The fundamental rule: a study of current usage

Members of the editorial boards of the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Psychoanalytic Quarterly, and Psychoanalytic Inquiry, plus selected analysts from Canada, France, and England, were asked how they presented the fundamental rule to their analysands and what considerations led to their choice of initial guidelines. Forty-nine of eight-three analysts responded to the survey. The respondents described diversity in phrasing of the fundamental rule, the time in analysis when the guidelines are given, and the reasons for the practice they follow. The method each chose appears to reflect the differing conceptions analysts have of the analytic process. Two major trends emerged: either our respondents emphasized delineating a work or functional framework or contract, or they emphasized establishing an attitude or spirit of cooperation, mutuality and work sharing. In each group respondents differed as to whether they favored minimal or more lengthy instructions. They also differed as to whether they followed a consistent approach or one tailored to the needs of the individual analysand. A source of tension lay in an inclination either to remain in the tradition set by Freud or to experiment with different phrasings and timings. The authors give their reasons for choosing to give explicit instructions, requesting associational material beyond thoughts and feelings, and describing resistance as inevitable and a potential source of insight.     

Lifespan normative data (18–89 years) for Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices Set I

Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) Set I is a validated and brief test of fluid intelligence, ideal for use in busy clinical settings. However, there is a dearth of normative data allowing an accurate interpretation of APM scores. To address this, we present normative data from across the adult lifespan (18–89 years) for the APM Set I. Data are presented in five age cohorts (total N = 352), including two older adult cohorts (65–79 years and 80–89 years), which allows age-standardized assessment. We also present data from a validated measure of premorbid intellectual ability, which was absent from previous standardizations of longer forms of the APM. In line with previous findings, a striking age-related decline was noted, beginning relatively early in adulthood and most marked amongst lower-scoring individuals. Older adults did not demonstrate difficulty with specific test items or make an increased proportion of specific errors. Sex was not a significant predictor of performance. The data set is of particular use in the neuropsychological assessment of older adults, given the known susceptibility of fluid intelligence to both the effects of normal ageing and acquired brain injury in older age. The results are discussed in light of theories of neurological ageing.     

Motivational Systems and Stress-Related Cardiovascular Reactivity

This study examined the relation of motivational systems to patterns of autonomic responses to stress. Specifically, we examined patterns of physiological response resulting from differential activation of motivational systems for behavioral approach and behavioral inhibition. We also examined the relation of these motivational systems to threat and challenge responses to potential stress. Self-report, cardiac measures (i.e., pre-injection period, or PEP, and heart rate, or HR), and blood pressure (i.e., systolic blood pressure, or SBP, and diastolic blood pressure, or DBP) measures reliably distinguished between an experimental condition facilitating behavioral approach and an experimental condition facilitating coactivation of behavioral approach and behavioral inhibition systems. Vascular (e.g., total peripheral resistance, or TPR) and electrodermal (e.g., electrodermal response, or EDR) measures, however, did not vary by condition. We discuss the results in relation to other research on motivational factors as they relate to stress and cardiovascular reactivity.     

War,innocence, and the doctrine of double effect

I am grateful to members of the philosophy departments at the University of Melbourne and Sydney, to students in my Fall 1991 Ethical Theory class at the University of Maryland, especially John Watts, and to David Luban for useful discussions.