Keeping Theory Revision Front and Center in Counseling Psychology

Abstract

This rejoinder responds to the four reactions in the May 2005 issue of The Counseling Psychologist. Areas of possible confusion are clarified, and relevant examples are highlighted. Of particular interest are examples of the nomological network, which offers an excellent tool for counseling psychologists and others in related disciplines as well as within the broader field of psychology. In addition, the implications of current and future theoretical and empirical investigation of multicultural issues are discussed.In considering the comments offered by the reactants, we thank them for contributing to this discussion of theory-driven research. First, we address Nancy Betz's (2005 [this issue]) reaction that elucidated the use of nomological networks as a vehicle for testing theories. Second, we comment on Cheryl Gore-Felton's (2005 [this issue]) concern regarding whether specific journals represent the field. Next, Dong-gwi Lee's (2005 [this issue]) suggestions for multiculturally based research and analyses are discussed. Finally, the implications of Jeffrey Kahn's (2005 [this issue]) response are reviewed in the context of theory-driven research, especially his suggestions for improving theory precision. RESPONSE TO BETZ (2005 [THIS ISSUE]): LOOKING AHEADWe lead with our rejoinder to Betz because this reaction focused on our original intent for pursuing this line of research, namely, to catapult the field forward. Betz went further with some practical suggestions for teaching graduate students and for informing scholars in the field about how to conceptualize future theory-driven or model-driven studies. Betz's example of a

Conducting Research With LGB People of Color: Methodological Challenges and Strategies

“…But, when results are presented with small subsamples of LGB people of color, it is important to present findings with appropriate cautions and to report effect sizes in addition to level of significance. Reporting effect sizes has been advocated as an important complement to statistical significance testing and is useful for interpreting the magnitude and real-world meaning of effects (Karr & Larson, 2005). Specifically, in research with LGB people of color, moderate effect sizes may not emerge as statistically significant due to small sample sizes but could still provide important information about potentially meaningful relationships to be tested in further research.…”

“…Scholars have emphasized that theory should inform the content and process of research (e.g., Karr & Larson, 2005;McDowell & Fang, 2007;Tracey & Glidden-Tracey, 1999). But, the noted dearth of literature about LGB people of color presents a challenge to conducting theoretically grounded research.…”