ANOTHER VIEW OF DYNAMIC CRITERIA: A CRITICAL REANALYSIS OF BARRETT, CALDWELL, AND ALEXANDER

We argue a divergent perspective from that taken by Barrett, Caldwell, and Alexander (1985) in a critical reanalysis of the evidence for dynamic criteria. Those authors distinguished three definitions of the dynamic criterion phenomenon and concluded, on the basis of secondary analyses of several sets of published data, that dynamic criteria do not exist. Moreover, they concluded that most of the temporal changes in criteria reported in those data sets could be explained by methodological artifacts. In several cases these artifacts were listed in summary form, without a complete consideration of the implications of invoking these artifacts as post hoc explanations. The purpose of this comment is to clarify the debate on dynamic criteria by critiquing the Barrett et al. study. We suggest that a fruitful solution to the problem may lie in trying to understand criteria per se rather than searching for artifacts.     

Theorizing About Power: Intersecting the Ideas of Foucault with the “Problem” of Power in Family Therapy

How to theorize about power has been a controversial issue in systemic family therapy, which, in its understanding of power, has shown the legacy of Gregory Bateson's ideas in terms of its earlier censorship of the concept of power as well as in the way in which the more recent challenges continue to be framed in relation to Bateson's position. This essay examines the work of the French philosopher, Michel Foucault, and his ideas on power in relation to family therapy themes. The main aim in intersecting Foucault's ideas with the “problem” of power in family therapy is to shed a different light on the way in which family therapy has theorized about power. A strong point of connection is made between Foucault's commitment to a relational analysis of power and family therapy's commitment to recursive analysis. However, a number of major contrasts are also identified. These contrasts are used to underline the need for family therapy to abandon the restrictions of Bateson's ideas on power, and to tackle the task of developing and using a recursive understanding of power.     

Do Health Care Workplaces Affect Treatment Environments?

Previous research has demonstrated that characteristics of the health care workplace influence staff outcomes such as morale and burnout, but the potential effect of health care workplaces on the treatment environment has been little studied. Building on a model proposed by Schaefer and Moos (1993), we propose that the workplace factors of supervisory work environment (e.g. support from supervisors, managerial control) and programme philosophical orientation (e.g. disease model of addiction, psychosocial learning model of addiction) predict four treatment environment elements: patient autonomy, staff control, staff sensitivity, and patient alienation. Multiple regression analysis of data drawn from a survey (response rate = 86%) of 327 staff members at 15 Veterans Affairs (VA) inpatient substance abuse treatment programmes revealed that greater managerial control over staff predicted greater patient alienation, lower staff sensitivity towards patients, and greater staff control over patients. Stronger disease model programme orientations predicted less patient alienation and greater staff sensitivity, whereas stronger psychosocial model programme orientations predicted less staff control. These results suggest that health care workplaces may influence treatment environments. Implications for further research and practice are discussed. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.