Free visual imagery sequences in reactors and nonreactors

The technique of Free Visual Imagery Sequences was used with 32 outpatients, M age of 33.9, to determine the differences between Visual Imagery Reactors and Nonreactors as defined in previous studies. Reactors showed significantly more responses associated with Affect/Conflict material, frequently including bizarre and distorted images. The Affect/Conflict responses occurred earlier and had longer duration spans in Reactors. Neutral content was more prevalent in Nonreactors. An interpretive approach involving a regulatory processing system is proposed. Free Visual Imagery Sequences appears to be a simple and efficient clinical technique which can contribute data useful in determining the extent to which imagery techniques could be employed in certain forms of psychotherapy.     

Clinical applications of Rorschach-based visual imagery reactivity

A diverse set of findings from recent research suggests the value of visual imagery techniques in clinical practice.     

Fear of success and failure,or norms for achievement?

Previous research has indicated that success in competitive situations is differentially perceived, considering the level of success and sex of person who succeeded. The amount of projected negative imagery of 100 college students under various degrees of a man's or woman's failure in medical school was investigated in the present study. Data indicated a pervasive tendency to downgrade unsuccessful men in relation to unsuccessful women. The possibility that subjects' responses reflect anxiety about the level of success and failure obtained, rather than anxiety about success and failure in general, is discussed.The authors thank D. F. Ricks for his helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article. Portions of this article were presented at the 6th Annual Conference for Research on Women and Education, Pacific Grove, California, December, 1980.     

Commentary on “Can a good philosophical contribution be made just by asking a question?”

This paper explains some of the reasoning behind “Can a Good Philosophical Contribution Be Made Just by Asking a Question?,” a paper which consists solely in its title and which is published in the same issue of the journal as the present paper. The method for explaining that reasoning consists in making available a lightly edited version of a letter the authors sent to the editors when submitting the title-only paper. The editors permitted publication of that paper on the condition that the authors also separately publish a version of that letter; the present paper aims to fulfil that condition.     

Ambiguity attitudes in qualitative contexts: The role of prior beliefs

Most studies of ambiguity aversion rely on experimental paradigms involving monetary bets. Thus, the extent to which ambiguity aversion occurs outside of such contexts is much less understood, particularly when the situation cannot easily be reduced to numerical terms. The present work seeks to understand whether people prefer to avoid ambiguous decisions in a variety of different qualitative domains (e.g., work, family, love, friendship, exercise, study, and health), and, if so, to determine the role played by prior beliefs in those domains. Across three studies, we presented participants with 24 vignettes and measured the degree to which they preferred risk to ambiguity in each. We also asked them for their prior probability estimates about the likely outcomes in the ambiguous events. Ambiguity aversion was observed in the vast majority of vignettes, but at different magnitudes. It was predicted by whether the vignette involved gain or loss as well as by people's prior beliefs; however, the heterogeneity between people meant that the role of prior beliefs was only evident in an individual-level analysis (i.e., not at the group level). Our results suggest that the desire to avoid ambiguity occurs in a wide variety of qualitative contexts but to different degrees for different people and may be partially driven by unfavorable prior estimates of the likely outcomes of the ambiguous events.     

Social support from weak ties: Insight from the literature on minimal social interactions

When people face difficult life events, such as cancer or bereavement, they fare better when they receive support. These “experiencers” are likely to seek and receive support from a wide range of people, from close others to acquaintances. Indeed, the social support literature has long acknowledged the value of having a diverse support network. Research suggests that experiencers often perceive “weak ties” (i.e., acquaintances) as sources of support, and that experiencers sometimes prefer to get support from weak ties rather than strong ties. Providing support can be challenging for all kinds of supporters, however weak ties may be more likely than strong ties to allow worries about their inability to provide effective support to stop them from providing any support at all, thus depriving experiencers of opportunities for additional support. In this paper, we focus on the fact that often the provision of support occurs via a social interaction. We draw on the social psychology literature on minimal social interactions to suggest reasons why potential weak tie supporters might doubt their ability to provide effective support, and to generate advice to encourage potential supporters to reach out. Finally, we suggest future areas of research, with the ultimate goal of helping to expand the support that is available for people experiencing difficult life events.