outside the school. We suggest a shift in the focus of violence prevention programming that is more inclusive of families as both a risk and protective agent. In support of this position, relevant theory and reviews of exemplary family-involved programs are offered. Challenges to involving youth caregivers are identified and recommendations for overcoming those challenges suggested. Last, recommendations for future research and public policy in the prevention of youth violence are offered.     

The Therapeutic Factors Inventory: Development of a Scale

Although Yalom's (1995) framework of the therapeutic factors facilitating outcome in group has been accepted by group specialists, no empirically based instrument assesses all of these factors. The Therapeutic Factors Inventory (TFI), with 11 scales based on the therapeutic factors, has been designed to fill this gap. This article summarizes the development and preliminary reliability testing of the TFI. Each scale of the instrument demonstrated high internal consistency; however, one scale obtained unacceptably low test-retest reliability. Further validity testing is needed. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Semantic Shifts in Argumentative Processes: A Step Beyond the ‘Fallacy of Equivocation’

In naturally occuring argumentation, words which play a crucial role in the argument often acquire different meanings on subsequent occasions of use. Traditionally, such semantic shifts have been dealt with by the fallacy of equivocation. In my paper, I would like to show that there is considerably more to semantic shifts during arguments than their potentially being fallacious. Based on an analysis of a debate on environmental policy, I will argue that shifts in meaning are produced by a principle I call local semantic elaboration. I will go on to show that semantic shifts in the meaning of a word, the position advocated by a party, and the questions that the parties raise during an argumentative process are neatly tailored to one another, but can be incommensurable to the opponent's views. Semantic shifts thus may have a dissociative impact on a critical discussion. By linking the structure of argumentation to its pragmatics, however, it may be revealed that there are two practices that account for a higher order of coherence of the debate. The first practice is a general preference for disagreeing with the opponent, the second practice is the interpretation of local speech acts in terms of an overall ideological stance that is attributed to the speaker. Because of these practices, parties do not criticize divergent semantic conceptions as disruptive, but they treat them as characteristic and sometimes even metonymic reflections of the parties' positions.     

对伪医学现象的思考

伪医学是当今社会的普遍现象,给社会、家庭造成极大损失和危害。分析伪医学的滋生背景,并提出加强自身建设,加大科普宣传和媒体管理等扫除伪医学现象的对策。     

多层线性模型在纵向研究中的运用

纵向研究中传统统计技术主要是重复测量的方差分析和多元回归分析，但是这两种技术存在一些局限性，不能合理而充分地解释纵向研究资料。近年来出现的多层线性模型能够更有效地利用纵向数据。为促进多层线性模型在纵向研究中的运用，简要论述了传统统计技术的局限，介绍了多层线性模型的原理及其在纵向研究中的作用，以一组模拟数据为例对多层线性模型中各种参数在纵向研究中的含义进行了详细讨论，对于纵向研究中运用多层线性模型时须注意的问题提出了建议。     

A psychometric evaluation of the social skills rating system in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

The social skills rating system (SSRS) was developed to assess social skills of children, as observed by multiple raters (teacher, parent, child). Studies of the SSRS have been conducted with handicapped, mentally retarded and learning disabled children. No studies have reported the psychometric properties of the SSRS in a clinical ADHD sample. This is important, because deficient social functioning is associated with ADHD. The present study assesses the psychometric properties of the teacher, parent and child versions of the SSRS in children with ADHD (n = 123), and normal controls (n = 239). Also, the social skills of children with ADHD, as rated on the SSRS were examined. Results support the factor structure and internal consistency of the original SSRS-teacher version. Moreover, support was found for 3 out of 4 scales of the SSRS-parent version. The factor structure of the SSRS-child version could not be replicated. An explanatory factor analysis on the SSRS-child version yielded two factors. Evidence was found for discriminative ability of the SSRS between normal controls and children with ADHD. Finally, informant agreement between raters was found to be poor.     

The effects of reinforcement magnitude on functional analysis outcomes

The duration or magnitude of reinforcement has varied and often appears to have been selected arbitrarily in functional analysis research. Few studies have evaluated the effects of reinforcement magnitude on problem behavior, even though basic findings indicate that this parameter may affect response rates during functional analyses. In the current study, 6 children with autism or developmental disabilities who engaged in severe problem behavior were exposed to three separate functional analyses, each of which varied in reinforcement magnitude. Results of these functional analyses were compared to determine if a particular reinforcement magnitude was associated with the most conclusive outcomes. In most cases, the same conclusion about the functions of problem behavior was drawn regardless of the reinforcement magnitude.     

The relation between children's reading comprehension level and their comprehension of idioms

We report an investigation of 9-year-olds' ability to interpret idioms in relation to their reading comprehension level. We manipulated whether the idioms were transparent or opaque, whether they were real or novel, whether they were presented in isolation or in a supportive narrative context. As predicted, children were better able to explain the meanings of idioms in context than in isolation. The good and poor comprehenders did not differ in their abilities to interpret transparent idioms in context, but the poor comprehenders were significantly worse at using context to work out the meanings of opaque idioms. The explanation task revealed the source of information used by the children to derive nontarget interpretations. We discuss these findings in relation to idiom processing strategies and Levorato and Cacciari's global elaboration model.