Data are presented from a survey of 121 psychologists regarding their experiences with and attitudes toward self-help books. Psychologists were found to be quite positive in their evaluation of self-help works, and most prescribed them to patients. Locale (East vs West Coast) and orientation differences were observed in prescriptive practices.The ubiquitous self-help book has become an important source of health-care advice for millions of Americans and a source of some debate among psychologists. Rosen (1976) expressed his concern with the proliferation of "do-it-yourself" behavior therapy works, noting that such manuals had been developed for weight reduction, sexual dysfunction, relaxation, and so on, and had been marketed without adequate validation under self-administered conditions. "Consequently, consumers run the risk of purchasing treatment programs that may be ineffective or harmful when used on a totally nonprescription basis" (p. 140). Goldiamond (1976), in response to Rosen's argument, pointed out that it was unfair to single out behavioral treatments in this regard. In truth, self-administered works had appeared in virtually all applied areas of psychology, including hypnosis, Gestalt therapy, transactional analysis, and dream analysis, and all were marketed more thoroughly than validated. Goldiamond was content to let the public decide on the merits of these works; Rosen called for some professional oversight or regulation Reprints may be ordered from Steven Starker,
Data are presented from a survey of 123 practicing psychologists in 36 states concerning attitudes and prescriptive practices with regard to self-help books. Tables are provided indicating those self-help works most frequently read and prescribed by responding psychologists, along with ratings of quality and helpfulness. Results indicate widespread readership and prescription of popularized self-help books among psychologists and a positive evaluation of their utility. Questions as to how and why these works are being used are explored.
College students were administered the Imaginal Processes Inventory and were asked to record their nocturnal dreams in a diary. The dreams of students selected as representing extremely different styles of waking fantasy according to the Imaginal Processes Inventory were analyzed with regard to bizarreness, emotionality, emotional polarity, and variety of content. Significant differences in the dream structure were found among subjects of differing daydream styles. Findings support the psychological significance of the concept of daydreaming styles and suggest parameters of cognition that transcend state of consciousness.
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.