Developmental psychology in the real world: A paradigm of parent education

Twenty years ago, William Kessen, Greta Fein and I developed and tested a model of parent education, a model which involved variation in curricular content, didactic approaches, and child outcomes–experimentally contrasted. Our experience yielded some valuable lessons about the extent to which researchers can influence parents' behaviour, and parents their children's development. In the present article I suggest that these lessons might be useful for researchers now as they were for us then. I present some observations about the research that developmental psychologists have done in the intervening two decades and suggest that we could learn much by using such a model of parent education to answer questions about the effets of parents' behaviour on children's development. Carefully done, parent education studies can yield valuable information about many of the questions raised in recent correlational research. Parent training research can suggest hypotheses that can be tested with data collected non-interventively and analysed in causal model analyses–and vice versa. What is more, because one reason for studying parent effects is so that we can offer guidance to parents about rearing their children, this design has a particular advantage; it is both the medium and the message.     

Cross-sex comparisons: A word of caution

A cross-sex difference on one variable is often hypothesized to be related to a gender difference on a second variable. However, caution should be exercised in making such comparative hypotheses. We gathered the expected and actual examination grades for 168 female and 163 male college students. As in prior research, males had higher expectancies than females (p<.05). But analysis of the intrasex regression equations indicated that the relationship of expectancies to performance was different for women than it was for men. Thus, a cross-sex difference in expectancies did not correspond to a parallel difference in grades. This finding highlights the potential hazards of making certain cross-sex comparisons, and we argue for more caution in their application.     

Children's affective,behavioral, and cognitive responses to social comparison

Relative outcomes in social commerce with peers are potent determinants of cognitions and behavior in young children. Although there has been considerable attention given to the behavioral consequences of social comparisons following the receipt of rewards, there has been less concern with cognitive or affective consequences. Additionally, little is known about the accrued effects of multiple social comparison experiences that may be consistent or inconsistent with one another. In the present study, young children received a constant level of reward but the amount they saw a peer receive was varied. There were two sequences of reward distribution, and in a given sequence children received either the same number of rewards as the peer (=), more (+), or fewer (?). In a 3 × 3 factorial design all possible combinations occurred. A negative inequality in reward distribution, no matter where it fell in a sequence, made children sad and inclined children to distribute fewer rewards to peers. When a sequence contained an initial experience of positive inequality, children decreased subsequent levels of self-reward. Experiencing a comparison that revealed a negative inequality in reward distribution also disrupted children's accuracy in appraising the overall distribution of rewards: even when an initial negative inequality was completely offset by an equivalent experience of positive inequality, children inaccurately concluded that they had received fewer rewards than their peers.     

The Effectiveness of Encounter Groups: Implications of Research for Counselling Practice

In the past decade, encounter groups have become a widely recognised technique of intervention for counsellors. Empirical research on encounter groups is confusing. Trends in research are obscured by a diversity of definitions, methodologies and subjects. This review considers the most significant research on the effectiveness of encounter groups, focusing on positive and negative effects, leader behaviour, group characteristics, participant characteristics, and the maintenance of change. Conclusions are drawn relating the research to practice, with some suggested guidelines for use of encounter groups in counselling interventions.     

A preliminary study of Hare's “Research Scale for the Assessment of Psychopathy” in mentally-abnormal offenders

The abbreviated (15-item) version of Hare's Research Scale for the Assessment of Psychopathy (RSAP) was investigated in a sample of male admissions to Broadmoor Special Hospital (N = 50), along with five MMPI measures relevant to psychopathy (Impulsivity, Sociability, Psychopathic Deviate, Anxiety and Sociopathy). Patients were assigned to one of four clinical diagnostic groups: Personality Disorder, Mixed (personality disorder with schizophrenia), Schizophrenia and Affective Disorder. Results indicated that while both psychopathic groups (Mixed and Personality Disorder) showed high scores on almost all RSAP items, the Affective Disorder group showed low scores on almost all items. Results of a discriminant function analysis indicated that Hare's RSAP was superior to the MMPI measures at discriminating between psychopaths and non-psychopaths. Use of the discriminant function to re-allocate patients to criterion groups showed a high hit rate (94%) for psychopathic patients but a hit rate of only 61% for non-psychopathic patients. Half of the schizophrenic patients were mis-allocated to the psychopathic group. The results support the idea of an affective deficit common to psychopaths and schizophrenics, but suggest that psychopaths additionally show a deficit which may be characterized by a lack of goal-directed behaviour.