Cognitive Differences Between Experts and Novices: Implications for Group Supervision

The literature on counselor training and supervision has grown considerably in the past decade. Little of this literature has discussed group supervision. This article outlines the implications of cognitive psychology for group supervision and discusses the unique dimensions of the group modality for the supervision process and cognitive skill acquisition.     

Self-Involving Versus Self-Disclosing Counselor Statements During an Initial Interview

This study examined the hypothesis that positive self-involving and self-disclosing counselor responses would be rated more favorably by subjects than negative self-involving and self-disclosing counselor responses (Andersen & Anderson, 1985). The differential effectiveness of the counselor responses during the initial interview was discussed, and some implications of the findings for counseling practice were considered.     

Counselor Acting Out in the Counseling Situation: An Exploratory Analysis

Five categories of counselor acting out are explored. Also several intervention measures are presented as means of preventing or reducing counselor acting out.     

IDENTIFYING DETERMINANTS OF RETENTION DECISIONS1

Variables from five domains—demography, social background, service history, satisfaction, and performance—were used in a discriminant analysis approach to distinguishing three groups of naval personnel: Those eligible to reenlist who do, those eligible who do not, and those not eligible. Discriminant weights were derived from a sample of 642 first-term enlisted men and cross-validated on a sample of 628. The results indicated that both pre-service characteristics (demography and social background) and in-service experiences (service history, satisfaction, and performance) contributed importantly to prediction of attrition/retention. Potential usefulness of this method, including implications for better understanding and control of manpower turnover were discussed.     

RESPONSE‐DEPENDENCE ABOUT AESTHETIC VALUE

The dominant view about the nature of aesthetic value holds it to be response‐dependent. We believe that the dominance of this view owes largely to some combination of the following prevalent beliefs:

• 1 The belief that challenges brought against response‐dependent accounts in other areas of philosophy are less challenging when applied to response‐dependent accounts of aesthetic value.
• 2 The belief that aesthetic value is instrumental and that response‐dependence about aesthetic value alone accommodates this purported fact.
• 3 The belief that response‐dependence about aesthetic value alone accommodates the widely acknowledged anthropocentricity of aesthetic value.
• 4 The belief that response‐dependence about aesthetic value alone accommodates aesthetic normativity.

We argue that each of these beliefs is false, and that the dominance of response‐dependent accounts of aesthetic value is therefore largely without foundation.