Specificity of Dating Aggression and Its Justification Among High-Risk Adolescents

Ninety-five high-risk adolescents were studied to determine whether their dating aggression and its justification as a response to interpersonal problems were specific to the current partner, general to dating relationships, or part of a global age-mate (same-sex peers and opposite-sex dating partners) aggression problem. Approximately one-third of males and two-thirds of females reported physical aggression against their current dating partner. Males' aggression (and its justification) toward their current dating partner was part of a generalized pattern of dating aggression, whereas for females, physical aggression against a current dating partner (and its justification) was partner-specific and unrelated to aggression in other relationships. Findings are discussed with regard to intervention and future research on adolescent dating aggression.     

Making faces: testing the relation between child behavior problems and mothers' interpretations of child emotion expressions

We examined the relations between preschool boys' behavior problems and mothers' interpretations of children's emotion expressions. A sample of 31 mothers of oppositional boys and 28 control mothers responded to standard stimuli depicting child emotional reactions to maternal control attempts; mothers were instructed to think of the stimuli as either (a) their own child or (b) an unfamiliar child. Mothers of oppositional boys were more likely to generate negative interpretations than were control mothers when thinking of their own children; however, this difference did not generalize to the explicitly unfamiliar child condition. Mothers of oppositional boys demonstrated negative and comparison mothers demonstrated positive interpretive tendencies toward their own children. Findings suggest that child emotion cues may trigger biased maternal cognitions even in the absence of child misbehavior.     

Measuring Qualitative Aspects of Preschool Boys' Noncompliance: The Response Style Questionnaire (RSQ)

Child noncompliance is a core maladjustment factor in current clinical models of aggression and antisocial development. However, little is known about the relations among qualitative aspects of child noncompliance and aggressive maladjustment. The authors developed the Response Style Questionnaire, an instrument designed to measure the multidimensional qualities of child noncompliance, and tested its validity and reliability. Tests of internal validity provided a five-factor solution, featuring distinctions in noncompliance quality between and among skilled noncompliance (verbally skilled and emotionally regulated) and unskilled noncompliance (overt/confrontational, covert/sneaky, and emotionally labile). Theory-driven tests of external validity using peer-adjustment variables as criteria provided discriminant prediction (a) among qualitatively distinct aspects of noncompliance and (b) between noncompliance qualities and rate. Discussion focuses on a modified view of the nature and role of noncompliance in aggressive and antisocial development.     

The teachings of honorary Professor of Psychiatry Daniel Paul Schreber, J.D., to psychiatrists and psychoanalysts, or dramatology's challenge to psychiatry and psychoanalysis

The paper addresses the question: How does one read Schreber? Should one read ideas into his text to make sense of it, or should one listen to Schreber's own ideas? Freud read theories into Schreber and so did generations of psychiatric and psychoanalytic readers thereafter, creating Schreber, a myth. Looking for Schreber, the man, the author read Schreber from the perspective of history and dramatology so as to retranslate symptoms, syndromes, and systems back into Schreber's life dramas. As an interpreter and thinker in his own right, Schreber crafted a multilayered first-person narrative containing many lessons useful to patients, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts.     

Further evidence for the case against neuropsychoanalysis: How Yovell,Solms, and Fotopoulou's response to our critique confirms the irrelevance and harmfulness to psychoanalysis of the contemporary neuroscientific trend

In their paper “The case for neuropsychoanalysis” Yovell, Solms, and Fotopoulou (2015) respond to our critique of neuropsychoanalysis (Blass & Carmeli, 2007), setting forth evidence and arguments which, they claim, demonstrate why neuroscience is relevant and important for psychoanalysis and hence why dialogue between the fields is necessary. In the present paper we carefully examine their evidence and arguments and demonstrate how and why their claim is completely mistaken. In fact, Yovell, Solms, and Fotopoulou's paper only confirms our position on the irrelevance and harmfulness to psychoanalysis of the contemporary neuroscientific trend. We show how this trend perverts the essential nature of psychoanalysis and of how it is practiced. The clinical impact and its detrimental nature is highlighted by discussion of clinical material presented by Yovell et al (2015). In the light of this we argue that the debate over neuropsychoanalysis should be of interest to all psychoanalysts, not only those concerned with biology or interdisciplinary dialogue.     

Mass psychology of the led and the leaders

Abstract

Some salient features of a Sullivanian perspective are given as a background for a discussion of the case of Anna. Lived experience is mentioned as of equal importance as fantasy. Technically, analytic inquiry in the form of questions is stressed. In his review of the case presentation, the author observes that too much emphasis is given to content, compared to form. He notes that the therapist does not report key transference and non-transference interactions with the patient and further suggests that the patient still has significant narcissistic problems. He suggests that it is time to confront the patient with her characterological ways of relating to the analyst.     

Overcoming modern-postmodern dichotomies: Some possible benefits for the counselling profession

The rhetorical/discursive turn, in its multiple disciplinary masks, is here to stay. Even psychology is giving in to its charm. The Sophists can smile again, the agora is back and the solipsistic self is in retreat. Dialogical, narrative and cultural psychologies, as well as the counselling profession, triumph the return of the social, the contextual, and the historical to the conceptual realm of the autonomous individual. Though we encourage and enjoy critical views of modern perspectives, such as that supported by poststructuralist and postmodern perspectives, we wonder whether orthodoxies might not be more inclined towards relocation than to eviction. Based on our conviction that a positivist/relativist dichotomy is a poor exchange for older modern dichotomies (self/other), the paper critically reviews the poststructuralist turn in therapy and counselling, and discusses the implications for counselling theory and counsellors' work.     

The Role of Communicating Social Emotions Accompanying Apologies in Forgiveness

Apologies are an effective strategy used by transgressors to restore relationships with an injured party. Apologies are often motivated by emotions the transgressor feels in relation to the situation. We report the results of two studies that examined how an injured person's knowledge that an apology was driven by one or more of the social emotions of guilt, shame, and pity affected forgiveness. Findings suggest that the knowledge that guilt and/or shame motivated the apology increased forgiveness. In contrast, knowledge that pity induced the apology decreased forgiveness. These findings are consistent with the view that the communication of emotions has the social function of monitoring and shaping social relationships. We are grateful to the editor and an anonymous reviewer for their most helpful comments and suggestions to earlier versions of this paper.