Effect of depression on processing interactions in group psychotherapy

Two studies were conducted to investigate the possibility of individual differences in the ability of inpatients to process interactions in group psychotherapy. The first was a pilot study conducted on groups of major depressive patients and matched normal subjects. Subjects were asked to give process comments after viewing simulations of typical group therapy interactions. These comments were later rated on the extent to which they reflected process qualities and accuracy. These data led to a more rigorous and extensive study that included more appropriate control groups as well as measures of potential confounding factors, such as simulation realism, verbal ability, and interaction comprehension. Results indicated that major depressives suffer from deficits in the ability to process group interactions, relative to three types of control groups, including normals. These differences in processing were not significantly positively correlated with any of the potential confounding factors. The implications for understanding interactional processing and group psychotherapy are discussed.     

A Primer of the Values Implicit in Counseling Research Methods

The author attempts to answer 5 related questions: What are implicit values? Why are these values often considered problematic to traditional science? Why are such values necessary to research? What are the main values of traditional methods in psychology? What are the implications of a value‐laden science?     

How Separable Are Spirituality and Theology in Psychotherapy?

The authors respond to D. A. Helminiak's (2001) article “Treating Spiritual Issues in Secular Psychotherapy.” They focus particularly on Helminiak's argument for secular spirituality (whether spirituality can be independent of theology/religion) and his inherent biases in discussing the nature and existence of spirituality. The authors argue that all spiritual conceptions have theological implications—and thus a theology, broadly defined—and that theology, in this sense, pervades the theory and practice of all psychotherapists, whether or not they are religious.     

Accounting for the power of the here-and-now: a theoretical revolution

Psychotherapists have long recognized the therapeutic power of the here-and-now, but few have attempted to account for this power or provide a rationale for its efficacy. This leaves one of the most central concepts of group therapy without an adequate theoretical base. A major reason for this is the insufficiency of our Western assumptions of time and causality. These ascribe all human behaviors and cognitions to prior influences of one sort or another, making a true focus upon the present almost impossible. Even those who value the here-and-now are inevitably drawn into the past, because the Western philosophy underlying mainstream psychology makes this seem only logical. A theoretical revolution is therefore proposed that draws upon the lessons of history, the insights of other cultures, and developments in physics. This approach is then applied to group therapy, and specific advantages over conventional theorizing are noted.     

Conceptualizing Religious Practices in Psychological Research: Problems and Prospects

This article addresses the problems and prospects that follow from the conceptualization of religious phenomena and practices for scientific investigation in the psychology of religion. Two Western research traditions—instrumentalism and operationalism—are described and their potential contribution to a mismatch between what researchers intend to study and what they actually study is illustrated through two exemplar studies. The exemplar studies show how researchers’ concern with methodological rigor can compromise the rich and thick meanings of religious practices, resulting in the misrepresentation of the practices and misleading both the psychological and religious research consumer. Several suggestions for dealing with these problems are discussed.     

Is evidence-based practice diverse enough? Philosophy of science considerations

In its policy rationale for evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP), the APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice claims to have constituted itself with "scientists and practitioners from a wide range of perspectives and traditions, reflecting the diverse perspectives within the field" (p. 273). We applaud this attention to diversity but contend that an entire perspective of the debate was omitted in the Task Force's newly approved policy and its underlying report. The failure to consider a philosophy of science perspective led the Task Force to make a number of epistemological assumptions that are not based on evidence or rationale and that thus violate the very spirit of evidence-based decision making. In this comment, we reveal a few of these assumptions and discuss their detrimental consequences.     

Method Decisions: Quantitative and Qualitative Inquiry in the Study of Religious Phenomena

The conceptual and procedural differences between quantitative and qualitative methods have led many researchers to realize that some methodologies are better suited for studying some phenomena over other phenomena. However, practical guidelines for making these method decisions have yet to be developed. The primary purpose of this paper is to begin to provide such guidelines, especially in the study of religious phenomena. We first discuss the common mistake in Western psychology of considering methods as mere procedures rather than as the outcomes of different interpretations of the world. We then compare five features of a general quantitative interpretation with five features of a general qualitative interpretation. From this comparison, the advantages and disadvantages of each method strategy are discussed. Knowledge of these advantages and disadvantages allows methods to be better matched to the religious phenomena being studied.     

Questioning the Presumption of Naturalism in the Social Sciences: A Case Study

An important consensus has occurred across the social sciences: The best philosophy for guiding knowledge advancement omits any substantive reference to an active transcendent being. This philosophy of naturalism is so prevalent that social science disciplines renowned for examining research philosophies, such as anthropology, overlook naturalism. This article describes an anthropological case in point: E. E. Evans-Pritchard’s study of the Azande people. Evans-Pritchard is noted for his thoughtful and thorough cultural studies, and the Azande are noted for their unorthodox, non-naturalistic beliefs. We describe the interaction of this anthropologist and culture and find that he presumes a reified naturalism, which dramatically affects his understanding and treatment of this non-naturalistic culture. We then proffer several lessons and implications for pastoral psychology and psychotherapy that follow from our case study.