A classification system, designed to focus on 2 aspects of client behavior, voice quality and expressive stance, was applied to interviews of S3 clients. The behavior thus coded was vector analyzed by columns, yielding factor loadings for interviews for each client for 1st, 2nd, and llth interviews. Estimated factor loadings were obtained for 12 attrition clients for 1st and 2nd interviews. Attrition could be predicted from 1st interview process. For the 2nd and llth interviews, 2 of the 4 factors extracted were found to differentiate among outcome groups formed by combining client's and therapist's vantage points. The authors discuss the value of these client-process variables not only for prognosis, but also as a background against which to evaluate therapist participation or experimental intervention.
When one considers the philosophy and teaching of science, it seems significant that little, if any, formal attention is paid to naturalistic observation and research, although it is quite clear that they constitute the foundation of all science. The science of physics is profoundly indebted to the uncontrolled observations of superstitious Babylonian and Chaldean priests. Recently we have witnessed widespread observances of the centennial of the masterwork of naturalistic observation and research, the Darwinian theory of evolution, which is still revolutionizing our concept of the biological world and, indeed, of ourselves. Yet in many current discussions of science by philosophers or by scientists in the role of philosophers, we find a great deal of emphasis placed upon what are considered to be the two major aspects of science: experimental method and logic, and the personal element, the latter being discussed under such headings as "genius", "creativity", "scientific imagination", and "luck".Although scientific method is greatly admired, it seems that the practitioner of scientific method, the experimental scientist, is not. The skilled experimentalist at best attains second rank as a scientist; the highest rank he can hope to attain is that of Boyle. The deepest admiration is reserved for the Newtons, Einsteins, Darwins, and Flemings who are considered to be geniuses or to be lucky discoverers able to capitalise on the significance discerned in accidental events. Understanding science by division into the two aspects of objective method or verification and personal subjective elements creates a rather uncomfortable situation for the majority of scientists who do not possess genius and who realise that luck is a synonym for chance.
In this chapter we will present the results of exploratory analyses on data from different sources: from a mental test, from verbal behavior in psychotherapy, and from an attitude inventory. THE HALSTEAD CATEGORY TEST*The first study to be reported is from an vmpublished analysis of data gathered by Simmel and Counts (1957). The 61 subjects of this study originally comprised two samples: 35 patients seen in connection with a study of the effect of temporal lobectomy as a treatment for psychomotor epilepsy and 26 student nurses. Both groups were given the Halstead Category Test, a test designed to measure abstraction or concept formation. The test has been described by Simmel and Counts (1957, p. 7) as follows:Briefly, it consists of several groups of visually presented stimulus patterns. For each group a "principle of correct responses" has been defined by the test author and is to be discovered by the subject. The subject's response to each item consists in pressing selectively one of four numbered keys which is in fact equivalent to saying "1", "2", "3", or "4"-By means of a chime for correct responses and a buzzer for incorrect responses the subject is continually appraised of the accuracy oj his performance and is, in a sense, rewarded and punished. * CommunaUties were used in the studies reported here. The Halstead Category Test was analyzed by Dr. Sarah Counts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.