1967
DOI: 10.1037/h0083136
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Behaviour therapy versus psychotherapy and applied science.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1969
1969
1983
1983

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Conventional statistical methods of inference are arbitrary and have no scientific justificationeither for levels of significance, or for avoiding Type 1 versus Type 2 errors. In any case, they are totally inappropriate for the evaluation of treatment in clinical psychology (Arthur, 1967(Arthur, , 1972. Also, analysis of variance is applicable to agricultural land parcels but it cannot be applied to human beings without important qualifications.…”
Section: U>mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conventional statistical methods of inference are arbitrary and have no scientific justificationeither for levels of significance, or for avoiding Type 1 versus Type 2 errors. In any case, they are totally inappropriate for the evaluation of treatment in clinical psychology (Arthur, 1967(Arthur, , 1972. Also, analysis of variance is applicable to agricultural land parcels but it cannot be applied to human beings without important qualifications.…”
Section: U>mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cole and Magnussen (1966) stressed the action-oriented nature of decision making; in this sense, it is similar to the behavioral approach. Arthur (1967) applied its concepts toward resolving the conflict between behavioral and psychothcrapeutic approaches to treatment.…”
Section: Decision-making Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%