Beyond the Obvious: Chronic Vividness of Imagery and the Use of Information in Decision Making

The authors investigate two competing hypotheses about how chronic vividness of imagery interacts with the vividness and salience of information in decision making. Results from four studies, covering a variety of decision domains, indicate that chronic imagery vividness rarely amplifies the effects of vivid and salient information. Imagery vividness may, in fact, attenuate the effects of vivid and salient information. This is because, relative to nonvivid imagers, vivid imagers rely less on information that appears obvious and rely more on information that seems less obvious. This tendency is so robust that vividness of imagery may amplify the effects of vivid information only when this information is the only information available in the decision field. The findings seem to reflect vivid imagers' tendency to totally immerse themselves in a decision problem and scrutinize the available information creatively.     

Psychoanalysis and Diplomacy: Part I. Individual and Large Group Identity

Starting with Sigmund Freud, psychoanalysts have written on a variety of topics relating to the diplomatic and political realms; but thus far their contributions primarily have been theoretical in nature, and have offered little of practical use to most diplomats and politicians. Various psychoanalytic theories have been applied, resulting in diverse conceptualizations: Wars are inevitable because of our inherent aggressive drives; a nation-state serves a maternal function for its members; certain large groups exhibit behaviors similar to those of adolescents. Yet these ideas do not significantly help us understand day-to-day events around the world, practical political issues, or international relations and diplomatic decisions.     

Anger Can Help: A Transactional Model and Three Pathways of the Experience and Expression of Anger

Anger is a significant human emotion with far‐reaching implications for individuals and relationships. We propose a transactional model of anger that highlights its relational relevance and potentially positive function, in addition to problematic malformations. By evolutionary design, physical, self‐concept, or attachment threats all similarly trigger diffuse physiological arousal, psychologically experienced as anger‐emotion. Anger is first a signaling and motivational system. Anger is then formed to affirming, productive use or malformed to destructive ends. A functional, prosocial approach to anger organizes it for protective and corrective personal and relational adaptation. In our model, threat perception interacts with a person's view of self in relation to other to produce helpful or harmful anger. Inflated or collapsed views of self in relation to other produce distinct manifestations of destructive anger that are harmful to self, other, and relationship. Conversely, a balanced view of self in relation to other promotes constructive anger and catalyzes self, other, and relationship healing. Clinical use of the model to shape healing personal and relational contact with anger is explored.     

Clinical Guidelines for Working With Stepfamilies: What Family,Couple, Individual,and Child Therapists Need to Know

This article draws on four decades of research and clinical practice to delineate guidelines for evidence‐informed, clinically sound work with stepfamilies for couple, family, individual adult, and child therapists. Few clinicians receive adequate training in working with the intense and often complex dynamics created by stepfamily structure and history. This is despite the fact that stepfamilies are a fundamentally different family form that occurs world‐wide. As a result many clinicians rely on their training in first‐time family models. This is not only often unhelpful, but all too often inadvertently destructive. The article integrates a large body of increasingly sophisticated research about stepfamilies with the author's four decades of clinical practice with stepfamily relationships. It describes the ways in which stepfamilies are different from first‐time families. It delineates the dynamics of five major challenges stepfamily structure creates: (1) Insider/outsider positions are intense and they are fixed. (2) Children struggle with losses, loyalty binds, and change. (3) Issues of parenting, stepparenting, and discipline often divide the couple. (4) Stepcouples must build a new family culture while navigating previously established family cultures. (5) Ex‐spouses (other parents outside the household) are part of the family. Some available data are shared on the impact of cultural and legal differences on these challenges. A three‐level model of clinical intervention is presented: Psychoeducational, Interpersonal, and Intrapsychic/Intergenerational Family‐of‐Origin. The article describes some “easy wrong turns” for well‐meaning therapists and lists some general clinical guidelines for working with stepfamily relationships.     

On matters of mind and body: regarding Descartes

In this paper the author considers Descartes’ place in current thinking about the mind‐body dilemma. The premise here is that in the history of ideas, the questions posed can be as significant as the answers acquired. Descartes’ paramount question was ‘How do we determine certainty?’ and his pursuit of an answer led to cogito ergo sum. His discovery simultaneously raised the question whether mind is separate from or unified with the body. Some who currently hold that brain and subjectivity are unified contend that the philosopher ‘split’ mind from body and refer to ‘Descartes’ error’. This paper puts forward that Descartes’ detractors fail to recognise Descartes’ contribution to Western thought, which was to introduce the Enlightenment and to give a place to human subjectivity. Added to this, evidence from Descartes’ correspondence with Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia supports the conclusion that Descartes did in fact believe in the unity of mind and body although he could not reconcile this rationally with the certainty from personal experience that they were separate substances. In this Descartes was engaged in just the same dilemma as that of current thinkers and researchers, a conflict which still is yet to be resolved.     

Couple‐based Intervention for Depression: An Effectiveness Study in the National Health Service in England

This study represents an effectiveness study and service evaluation of a cognitive behavioral, couple‐based treatment for depression (BCT‐D) provided in London services that are part of the “Improving Access to Psychological Therapies” (IAPT) program in England. Twenty‐three therapists in community clinics were trained in BCT‐D during a 5‐day workshop, followed by monthly group supervision for 1 year. The BCT‐D treatment outcome findings are based on 63 couples in which at least one partner was depressed and elected to receive BCT‐D. Eighty‐five percent of couples also demonstrated relationship distress, and 49% of the nonclient partners also met caseness for depression or anxiety. Findings demonstrated a recovery rate of 57% with BCT‐D, compared to 41% for all IAPT treatments for depression in London. Nonclient partners who met caseness demonstrated a 48% recovery rate with BCT‐D, although they were not the focus of treatment. BCT‐D was equally effective for clients regardless of the clinical status of the nonclient partner, suggesting its effectiveness in assisting both members of the couple simultaneously. Likewise, treatment was equally effective whether or not both partners reported relationship distress. The findings are promising regarding the successful application of BCT‐D in routine clinical settings.     

Attachment Versus Differentiation: The Contemporary Couple Therapy Debate

This paper reviews the current debate between differentiation and attachment in treating couples through exploring the tenets of crucible therapy (Schnarch, 1991) and emotionally focused couple therapy (Johnson, 2004). We provide a review of the two theories—as well as the two “pure form” example models—and explore the debate in light of the integrative movement in couple and family therapy (Lebow, 2014). We also examine points of convergence of the two theories and models, and provide clinicians and researchers with an enhanced understanding of their divergent positions. Both differentiation and attachment are developmental theories that highlight the human experience of balancing individuality and connection in adulthood. The two models converge in terms of metaconcepts that pervade their respective theories and approach. Both models capitalize on the depth and importance of the therapeutic relationship, and provide rich case conceptualization and processes of therapy. However, they substantially differ in terms of how they view the fundamental aspects of adult development, have vastly divergent approaches to how a therapist intervenes in the room, and different ideas of how a healthy couple should function. In light of the deep polarization of the two models, points of integration—particularly between the broader theories of attachment and differentiation—are offered for therapists to consider.     

Retribution and Restoration as General Orientations Towards Justice

We proposed two distinct understandings of what justice means to victims and what its restoration entails that are reflected in individual‐level justice orientations. Individuals with a retributive orientation conceptualize justice as the unilateral imposition of just deserts against the offender. In contrast, individuals with a restorative orientation conceptualize justice as achieving a renewed consensus about the shared values violated by the offence. Three studies showed differential relations between these two justice orientations and various individual‐level values/ideologies and predicted unique variance in preferences for concrete justice‐restoring interventions, judicial processes and abstract justice restoration goals. The pattern of results lends validity to the understanding of justice as two distinct conceptualizations, a distinction that provides much needed explanation for divergent preferences for injustice responses. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Shift from Monologue to Dialogue in a Couple Therapy Session: Dialogical Investigation of Change from the Therapists’ Point of View

As part of a larger research project on couple therapy for depression, this qualitative case study examines the nature of dialogue. Drawing on Bakhtinian concepts, the investigation shows how the conversation shifts from a monologue to dialogue. Among the findings are: first, the process of listening is integral to the transforming experience. That is, the careful listening of the therapist can evoke new voices, just as the experience of one of the partners’ “listening in” to the conversation between the other partner and the therapist can create movement and new trajectories. The latter is a qualitative difference between dialogic therapy with a couple and that with an individual. Second, the therapist not only acts as creative listener, but as the dialogue unfolds, actively contributes to meaning‐making. Third, the study upholds having a team of researchers as a polyphonic forum and the usefulness of Bakhtinian concepts in clinical research on dialogue in multi‐actor sessions.     

Back to the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale: Time to Reconsider?

Abstract

The Consideration of Future Consequences (CFC) Scale is a measure of the extent to which individuals consider and are influenced by the distant outcomes of current behavior. In this study, the authors conducted factor analysis to investigate the factor structure of the 12-item CFC Scale. The authors found evidence for a multiple factor solution including one completely present-oriented factor consisting of all 7 present-oriented items, and one or two future-oriented factors consisting of the remaining future-oriented items. Further evidence indicated that the present-oriented factor and the 12-item CFC Scale perform similarly in terms of internal consistency and convergent validity. The structure and content of the future-oriented factor(s) is unclear. From the findings, the authors raise questions regarding the construct validity of the CFC Scale, the interpretation of its results, and the usefulness of the CFC scale in its current form in applied research.