Introduction

This issue of Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: Current Status and Research Directions, addresses the current status of our knowledge as well as critical research needs in the area of children exposed to domestic violence. Although much has been learned in recent years about children exposed to violence, significant research gaps remain, the identification of which may help to build a more complete and rigorous science base in this area. This journal issue represents the distillation of a 3-day workshop on children exposed to violence, held in July of 2002, that identified what is known about children exposed to violence and what this information tells us about future research directions. Although many federal agencies have supported some research in this area, there is a need for more targeted attention on the topic, particularly with regard to measurement, sampling, and interventions/services. The papers in this issue were selected with these themes in mind. Although no single issue could cover the entire field, we intend to offer a representative sample of where we are and where we need to go with the hope of stimulating additional thought, collaboration, and research in this important area.     

The Ethics of Type 1 Diabetes Prediction and Prevention Research

There are approximately one million cases oftype 1 diabetes in the US, and the incidenceis increasing worldwide. Given that two-thirdsof cases present in childhood, it is criticalthat prediction and prevention research involvechildren. In this article, I examine whethercurrent research methodologies conform to theethical guidelines enumerated by the NationalCommission for the Protection of Human Subjectsof Biomedical and Behavioral Research, andadopted into the federal regulations thatprotect research subjects. I then offer twopolicy recommendations to help researchersdesign studies that conform to these ethicalrequirements.     

Introducing ethics and engineering: the case of Delft University of Technology

This article focuses mainly on (1) the policy of Delft University of Technology since 1992 as regards the university-wide introduction of a compulsory course on ethics and engineering, and (2) the ideal structure of such a course, including the educational goals of the course. Dr. G. J. Scheurwater is Senior policy-advisor to the Board of Delft University of Technology. Prof. S. J. Doorman is Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Ethics of Delft University of Technology.     

Future directions in engineering ethics research: microethics, macroethics and the role of professional societies

Three frames of reference for engineering ethics are discussed—individual, professional and social—which can be further broken down into “microethics” concerned with individuals and the internal relations of the engineering profession and “macroethics” referring to the collective social responsibility of the engineering profession and to societal decisions about technology. Few attempts have been made at integrating microethical and macroethical approaches to engineering ethics. The approach suggested here is to focus on the role of professional engineering societies in linking individual and professional ethics and in linking professional and social ethics. A research program is outlined using ethics support as an example of the former, and the issuance of position statements on product liability as an example of the latter. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the International Symposium on Technology and Society 2000 (ISTAS 2000), Rome, Italy, 7 September 2000. Joseph R. Herkert directs a dual-degree program in engineering and humanities/social sciences and is editor of Social, Ethical, and Policy Implications of Engineering (Wiley/IEEE Press).     

Towards a research programme for ethics and technology

In this editorial contribution, two issues relevant to the question, what should be at the top of the research agenda for ethics and technology, are identified and discussed. Firstly: can, and do, engineers make a difference to the degree to which technology leads to morally desirable outcomes? What role does professional autonomy play here, and what are its limits? And secondly, what should be the scope of engineers' responsibility; that is to say, on which issues are they, as engineers, morally obliged to reflect? The research agendas proposed by the authors contributing to this special section, implicitly, give different answers to these questions. We suggest that an explicit discussion of these issues would greatly help in constructing a common research agenda.     

The professional approach to engineering ethics: five research questions

This paper argues that research for engineering ethics should routinely involve philosophers, social scientists, and engineers, and should focus for now on certain basic questions such as: Who is an engineer? What is engineering? What do engineers do? How do they make decisions? And how much control do they actually have over what they do?     

As We Forgive—Case History of a Burglary

In 1979, Pastoral Psychology published the first of a series of articles I wrote based on non-risk-free research. The last was The Extra Mile—Case History of a Homicide (1993) and in it a point was stressed: Ministers who practice psychotherapy will profit prophetically if pastoral theology accepts the responsibility to (1) articulate contemporary ultimateconcerns, (2) clarify healthy avenues for compensation, and (3) tell stories about the hopeful revelations of God's providence in a broken world. As We Forgive is also a case study—wrapped in a novella—and it illustrates these three ingredients with an emphasis on spiritual self-awareness and thereality of Providence.     

Where Do We Go from Here?

Beginning with the End represents an excellent collection of articles devoted to the thought of Wolfhart Pannenberg. This volume includes many of the most important thinkers in the science-religion dialogue and shows as well the importance and impact of Pannenberg's theology. This response addresses themes that surface in several of the articles: What is religion? What is science? What is theology? What is God? On some of these themes there is agreement, on others sharp disagreement. The conclusion also considers what this volume suggests about the future of Pannenberg's theology.     

Psychotherapy Process Measure Research and the Evaluation of Psychotherapy Orientation: A Narrative Analysis

This article discusses the need for a systematic method that enables researchers to evaluate integrative therapy approaches using a range of therapy process measures. The Narrative System Process Coding (NPCS; Angus, Hardtke, & Levitt, 1996) is proposed as such a method, and is applied with the Experiencing Scale (Klein, Mathieu, Gendlin, & Keisler, 1970) and the Levels of Client Perceptual Processing (LCPP; Toukmanian, 1986) to three brief good outcome integrative therapy modalities to illustrate this need. The study found higher Experiencing Scale scores to be most strongly related to an experiential approach to therapy and to the NPCS internal narrative processes. Higher LCPP scores were most strongly related to the NPCS reflexive narrative process and to a perceptual-processing approach. The discussion initiates a discourse on the importance of explicating process measures' origins when comparing different therapy approaches in order to allow for the meaningful consolidation of process research findings.     

Sehen, Sichtbarkeit und empirische Forschung

Vision, Visibility, and Empirical Research. In general, natural scientists use the concept of observation in a liberal way: they talk of observing electrons, DNA, or distant quasars. Several philosophers of science have recently argued for a similar use of the concept of observation: they have claimed that the important aspects of scientific research can only be properly reconstructed in accordance with how this term is actually used in science. With reference to an example from astronomy, I point out that the proposed generalisation of the concept of observation leads to undesirable consequences. I argue that a differentiated conceptual framework is required in order to give an adequate account of the varieties of scientific experience. Thus, the appropriate starting point for distinguishing these various scientific research practices should not be the generalised scientific conception of observation, but instead distinctly different uses of the term observation drawn from ordinary language. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.