This document summarizes a conversation with Saul Rosenzweig, the founder of the common factors approach in psychotherapy. It discusses how Rosenzweig published the first paper on common factors in 1936 but received little attention until later theorists like Carl Rogers, Paul Hoch, Sol Garfield, and Jerome Frank promoted similar ideas in the 1940s-1960s without referencing Rosenzweig. The document reviews how these early common factors theorists were influenced by Rosenzweig's work and compares their perspectives to his original formulations. It then presents an interview with the 93-year-old Rosenzweig, who reflects on the evolution of his thinking and career spanning over 80 years.
This document outlines the literature review for a research project investigating whether the creative process can be used to explore a personal experience of bipolar disorder. It discusses three main areas: the creative process, bipolar disorder, and methodologies. Autoethnography is proposed as a methodology that acknowledges the researcher's power to explore their own life experiences. The creative process and autoethnography would be combined, using a spectrum from analytic to evocative approaches. 'Data' may include diaries, artworks, images and videos. The research would have academic and patient audiences. Ethics considerations are also important when using oneself as a research subject.
ASSIGNMENTContrast the Humanistic and Existential perspectiv.docxedmondpburgess27164
ASSIGNMENT
Contrast the Humanistic and Existential perspectives as they pertain to the concept of personality. Which philosophical assumptions were most important to Rogers? Using the Existential framework, how do times of change and crisis lead us to reconsider our values?
a post with a minimum of 300 words
READING
Personality Theory
Created
July 7, 2017
by
userMark Kelland
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization).
Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice more directly, Rogers felt a need to develop a new theoretical perspective that fit with his clinical observations and personal beliefs. Thus, he was proposing a humanistic approach to psychology and, more specifically, psychotherapy before Maslow. It was Maslow, however, who used the term humanistic psychology as a direct contrast to behaviorism and psychoanalysis. And it was Maslow who co.
ASSIGNMENTContrast the Humanistic and Existential perspectives a.docxedmondpburgess27164
Carl Rogers was influenced by his religious upbringing and experiences in China to develop a humanistic perspective focused on self-actualization and respecting each individual. He found existing therapeutic approaches lacking and developed client-centered therapy, which aims to help clients grow in a positive way without imposing external analysis or control. Rogers believed each person's internal experiences are unique and constantly changing, and that individuals are motivated towards self-actualization. His perspective emphasized empathy, understanding and respect for individuals.
Person centered therapy by brian thorneCTA Australia
1) Carl Rogers developed person-centered therapy after realizing that clients know best what problems are crucial to them and what direction therapy should take, rather than therapists focusing on diagnosis and interpretation.
2) Rogers' ideas spread from the US to Britain in the 1960s through university counseling training programs led by American professors. His ideas became more widely known as counseling grew in Britain, especially in education.
3) In recent decades, person-centered therapy has expanded beyond education in Britain through organizations like the Association for Humanistic Psychology and the Facilitator Development Institute, establishing training and increasing practitioners in fields like social work and psychiatry.
The American Scholar (An Essay) - Kindle edition by Ralph Waldo Emerson .... The American Scholar by Ralph Waldo Emerson. The American scholar (1911 edition) | Open Library. Emerson and the american scholar essays. The American Scholar Is Accepting Poetry And Essays Amongst Others/ How .... Summary and analysis of the american scholar.
Literature ReviewsPlanning and Writing Them1You’ve.docxsmile790243
Literature Reviews
Planning and Writing Them
1
You’ve done the hard part!
You did your secondary research with your annotated bibliography
Now, take that research and compile it into a cohesive, useful narrative that explains the “conversation” around the topic you’re going to be looking into
2
What is a lit review?
Lit reviews usually are at the beginnings of research articles
Summarize the “conversation” on the subject and establish why your study is important
Look at Zakreski article, Greene article – see in the beginning of their articles, they summarize and explain what others have had to say about the topic
Your annotated bib should easily transition into what will be the first part of your paper, the literature review.
Duggar has lots of citations; 16 in her bib. She talks about lots of different ideas here to lay the groundwork for what she is going to do
Greene has fewer, but has more to say about them
3
Three functions of a lit review
Your literature review will become the first part of your research paper. Thus, it should do three things:
Include a short introduction that defines or identifies the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature (this is called establishing a territory)
Synthesize other research on the topic, explaining what is known about it
Conclude by stating what is missing, what is controversial, what is not yet known, or what needs to be resolved in the discussion. This will provide the transition later to your own study and your research questions (this is called “establishing a niche”)
4
How do I write it?
Your literature review should synthesize all the information from your annotated bibliography
You can organize the information chronologically
You can organize the information by topic
by least-most recent studies or vice versa; clump everything by what was found, what
5
How do I write it, con’t
Your lit review should have an intro, body, and conclusion
This is not true of ALL lit reviews, but it is a good general rule to follow
The intro will serve at the intro to your paper
The body will establish the “conversation”
The conclusion will serve to transition your paper into a discussion of your study
The body can (and probably should) have multiple paragraphs, based on how you’ve organized it
6
About the conclusion
In the conclusion, you want to establish why your study is important
You need to somehow point out a gap in the knowledge, a question you have about other research, or a counter-point you want to raise
If you can’t prove that your study authentically adds to the conversation, then you really shouldn’t be doing the research
Leads to your methods section
7
Example lit reviews
See the link on Isidore on the “Info on Lit Reviews” page, “Example Lit Review”
From York College in New York – web.York.cuny.edu/~washton/student/Org-Behavior/lit_rev_eg.pdf
Also see https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/res ...
This document outlines the literature review for a research project investigating whether the creative process can be used to explore a personal experience of bipolar disorder. It discusses three main areas: the creative process, bipolar disorder, and methodologies. Autoethnography is proposed as a methodology that acknowledges the researcher's power to explore their own life experiences. The creative process and autoethnography would be combined, using a spectrum from analytic to evocative approaches. 'Data' may include diaries, artworks, images and videos. The research would have academic and patient audiences. Ethics considerations are also important when using oneself as a research subject.
ASSIGNMENTContrast the Humanistic and Existential perspectiv.docxedmondpburgess27164
ASSIGNMENT
Contrast the Humanistic and Existential perspectives as they pertain to the concept of personality. Which philosophical assumptions were most important to Rogers? Using the Existential framework, how do times of change and crisis lead us to reconsider our values?
a post with a minimum of 300 words
READING
Personality Theory
Created
July 7, 2017
by
userMark Kelland
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization).
Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice more directly, Rogers felt a need to develop a new theoretical perspective that fit with his clinical observations and personal beliefs. Thus, he was proposing a humanistic approach to psychology and, more specifically, psychotherapy before Maslow. It was Maslow, however, who used the term humanistic psychology as a direct contrast to behaviorism and psychoanalysis. And it was Maslow who co.
ASSIGNMENTContrast the Humanistic and Existential perspectives a.docxedmondpburgess27164
Carl Rogers was influenced by his religious upbringing and experiences in China to develop a humanistic perspective focused on self-actualization and respecting each individual. He found existing therapeutic approaches lacking and developed client-centered therapy, which aims to help clients grow in a positive way without imposing external analysis or control. Rogers believed each person's internal experiences are unique and constantly changing, and that individuals are motivated towards self-actualization. His perspective emphasized empathy, understanding and respect for individuals.
Person centered therapy by brian thorneCTA Australia
1) Carl Rogers developed person-centered therapy after realizing that clients know best what problems are crucial to them and what direction therapy should take, rather than therapists focusing on diagnosis and interpretation.
2) Rogers' ideas spread from the US to Britain in the 1960s through university counseling training programs led by American professors. His ideas became more widely known as counseling grew in Britain, especially in education.
3) In recent decades, person-centered therapy has expanded beyond education in Britain through organizations like the Association for Humanistic Psychology and the Facilitator Development Institute, establishing training and increasing practitioners in fields like social work and psychiatry.
The American Scholar (An Essay) - Kindle edition by Ralph Waldo Emerson .... The American Scholar by Ralph Waldo Emerson. The American scholar (1911 edition) | Open Library. Emerson and the american scholar essays. The American Scholar Is Accepting Poetry And Essays Amongst Others/ How .... Summary and analysis of the american scholar.
Literature ReviewsPlanning and Writing Them1You’ve.docxsmile790243
Literature Reviews
Planning and Writing Them
1
You’ve done the hard part!
You did your secondary research with your annotated bibliography
Now, take that research and compile it into a cohesive, useful narrative that explains the “conversation” around the topic you’re going to be looking into
2
What is a lit review?
Lit reviews usually are at the beginnings of research articles
Summarize the “conversation” on the subject and establish why your study is important
Look at Zakreski article, Greene article – see in the beginning of their articles, they summarize and explain what others have had to say about the topic
Your annotated bib should easily transition into what will be the first part of your paper, the literature review.
Duggar has lots of citations; 16 in her bib. She talks about lots of different ideas here to lay the groundwork for what she is going to do
Greene has fewer, but has more to say about them
3
Three functions of a lit review
Your literature review will become the first part of your research paper. Thus, it should do three things:
Include a short introduction that defines or identifies the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature (this is called establishing a territory)
Synthesize other research on the topic, explaining what is known about it
Conclude by stating what is missing, what is controversial, what is not yet known, or what needs to be resolved in the discussion. This will provide the transition later to your own study and your research questions (this is called “establishing a niche”)
4
How do I write it?
Your literature review should synthesize all the information from your annotated bibliography
You can organize the information chronologically
You can organize the information by topic
by least-most recent studies or vice versa; clump everything by what was found, what
5
How do I write it, con’t
Your lit review should have an intro, body, and conclusion
This is not true of ALL lit reviews, but it is a good general rule to follow
The intro will serve at the intro to your paper
The body will establish the “conversation”
The conclusion will serve to transition your paper into a discussion of your study
The body can (and probably should) have multiple paragraphs, based on how you’ve organized it
6
About the conclusion
In the conclusion, you want to establish why your study is important
You need to somehow point out a gap in the knowledge, a question you have about other research, or a counter-point you want to raise
If you can’t prove that your study authentically adds to the conversation, then you really shouldn’t be doing the research
Leads to your methods section
7
Example lit reviews
See the link on Isidore on the “Info on Lit Reviews” page, “Example Lit Review”
From York College in New York – web.York.cuny.edu/~washton/student/Org-Behavior/lit_rev_eg.pdf
Also see https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/res ...
Assignment InstructionsTHIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!The Learning R.docxhoward4little59962
Assignment Instructions
\THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!
The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly learning reflections you'll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a topic that you found particularly interesting during that week and what made it interesting, and the second paragraph will describe something that you have observed occurring in the real world that exemplified that topic. Only one topic may be recorded in the journal for each assigned week and your observed real word occurrence must be clearly related to it.
READINGPersonality Theory
Created July 7, 2017 by userMark Kelland
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization). Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice more directly,.
Shiva Kumar Srinivasan has a Ph.D. in English Literature and Psychoanalysis from the University of Wales at Cardiff.
This review essay on Sigmund Freud's 'Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego' describes how an understanding of psychoanalysis can further the reader's ability to situate and intervene in the context of group dynamics.
It lists the differences between individual and group psychology before describing the dangers of crowds and the contagion effect before setting out the structure and forms of identification between members in groups.
The main argument in the essay is that groups should guard against regression to more primitive forms of organizational life that Freud characterized as crowds and herds that are subject to the contagion effect.
In instances of such regression, groups will be able to repair themselves more effectively if they are psychoanalytically informed.
That is why this review essay on Freudian psychoanalysis is aimed at not only analysts but to an audience of bankers, economists, and social scientists.
PLEASE READ THE ASSIGNMENT BEFORE TAKING IT ON. WIILLING TO PAY FOR.docxsarantatersall
This document provides instructions for students to complete multiple assignments. It requests that students read assignments fully before taking them on and offers to pay for entire classes completed, not just individual assignments. It emphasizes following the rubric, including citations in papers, and using proper APA format. Students are to analyze television characters using Horney's coping strategies and complete two case assignments analyzing Freud/Jung's theories and Erikson's stages of development. They are also to discuss environmental factors using Skinner's perspective and complete a Myers-Briggs personality test with analysis.
Shiva Kumar Srinivasan has a Ph.D. in English Literature and Psychoanalysis from the University of Wales, Cardiff (1996).
His thesis was titled 'Oedipus Redux: D.H. Lawrence in the Freudian Field.'
These clinical notes should be of use to both theorists and practitioners of psychoanalysis in the tradition of Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan.
Assignment InstructionsTHIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!The Learning.docxhoward4little59962
Assignment Instructions
\THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!
The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly
learning reflections you'll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a topic that you found particularly interesting during that week and what made it interesting, and the second paragraph will describe something that you have observed occurring in the real world that exemplified that topic. Only one topic may be recorded in the journal for each assigned week and your observed real word occurrence must be clearly related to it.
READING
Personality Theory
Created
July 7, 2017
by
userMark Kelland
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization).
Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice m.
This document contains instructions and examples for analyzing abstracts from academic papers and research. It provides guidance on identifying key elements like the title, topic, discipline, objectives, methodology, and conclusions based on two sample abstracts. The first abstract examines the impact of the Mississippi Civil Rights Movement from 1960-1984 using quantitative analysis and case studies. The second analyzes the influence of Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky on counterculture writers in America through a close reading of his work and their stylistic similarities. The document aims to help readers effectively analyze and understand the essential information presented in academic abstracts.
This document contains instructions and examples for analyzing abstracts from academic papers and research. It provides guidance on identifying key elements like the title, topic, discipline, objectives, methodology, and conclusions based on two sample abstracts. The first abstract examines the impact of the Mississippi Civil Rights Movement from 1960-1984 using quantitative analysis and case studies. The second analyzes the influence of Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky on counterculture writers in America through a close reading of his work and their stylistic similarities. The document aims to help readers effectively analyze and understand the essential information presented in academic abstracts.
Katerina Avgeropoulou Research Methods Project FALL SEMESTER 2014Katerina Avgeropoulou
This document provides a research proposal and pilot study on the relationship between narcissism and social media. The literature review discusses previous research that has found uncertain relationships between social media and narcissism. The proposed methods for the pilot study include surveys. Results from the pilot study found that people with high narcissistic traits tend to have more friends and followers on social media and are more likely to use their real name on Facebook but fake names on Twitter. However, the sample size was small so further research is needed to draw stronger conclusions.
Follow-Up Post InstructionsRespond to at least one person. Furth.docxkeugene1
Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least one person. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons
and
an outside scholarly source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references
Please
write a minimum of five complete sentences
for your
one peer posting.
You should also consider
referencing
some
information
from the
course textbook
,
lecture lessons
,
or a scholarly source
to help support your written response post.
This discussion focuses on Ayn Rand and self-interest.
Kim (2014) stated that the most common definition used for self-interest includes the ability to maximize material resources while decreasing the level of harm caused to an individual. This harm can include a person’s health. It can also include a person’s wealth. Self-interest is considered a powerful motivator. According to Kim (2014), self-interest is the motivation behind humans setting goals. It is also the reason behind individuals achieving them.
Kim (2014) also noted that engaging in pleasure that makes an individual feel subjectively good can lead to self-interest. This can happen even if the person does not obtain any monetary gain. Likewise, this can occur even if an individual’s health is not impacted. For example, “the taxpayer who wants to pay taxes simply because it makes him feel good to help society would be self-interested because of the hedonistic benefits he accrues” (Kim, 2014, p. 100). Likewise, an individual who engages in risky sexual behaviors and/or smoking cigarettes both could be interpreted as self-interest. Kim (2014) stated that the pleasure feelings that individuals experience are self-interested even if these feelings coming with expenses to the health of the individual engaging in them.
As it relates to the public’s view on self-interest, many American voters in the 1950’s declared self-interest as playing a pivotal role in society (Weeden & Kurzban, 2017). Since the 1950’s; however, researchers have completed studies that reflect the opposite. Voters are now finding self-interest to play less of a role in society.
In closing, it is important to know that Alexis de Tocqueville held his own views related to self-interest. These views were no precursor to the views of philosopher Ayn Rand. Tocqueville believed that self-interest could lead a person to support others or it could lead to an individualized focus (Frohnen, 2000). Rand believed in the individualism as well as man’s ability to reason. Moreover, Rand believed “when we describe one person’s action as altruistic and another person’s action as self-interested, we may be overlooking the fact that in each case
the person is merely doing what he or she most wants to do
”(p. 69).
Attached is a video with more information related to Ayn Rand and self-interest verse altruism (Common Sense Capitalism, 2013).
Youtube: Ayn Rand: Self Interest versus Altruism
Referen.
Does Psychology Make a Significant Differencein Our LivesDustiBuckner14
Does Psychology Make a Significant Difference
in Our Lives?
Philip G. Zimbardo
Stanford University
The intellectual tension between the virtues of basic versus
applied research that characterized an earlier era of psy-
chology is being replaced by an appreciation of creative
applications of all research essential to improving the
quality of human life. Psychologists are positioned to “give
psychology away” to all those who can benefit from our
wisdom. Psychologists were not there 35 years ago when
American Psychological Association (APA) President
George Miller first encouraged us to share our knowledge
with the public. The author argues that psychology is
indeed making a significant difference in people’s lives;
this article provides a sampling of evidence demonstrating
how and why psychology matters, both in pervasive ways
and specific applications. Readers are referred to a newly
developed APA Web site that documents current opera-
tional uses of psychological research, theory, and method-
ology (its creation has been the author’s primary presiden-
tial initiative): www.psychologymatters.org.
Does psychology matter? Does what we do, andhave done for a hundred years or more, reallymake a significant difference in the lives of indi-
viduals or in the functioning of communities and nations?
Can we demonstrate that our theories, our research, our
professional practice, our methodologies, our way of think-
ing about mind, brain, and behavior make life better in any
measurable way? Has what we have to show for our dis-
cipline been applied in the real world beyond academia and
practitioners’ offices to improve health, education, welfare,
safety, organizational effectiveness, and more?
Such questions, and finding their answers, have al-
ways been my major personal and professional concern.
First, as an introductory psychology teacher for nearly six
decades, I have always worked to prove relevance as well
as essence of psychology to my students. Next, as an author
of the now classic basic text, Psychology and Life (Ruch &
Zimbardo, 1971), which claimed to wed psychology to life
applications, I constantly sought to put more psychology in
our lives and more life in our psychology (Gerrig & Zim-
bardo, 2004; Zimbardo, 1992). To reach an even broader
student audience, I have coauthored Core Concepts in
Psychology (Zimbardo, Weber, & Johnson, 2002) that
strives to bring the excitement of scientific and applied
psychology to students in state and community colleges.
In order to further expand the audience for what is best
in psychology, I accepted an invitation to help create, be
scientific advisor for, and narrator of the 26-program PBS
TV series, Discovering Psychology (1990/2001). For this
general public audience, we have provided answers—as
viewable instances—to their “so what?” questions. This
award-winning series is shown both nationally and inter-
nationally (in at least 10 nations) and has been the foun-
dation for the most popular telecou ...
Annotated Bibliography and Outline
Kirsten Vincent
RES 802
March 29, 2017
Dr. Millett
Running head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND OUTLINE
1
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND OUTLINE
6
Annotated Bibliography and Outline
Hall, C. S., & Lindzey, G. (1957). Social psychological theories: Adler, Fromm, Horney, and Sullivan. In Theories of personality (pp. 114-156). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. doi:10.1037/10910-004 https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login .aspx?direct=true&db=pzh&AN=2006-03537-004&site=ehost-live&scope=site
This article defines and explains the different theories of personality and social psychological theories. The contributions of Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm, and Harry Stack Sullivan in the development of the ideas are discussed in the article. These psychologists agreed with previous works of Freud but incorporated their ideas and theories to develop new theories. These theories aim at answering questions and explaining concepts that previous theories could not explain. Adler developed a theory that had social interest and striving for superiority as its primary pillars. Horney and Fromm insisted on the relevance of social psychological variables in the development of the personality theories. Later, Harry Stack developed the theory of interpersonal relationships and provided insight on its relationship with the personality theory. Despite different assumptions and concepts are shown by the different theories, some concepts complement each other in explaining certain behaviors.
Weaver, Y. (2009). Mid-life - A time of crisis or new possibilities? Existential Analysis, 20(1), 69–78. https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login .aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=37585685&site=ehost-live&scope=site
This article offers insight on the different views held by various psychologists concerning mid-life crises. There are two groups holding views from the various schools of thought. One group believes that the cause of the mid-life crisis is rooted in childhood difficulties that cause disorders of the ego. They argue that psychoanalysis is the only solution that allows the disturbed individuals to revisit their childhoods and deal with issues emanating from the same. The other group views mid-life as a normal stage of human development. This stage, according to this panel, is characterized by a time for people to re-evaluate their achievements and gauge their accomplishments. This period involves critiquing of one's abilities at this stage is also a feature of this period. It also entails conflicts between who an individual is and what they are aiming to be or what they expected to achieve at their age. These psychologists argue that these conflicts can occur at any age and are not specifically characteristic of mid-life.
Axelrod, S. D. (2012). "Self-awareness: At the interface of executive development and psychoanalytic thera.
This document provides an overview and contents of the book "Reading Jung: Science, Psychology, and Religion" by Volney P. Gay. The book aims to provide a systematic way of reading the major works of Carl Jung critically. It introduces Jung as both a famous scientist and personality, and discusses his goals and methods. The book will focus on reading selected texts from Jung's Collected Works in chronological order to understand the development of his ideas over time. It acknowledges challenges in relying solely on the Collected Works due to revisions of texts and lack of chronological ordering.
Applications Of Carl Rogers Theory And Practice To Couple And Family Therapy...Natasha Grant
This document discusses the application of Carl Rogers' theory and practice to couple and family therapy. It makes three key points:
1. It describes the relationship enhancement approach developed by Bernard Guerney, which applies Rogers' core conditions of congruence, unconditional positive regard, and empathic understanding by training family members to be "therapeutic agents" for each other.
2. It discusses how teaching relationship skills, like empathic listening and subjective expression, can help facilitate the philosophical underpinnings of a Rogerian approach, but these skills must be grounded in those underpinnings to be effective.
3. It explores how postmodern thinking, which emphasizes social construction of meaning and language,
Freud developed his psychoanalytic theory in late 19th century Vienna. The repressive social norms and aftermath of World War I influenced Freud to focus on exploring the unconscious mind and sexuality. He pioneered techniques like free association and dream analysis. Though controversial, Freud's theories of the id, ego, and superego and his focus on childhood development had a huge influence on psychology. However, his ideas could not be scientifically tested.
Freud developed his psychoanalytic theory in late 19th century Vienna. The repressive social norms and aftermath of World War I influenced Freud to focus on exploring the unconscious mind and sexuality. He pioneered techniques like free association and dream analysis. Though controversial, Freud's theories of the id, ego and superego and psychosexual stages laid the foundation for modern psychology. Students discuss how Vienna's cultural context shaped Freud's pioneering yet disputed theories of personality and psychotherapy.
This document provides biographical information about Dr. Richard D. Chessick, the author of the book being summarized. It outlines his extensive career in psychiatry and psychoanalysis, including his roles as director of various residency programs, chief of psychiatry, private practitioner of psychiatry and psychoanalysis, and professor. It notes the numerous awards and honors he has received for his work. It also lists his publications, including 17 books and over 300 papers in professional journals.
A Brief Essay On How Comparative Psychology Became An Endangered SpeciesJoshua Gorinson
- Comparative psychology has seen a steady decline, with fewer students pursuing advanced degrees in the field and fewer university courses being offered.
- The true cause of the decline occurred decades earlier when the field became overly focused on studying only rat behavior in learning and maze experiments. Critics pointed this out but it was largely ignored.
- By the 1960s-70s, books on animal behavior became bestsellers and TV shows featured field research on animals, making comparative psychology look outdated compared to ethology. This contributed to the current endangered status of the field, despite integration of ethology concepts later on.
zkStudyClub - Reef: Fast Succinct Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Regex ProofsAlex Pruden
This paper presents Reef, a system for generating publicly verifiable succinct non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs that a committed document matches or does not match a regular expression. We describe applications such as proving the strength of passwords, the provenance of email despite redactions, the validity of oblivious DNS queries, and the existence of mutations in DNA. Reef supports the Perl Compatible Regular Expression syntax, including wildcards, alternation, ranges, capture groups, Kleene star, negations, and lookarounds. Reef introduces a new type of automata, Skipping Alternating Finite Automata (SAFA), that skips irrelevant parts of a document when producing proofs without undermining soundness, and instantiates SAFA with a lookup argument. Our experimental evaluation confirms that Reef can generate proofs for documents with 32M characters; the proofs are small and cheap to verify (under a second).
Paper: https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/1886
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
Assignment InstructionsTHIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!The Learning R.docxhoward4little59962
Assignment Instructions
\THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!
The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly learning reflections you'll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a topic that you found particularly interesting during that week and what made it interesting, and the second paragraph will describe something that you have observed occurring in the real world that exemplified that topic. Only one topic may be recorded in the journal for each assigned week and your observed real word occurrence must be clearly related to it.
READINGPersonality Theory
Created July 7, 2017 by userMark Kelland
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization). Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice more directly,.
Shiva Kumar Srinivasan has a Ph.D. in English Literature and Psychoanalysis from the University of Wales at Cardiff.
This review essay on Sigmund Freud's 'Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego' describes how an understanding of psychoanalysis can further the reader's ability to situate and intervene in the context of group dynamics.
It lists the differences between individual and group psychology before describing the dangers of crowds and the contagion effect before setting out the structure and forms of identification between members in groups.
The main argument in the essay is that groups should guard against regression to more primitive forms of organizational life that Freud characterized as crowds and herds that are subject to the contagion effect.
In instances of such regression, groups will be able to repair themselves more effectively if they are psychoanalytically informed.
That is why this review essay on Freudian psychoanalysis is aimed at not only analysts but to an audience of bankers, economists, and social scientists.
PLEASE READ THE ASSIGNMENT BEFORE TAKING IT ON. WIILLING TO PAY FOR.docxsarantatersall
This document provides instructions for students to complete multiple assignments. It requests that students read assignments fully before taking them on and offers to pay for entire classes completed, not just individual assignments. It emphasizes following the rubric, including citations in papers, and using proper APA format. Students are to analyze television characters using Horney's coping strategies and complete two case assignments analyzing Freud/Jung's theories and Erikson's stages of development. They are also to discuss environmental factors using Skinner's perspective and complete a Myers-Briggs personality test with analysis.
Shiva Kumar Srinivasan has a Ph.D. in English Literature and Psychoanalysis from the University of Wales, Cardiff (1996).
His thesis was titled 'Oedipus Redux: D.H. Lawrence in the Freudian Field.'
These clinical notes should be of use to both theorists and practitioners of psychoanalysis in the tradition of Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan.
Assignment InstructionsTHIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!The Learning.docxhoward4little59962
Assignment Instructions
\THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!
The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly
learning reflections you'll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a topic that you found particularly interesting during that week and what made it interesting, and the second paragraph will describe something that you have observed occurring in the real world that exemplified that topic. Only one topic may be recorded in the journal for each assigned week and your observed real word occurrence must be clearly related to it.
READING
Personality Theory
Created
July 7, 2017
by
userMark Kelland
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization).
Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice m.
This document contains instructions and examples for analyzing abstracts from academic papers and research. It provides guidance on identifying key elements like the title, topic, discipline, objectives, methodology, and conclusions based on two sample abstracts. The first abstract examines the impact of the Mississippi Civil Rights Movement from 1960-1984 using quantitative analysis and case studies. The second analyzes the influence of Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky on counterculture writers in America through a close reading of his work and their stylistic similarities. The document aims to help readers effectively analyze and understand the essential information presented in academic abstracts.
This document contains instructions and examples for analyzing abstracts from academic papers and research. It provides guidance on identifying key elements like the title, topic, discipline, objectives, methodology, and conclusions based on two sample abstracts. The first abstract examines the impact of the Mississippi Civil Rights Movement from 1960-1984 using quantitative analysis and case studies. The second analyzes the influence of Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky on counterculture writers in America through a close reading of his work and their stylistic similarities. The document aims to help readers effectively analyze and understand the essential information presented in academic abstracts.
Katerina Avgeropoulou Research Methods Project FALL SEMESTER 2014Katerina Avgeropoulou
This document provides a research proposal and pilot study on the relationship between narcissism and social media. The literature review discusses previous research that has found uncertain relationships between social media and narcissism. The proposed methods for the pilot study include surveys. Results from the pilot study found that people with high narcissistic traits tend to have more friends and followers on social media and are more likely to use their real name on Facebook but fake names on Twitter. However, the sample size was small so further research is needed to draw stronger conclusions.
Follow-Up Post InstructionsRespond to at least one person. Furth.docxkeugene1
Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least one person. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons
and
an outside scholarly source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references
Please
write a minimum of five complete sentences
for your
one peer posting.
You should also consider
referencing
some
information
from the
course textbook
,
lecture lessons
,
or a scholarly source
to help support your written response post.
This discussion focuses on Ayn Rand and self-interest.
Kim (2014) stated that the most common definition used for self-interest includes the ability to maximize material resources while decreasing the level of harm caused to an individual. This harm can include a person’s health. It can also include a person’s wealth. Self-interest is considered a powerful motivator. According to Kim (2014), self-interest is the motivation behind humans setting goals. It is also the reason behind individuals achieving them.
Kim (2014) also noted that engaging in pleasure that makes an individual feel subjectively good can lead to self-interest. This can happen even if the person does not obtain any monetary gain. Likewise, this can occur even if an individual’s health is not impacted. For example, “the taxpayer who wants to pay taxes simply because it makes him feel good to help society would be self-interested because of the hedonistic benefits he accrues” (Kim, 2014, p. 100). Likewise, an individual who engages in risky sexual behaviors and/or smoking cigarettes both could be interpreted as self-interest. Kim (2014) stated that the pleasure feelings that individuals experience are self-interested even if these feelings coming with expenses to the health of the individual engaging in them.
As it relates to the public’s view on self-interest, many American voters in the 1950’s declared self-interest as playing a pivotal role in society (Weeden & Kurzban, 2017). Since the 1950’s; however, researchers have completed studies that reflect the opposite. Voters are now finding self-interest to play less of a role in society.
In closing, it is important to know that Alexis de Tocqueville held his own views related to self-interest. These views were no precursor to the views of philosopher Ayn Rand. Tocqueville believed that self-interest could lead a person to support others or it could lead to an individualized focus (Frohnen, 2000). Rand believed in the individualism as well as man’s ability to reason. Moreover, Rand believed “when we describe one person’s action as altruistic and another person’s action as self-interested, we may be overlooking the fact that in each case
the person is merely doing what he or she most wants to do
”(p. 69).
Attached is a video with more information related to Ayn Rand and self-interest verse altruism (Common Sense Capitalism, 2013).
Youtube: Ayn Rand: Self Interest versus Altruism
Referen.
Does Psychology Make a Significant Differencein Our LivesDustiBuckner14
Does Psychology Make a Significant Difference
in Our Lives?
Philip G. Zimbardo
Stanford University
The intellectual tension between the virtues of basic versus
applied research that characterized an earlier era of psy-
chology is being replaced by an appreciation of creative
applications of all research essential to improving the
quality of human life. Psychologists are positioned to “give
psychology away” to all those who can benefit from our
wisdom. Psychologists were not there 35 years ago when
American Psychological Association (APA) President
George Miller first encouraged us to share our knowledge
with the public. The author argues that psychology is
indeed making a significant difference in people’s lives;
this article provides a sampling of evidence demonstrating
how and why psychology matters, both in pervasive ways
and specific applications. Readers are referred to a newly
developed APA Web site that documents current opera-
tional uses of psychological research, theory, and method-
ology (its creation has been the author’s primary presiden-
tial initiative): www.psychologymatters.org.
Does psychology matter? Does what we do, andhave done for a hundred years or more, reallymake a significant difference in the lives of indi-
viduals or in the functioning of communities and nations?
Can we demonstrate that our theories, our research, our
professional practice, our methodologies, our way of think-
ing about mind, brain, and behavior make life better in any
measurable way? Has what we have to show for our dis-
cipline been applied in the real world beyond academia and
practitioners’ offices to improve health, education, welfare,
safety, organizational effectiveness, and more?
Such questions, and finding their answers, have al-
ways been my major personal and professional concern.
First, as an introductory psychology teacher for nearly six
decades, I have always worked to prove relevance as well
as essence of psychology to my students. Next, as an author
of the now classic basic text, Psychology and Life (Ruch &
Zimbardo, 1971), which claimed to wed psychology to life
applications, I constantly sought to put more psychology in
our lives and more life in our psychology (Gerrig & Zim-
bardo, 2004; Zimbardo, 1992). To reach an even broader
student audience, I have coauthored Core Concepts in
Psychology (Zimbardo, Weber, & Johnson, 2002) that
strives to bring the excitement of scientific and applied
psychology to students in state and community colleges.
In order to further expand the audience for what is best
in psychology, I accepted an invitation to help create, be
scientific advisor for, and narrator of the 26-program PBS
TV series, Discovering Psychology (1990/2001). For this
general public audience, we have provided answers—as
viewable instances—to their “so what?” questions. This
award-winning series is shown both nationally and inter-
nationally (in at least 10 nations) and has been the foun-
dation for the most popular telecou ...
Annotated Bibliography and Outline
Kirsten Vincent
RES 802
March 29, 2017
Dr. Millett
Running head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND OUTLINE
1
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND OUTLINE
6
Annotated Bibliography and Outline
Hall, C. S., & Lindzey, G. (1957). Social psychological theories: Adler, Fromm, Horney, and Sullivan. In Theories of personality (pp. 114-156). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. doi:10.1037/10910-004 https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login .aspx?direct=true&db=pzh&AN=2006-03537-004&site=ehost-live&scope=site
This article defines and explains the different theories of personality and social psychological theories. The contributions of Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm, and Harry Stack Sullivan in the development of the ideas are discussed in the article. These psychologists agreed with previous works of Freud but incorporated their ideas and theories to develop new theories. These theories aim at answering questions and explaining concepts that previous theories could not explain. Adler developed a theory that had social interest and striving for superiority as its primary pillars. Horney and Fromm insisted on the relevance of social psychological variables in the development of the personality theories. Later, Harry Stack developed the theory of interpersonal relationships and provided insight on its relationship with the personality theory. Despite different assumptions and concepts are shown by the different theories, some concepts complement each other in explaining certain behaviors.
Weaver, Y. (2009). Mid-life - A time of crisis or new possibilities? Existential Analysis, 20(1), 69–78. https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login .aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=37585685&site=ehost-live&scope=site
This article offers insight on the different views held by various psychologists concerning mid-life crises. There are two groups holding views from the various schools of thought. One group believes that the cause of the mid-life crisis is rooted in childhood difficulties that cause disorders of the ego. They argue that psychoanalysis is the only solution that allows the disturbed individuals to revisit their childhoods and deal with issues emanating from the same. The other group views mid-life as a normal stage of human development. This stage, according to this panel, is characterized by a time for people to re-evaluate their achievements and gauge their accomplishments. This period involves critiquing of one's abilities at this stage is also a feature of this period. It also entails conflicts between who an individual is and what they are aiming to be or what they expected to achieve at their age. These psychologists argue that these conflicts can occur at any age and are not specifically characteristic of mid-life.
Axelrod, S. D. (2012). "Self-awareness: At the interface of executive development and psychoanalytic thera.
This document provides an overview and contents of the book "Reading Jung: Science, Psychology, and Religion" by Volney P. Gay. The book aims to provide a systematic way of reading the major works of Carl Jung critically. It introduces Jung as both a famous scientist and personality, and discusses his goals and methods. The book will focus on reading selected texts from Jung's Collected Works in chronological order to understand the development of his ideas over time. It acknowledges challenges in relying solely on the Collected Works due to revisions of texts and lack of chronological ordering.
Applications Of Carl Rogers Theory And Practice To Couple And Family Therapy...Natasha Grant
This document discusses the application of Carl Rogers' theory and practice to couple and family therapy. It makes three key points:
1. It describes the relationship enhancement approach developed by Bernard Guerney, which applies Rogers' core conditions of congruence, unconditional positive regard, and empathic understanding by training family members to be "therapeutic agents" for each other.
2. It discusses how teaching relationship skills, like empathic listening and subjective expression, can help facilitate the philosophical underpinnings of a Rogerian approach, but these skills must be grounded in those underpinnings to be effective.
3. It explores how postmodern thinking, which emphasizes social construction of meaning and language,
Freud developed his psychoanalytic theory in late 19th century Vienna. The repressive social norms and aftermath of World War I influenced Freud to focus on exploring the unconscious mind and sexuality. He pioneered techniques like free association and dream analysis. Though controversial, Freud's theories of the id, ego, and superego and his focus on childhood development had a huge influence on psychology. However, his ideas could not be scientifically tested.
Freud developed his psychoanalytic theory in late 19th century Vienna. The repressive social norms and aftermath of World War I influenced Freud to focus on exploring the unconscious mind and sexuality. He pioneered techniques like free association and dream analysis. Though controversial, Freud's theories of the id, ego and superego and psychosexual stages laid the foundation for modern psychology. Students discuss how Vienna's cultural context shaped Freud's pioneering yet disputed theories of personality and psychotherapy.
This document provides biographical information about Dr. Richard D. Chessick, the author of the book being summarized. It outlines his extensive career in psychiatry and psychoanalysis, including his roles as director of various residency programs, chief of psychiatry, private practitioner of psychiatry and psychoanalysis, and professor. It notes the numerous awards and honors he has received for his work. It also lists his publications, including 17 books and over 300 papers in professional journals.
A Brief Essay On How Comparative Psychology Became An Endangered SpeciesJoshua Gorinson
- Comparative psychology has seen a steady decline, with fewer students pursuing advanced degrees in the field and fewer university courses being offered.
- The true cause of the decline occurred decades earlier when the field became overly focused on studying only rat behavior in learning and maze experiments. Critics pointed this out but it was largely ignored.
- By the 1960s-70s, books on animal behavior became bestsellers and TV shows featured field research on animals, making comparative psychology look outdated compared to ethology. This contributed to the current endangered status of the field, despite integration of ethology concepts later on.
zkStudyClub - Reef: Fast Succinct Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Regex ProofsAlex Pruden
This paper presents Reef, a system for generating publicly verifiable succinct non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs that a committed document matches or does not match a regular expression. We describe applications such as proving the strength of passwords, the provenance of email despite redactions, the validity of oblivious DNS queries, and the existence of mutations in DNA. Reef supports the Perl Compatible Regular Expression syntax, including wildcards, alternation, ranges, capture groups, Kleene star, negations, and lookarounds. Reef introduces a new type of automata, Skipping Alternating Finite Automata (SAFA), that skips irrelevant parts of a document when producing proofs without undermining soundness, and instantiates SAFA with a lookup argument. Our experimental evaluation confirms that Reef can generate proofs for documents with 32M characters; the proofs are small and cheap to verify (under a second).
Paper: https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/1886
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !KatiaHIMEUR1
Today, after several years of existence, an extremely active community and an ultra-dynamic ecosystem, Kubernetes has established itself as the de facto standard in container orchestration. Thanks to a wide range of managed services, it has never been so easy to set up a ready-to-use Kubernetes cluster.
However, this ease of use means that the subject of security in Kubernetes is often left for later, or even neglected. This exposes companies to significant risks.
In this talk, I'll show you step-by-step how to secure your Kubernetes cluster for greater peace of mind and reliability.
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
“An Outlook of the Ongoing and Future Relationship between Blockchain Technologies and Process-aware Information Systems.” Invited talk at the joint workshop on Blockchain for Information Systems (BC4IS) and Blockchain for Trusted Data Sharing (B4TDS), co-located with with the 36th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE), 3 June 2024, Limassol, Cyprus.
Essentials of Automations: The Art of Triggers and Actions in FMESafe Software
In this second installment of our Essentials of Automations webinar series, we’ll explore the landscape of triggers and actions, guiding you through the nuances of authoring and adapting workspaces for seamless automations. Gain an understanding of the full spectrum of triggers and actions available in FME, empowering you to enhance your workspaces for efficient automation.
We’ll kick things off by showcasing the most commonly used event-based triggers, introducing you to various automation workflows like manual triggers, schedules, directory watchers, and more. Plus, see how these elements play out in real scenarios.
Whether you’re tweaking your current setup or building from the ground up, this session will arm you with the tools and insights needed to transform your FME usage into a powerhouse of productivity. Join us to discover effective strategies that simplify complex processes, enhancing your productivity and transforming your data management practices with FME. Let’s turn complexity into clarity and make your workspaces work wonders!
Maruthi Prithivirajan, Head of ASEAN & IN Solution Architecture, Neo4j
Get an inside look at the latest Neo4j innovations that enable relationship-driven intelligence at scale. Learn more about the newest cloud integrations and product enhancements that make Neo4j an essential choice for developers building apps with interconnected data and generative AI.
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...DanBrown980551
Do you want to learn how to model and simulate an electrical network from scratch in under an hour?
Then welcome to this PowSyBl workshop, hosted by Rte, the French Transmission System Operator (TSO)!
During the webinar, you will discover the PowSyBl ecosystem as well as handle and study an electrical network through an interactive Python notebook.
PowSyBl is an open source project hosted by LF Energy, which offers a comprehensive set of features for electrical grid modelling and simulation. Among other advanced features, PowSyBl provides:
- A fully editable and extendable library for grid component modelling;
- Visualization tools to display your network;
- Grid simulation tools, such as power flows, security analyses (with or without remedial actions) and sensitivity analyses;
The framework is mostly written in Java, with a Python binding so that Python developers can access PowSyBl functionalities as well.
What you will learn during the webinar:
- For beginners: discover PowSyBl's functionalities through a quick general presentation and the notebook, without needing any expert coding skills;
- For advanced developers: master the skills to efficiently apply PowSyBl functionalities to your real-world scenarios.
Generative AI Deep Dive: Advancing from Proof of Concept to ProductionAggregage
Join Maher Hanafi, VP of Engineering at Betterworks, in this new session where he'll share a practical framework to transform Gen AI prototypes into impactful products! He'll delve into the complexities of data collection and management, model selection and optimization, and ensuring security, scalability, and responsible use.
A tale of scale & speed: How the US Navy is enabling software delivery from l...sonjaschweigert1
Rapid and secure feature delivery is a goal across every application team and every branch of the DoD. The Navy’s DevSecOps platform, Party Barge, has achieved:
- Reduction in onboarding time from 5 weeks to 1 day
- Improved developer experience and productivity through actionable findings and reduction of false positives
- Maintenance of superior security standards and inherent policy enforcement with Authorization to Operate (ATO)
Development teams can ship efficiently and ensure applications are cyber ready for Navy Authorizing Officials (AOs). In this webinar, Sigma Defense and Anchore will give attendees a look behind the scenes and demo secure pipeline automation and security artifacts that speed up application ATO and time to production.
We will cover:
- How to remove silos in DevSecOps
- How to build efficient development pipeline roles and component templates
- How to deliver security artifacts that matter for ATO’s (SBOMs, vulnerability reports, and policy evidence)
- How to streamline operations with automated policy checks on container images
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...SOFTTECHHUB
The choice of an operating system plays a pivotal role in shaping our computing experience. For decades, Microsoft's Windows has dominated the market, offering a familiar and widely adopted platform for personal and professional use. However, as technological advancements continue to push the boundaries of innovation, alternative operating systems have emerged, challenging the status quo and offering users a fresh perspective on computing.
One such alternative that has garnered significant attention and acclaim is Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, a sleek, powerful, and user-friendly Linux distribution that promises to redefine the way we interact with our devices. With its focus on performance, security, and customization, Nitrux Linux presents a compelling case for those seeking to break free from the constraints of proprietary software and embrace the freedom and flexibility of open-source computing.
Alt. GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using ...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
1. The Founder of Common Factors: A
Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig
Barry L. Duncan
Nova Southeastern University
In preparation for a commentary on Saul Rosenzweig’s classic 1936 paper,
“Some Implicit Common Methods in Diverse Forms of Psychotherapy,” an
amazing discovery was made: Saul Rosenzweig is not only alive but also still
contributing to science and society at age 93. This article sets the stage for a
conversation with the incredibly prolific Dr. Rosenzweig by tracing the im-
pact of his seminal contribution on early common factors theorists. This
review reveals Rosenzweig’s unrecognized but profound influence on lead-
ing figures of not only common factors but also of psychotherapy itself. A
conversation with Rosenzweig, the founder of common factors, is presented.
This noted scholar and wise elder of psychology reflects on the evolution of
his thinking from common factors to idiodynamics, and on topics ranging
from his passion for literature to his 1965 Buick Skylark, from the history of
psychotherapy to falling in love with ideas.
There is no new thing under the sun.—Eccles. 1:9
A literature search in preparation for a commentary (Duncan, 2002) on
Saul Rosenzweig’s 1936 classic article, “Some Implicit Common Factors in
Diverse Methods of Psychotherapy,” uncovered puzzling findings. After
the 1936 article, there seemed to be a great void—nothing from Rosenz-
weig in follow-up to his incredibly prophetic article and not much of any-
thing else about common factors until the middle 1950s. Trying to make
sense of the nearly 20-year hiatus as well as the surprising lack of reference
to Rosenzweig’s contribution by early common factor theorists, I pursued
information about Rosenzweig’s career to find some explanation.
Barry L. Duncan, School of Social and Systemic Studies, Nova Southeastern University.
I am indebted to Saul Rosenzweig for his cheerful participation and hospitality. I also
thank Jacqueline Sparks for her invaluable comments on this article and Tracy Mullendore
and Roberto Quiroz for transcription and library assistance.
Barry L. Duncan is now at the Institute for the Study of Therapeutic Change, Tamarac,
Florida.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Barry L. Duncan, P.O.
Box 26231, Tamarac, Florida 33320. E-mail: barrylduncan@cs.com
10
Journal of Psychotherapy Integration Copyright 2002 by the Educational Publishing Foundation
2002, Vol. 12, No. 1, 10–31 1053-0479/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//1053-0479.12.1.10
2. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 11
A search on the Internet revealed a shocking discovery: a Saul Rosen-
zweig Web site depicting not only a distinguished career but also an ad-
dress and phone number! Could he still be alive some 65 years later? I
hurriedly called the number and amidst my fumbling and excitement, Saul
Rosenzweig, the founder of the common factors movement, answered the
phone. He is alive, vibrant, and still contributing to science and society at
age 93. Although delighted, imagine my embarrassment. My colleagues
and I dedicated our edited text about common factors to him (Hubble,
Duncan, & Miller, 1999) to honor his status as the original common factors
theorist. We, of course, assumed him dead. How wrong one can be.
He wrote the first known proposal for common factors at the ripe old
age of 29 (see the Appendix for a brief biography). This 1932 Harvard PhD
and schoolmate of B. F. Skinner and Jerome Frank did indeed follow up on
common factors: A 1938 article and 1940 panel presentation elaborated
and further disseminated his common factors argument; a related 1937
article, building on the commonality among approaches, cogently ad-
dressed their inherent complementarity. Thereafter, the idea of comple-
mentarity evolved into his life’s work and greatest passion, idiodynamics,
creativity, and personality theory. Rosenzweig’s prolific and meaningful
career, some 223 publications and counting, spanned many other areas as
well: empirical psychodynamics, projective assessment, frustration and ag-
gression, and historical psychology, to mention a few (visit http://
artsci.wustl.edu/∼srosenzw/SRBIB.html for a comprehensive list of Rosen-
zweig’s publications). Rosenzweig is well known to many in surprisingly
varied contexts within psychology: for his correspondence with Freud, for
his contributions to projective assessment (the Picture-Frustration Study),
for his oft-cited response to Hans Eysenck’s (1952) critique of psycho-
therapy (Rosenzweig, 1954), and for his New York Times-acclaimed analy-
sis of Freud’s visit to the United States (Rosenzweig, 1992). But there is
much more.
Although the 1936 article was honored by reprinting in Goldfried
(1982), it seemed only recently that Rosenzweig’s path-cutting perspective
has begun to be appreciated (see Weinberger, 1993). Luborsky (1995)
honored Rosenzweig, saying that the 1936 paper “deserves a laurel in
recognition of its being the first systematic presentation of the idea that
common factors across diverse forms of psychotherapy are so omnipresent
that comparative treatment studies should show nonsignificant differences
in outcomes” (p. 106). On closer inspection, however, Rosenzweig’s influ-
ence regarding common factors can be found in many places, most notably
on those who are often credited by later common factors theorists.
This article briefly compares Rosenzweig’s seminal contribution with
early common factors publications so that the reader may appreciate its
powerful impact. With that context set, a conversation with Saul Rosenz-
3. 12 Duncan
weig, the founder of common factors, is presented. This noted scholar and
wise elder of psychology reflects on the evolution of his thinking from
common factors to idiodynamics, and on topics ranging from his passion for
literature to his 1965 Buick Skylark, from the history of psychotherapy to
falling in love with ideas.
IN THE BEGINNING: THE BIRTH OF COMMON FACTORS
In 1936, writing in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Rosen-
zweig observed that no form of psychotherapy or healing is without cures
to its credit. Concluding that success is therefore not a reliable guide to the
validity of a theory, he suggested that some potent implicit common fac-
tors, perhaps more important than the methods purposely used, explained
the uniformity of success of seemingly diverse methods. Rosenzweig sum-
marized these common factors:
(1) the operation of implicit, unverbalized factors, such as catharsis, and the as yet
undefined effect of the personality of the good therapist; (2) the formal consistency
of the therapeutic ideology as a basis for reintegration; (3) the alternative formu-
lation of psychological events and the interdependence of personality organization.
(p. 415)
The following review traces these original ideas in arguably the most in-
fluential of the common factors theorists. Comments concerning whether
Rosenzweig’s 1936 proposal was referenced by different authors are of-
fered only for reader reflection on the historical significance of that classic
article. These comments are in no way meant as a criticism of scholarship
nor intended to imply in any way whatsoever that Rosenzweig’s ideas were
used without proper credit.
COMMON FACTORS: A BRIEF REVIEW
An altogether forgotten panel (for notable exceptions, see Goldfried &
Newman, 1992; Sollod, 1981; Weinberger, 1993) assembled several promi-
nent theorists at the 1940 conference of the American Orthopsychiatric
Society. This presentation, the “Areas of Agreement in Psychotherapy,”
was later published in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (Watson,
1940). The panelists agreed that more similarities existed between ap-
proaches than differences and articulated four areas of agreement (objec-
tives are similar, the relationship is central, keeping the responsibility for
choice on the client, and enlarging the client’s understanding of self). Wat-
son (1940), in his conclusion, also said:
4. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 13
if we were to apply to our colleagues the distinction, so important with patients,
between what they tell us and what they do, we might find that agreement is greater
in practice than in theory. . . . We have agreed further . . . that our techniques can-
not be uniform and rigid, but vary with the age, problems and potentialities of the
individual client and with the unique personality of the therapist. . . . A therapist
has nothing to offer but himself. (p. 29)
Although these points alone make the article well worth the read for
integrationists, who participated in that presentation is even more compel-
ling. Saul Rosenzweig outlined his implicit common factors with some
further elaboration, and Carl Rogers, yes, Carl Rogers, presented about
areas of agreement in working with children. Rogers (1942) highlights this
panel as recommended reading in his first book, Counseling and Psycho-
therapy, and also references Rosenzweig’s 1936 paper. It is difficult to say
how much Rosenzweig’s ideas regarding the qualities of a good therapist
influenced Rogers, but Rogers did often cite Rosenzweig’s work. Sollod
(1981) noted that the 1940 panel significantly influenced Rogers, especially
the ideas offered by Watson. Rosenzweig was later invited by Rogers to
present to Rogers’ colleagues in Chicago (see later).
Not much else was said about common factors until an interesting
study by Heine (1953) foreshadowed later comparative investigations.
Heine credited the questions raised by Rosenzweig as providing the impe-
tus to conduct a study that compared several of the prevailing methods of
the day. Given comparable results, Heine supported Rosenzweig’s analysis
by concluding that a common factor was operating in the different forms of
psychotherapy investigated. Heine suggested that theory and technique are
less important than the characteristics of the individual applying them—a
conclusion that reiterates the 1940 panel’s assertions and has since gained
much empirical support. He recommended that the field devote itself to
developing a psychotherapy rather than a variety of psychotherapies.
Heine’s influential study was often referenced by later scholars, as noted
below. Heine was also acknowledged in Fiedler’s (1950) classic investiga-
tion of the ideal therapeutic relationship.
Nineteen years after the original article, Paul Hoch echoed Rosen-
zweig’s words, without reference, in a 1955 article:
if we have the opportunity to watch many patients treated by many different
therapists using different techniques, we are struck by the divergencies in theory
and in practical application and similarity in therapeutic results. . . . There are only
two logical conclusions . . . first that the different methods regardless of their theo-
retical background are equally effective, and that theoretical formulations are not
as important as some unclear common factors present in all such therapies. (p. 323)
Rosenzweig (1936) said:
What . . . accounts for the result that apparently diverse forms of psychotherapy
prove successful in similar cases? Or if they are only apparently diverse, what do
5. 14 Duncan
these therapies actually have in common that makes them equally successful? . . . it
is justifiable to wonder . . . whether the factors that actually are operating in several
different therapies may not have much more in common than have the factors
alleged to be operating. (pp. 412–413)
Hoch (1955) posited two common factors: the establishment of rapport and
trying to influence the patient. He articulated five methods of influence
(reassurance, catharsis, interpretation, manipulating interpersonal relation-
ships, and altering environmental forces).
In 1957, Sol Garfield, noted common factors theorist and significant
contributor to the advancement of a common factors perspective, included
a 10-page discussion of common factors in his book, Introductory Clinical
Psychology. He identified a number of features common to psychotherapy,
including a sympathetic nonmoralizing healer, the emotional and support-
ing relationship, catharsis, and the opportunity to gain some understanding
of one’s problems. Several of Rosenzweig’s articles are referenced in this
text, but his common factors article is not. Garfield (1992) referenced
Rosenzweig’s 1936 article in a discussion of his own evolution to a common
factors perspective but credited Heine (1953) and Rogers (1942) for the
inspiration of his ideas. Heine and Rogers, as noted, were significantly
influenced by Rosenzweig.
The same year, 1957, Rogers published the profoundly influential pa-
per, “The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality
Change,” in the Journal of Consulting Psychology. That article did not
reference Rosenzweig. Given the impact of Rogers’s 1957 article, his par-
ticipation on the 1940 panel and association with Rosenzweig loom large as
an unnoticed, but perhaps dramatic event in the development of psycho-
therapy. Speaking of the relationship, Rosenzweig makes an interesting
comment in his 1936 paper regarding “the indefinable effect of the thera-
pist’s personality”:
observers seem intuitively to sense the characteristics of the good therapist time
and again . . . sometimes being so impressed as almost to believe that the person-
ality of the therapist could be sufficient [italics added] in itself, apart everything
else, to account for the cure of many a patient by a sort of catalytic effect. (p. 413)
Although the recognition of the importance of the therapeutic relation-
ship was widespread as early as 1940 (see Watson, 1940), this may be the
first report of the “sufficient” nature of the therapist-provided variables as
popularized by Rogers’s groundbreaking 1957 article.
If Rosenzweig wrote the first notes of the call to the common factors,
Johns Hopkins University’s Jerome Frank composed an entire symphony.
Frank’s (1961) book, Persuasion and Healing, was the first entirely devoted
to the commonalities cutting across approaches. He incorporated much of
Rosenzweig’s brief proposal but articulated a far more expanded theoret-
6. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 15
ical and empirical context, especially regarding the profound effects of
expectation and placebo in healing endeavors. In this and later editions
(Frank, 1973; Frank & Frank, 1991), Frank placed therapy within the larger
family of projects designed to bring about healing. He (joined by his daugh-
ter, Julia, in the last edition) looked for the threads linking such different
activities as traditional psychotherapy, group and family therapies, inpa-
tient treatment, drug therapy, medicine, religiomagical healing in nonin-
dustrialized societies, cults, and revivals. Interestingly, Rosenzweig noted
(see below) that his historical research of healing in religious and super-
natural contexts as a precursor to psychotherapy also fueled his ideas about
common factors.
In his analysis, Frank (1973) concluded that therapy in its various
forms should be thought of as “a single entity.” He proposed:
two apparently very different psychotherapies, such as psychoanalysis and system-
atic desensitization, might be analogous to penicillin and digitalis—totally different
pharmacological agents suitable for totally different conditions. On the other hand,
the active ingredient of both may be the same, analogous to two compounds mar-
keted under different names, both of which contain aspirin. I believe the second
alternative is closer to the mark. (pp. 313–314)
Frank also identified four features shared by all effective therapies: (a) an
emotionally charged, confiding relationship with a helping person; (b) a
healing setting; (c) a rationale, conceptual scheme, or myth that provides a
plausible explanation for the patient’s symptoms and prescribes a ritual or
procedure for resolving them; and (d) a ritual or procedure that requires
the active participation of both patient and therapist and that is believed by
both to be the means of restoring the patient’s health.
Although Frank’s common factors bear a resemblance to Rosenzweig’s
original formulations, especially the notions of a conceptual scheme and
alternative explanation, and the therapeutic relationship, Rosenzweig was
not referenced until the 1991 edition. Frank did reference both Rogers
(1942) and Heine (1953) in the 1961 edition. Frank’s “single entity” notion
seems akin to Heine’s idea of developing “a psychotherapy.” Curiously,
both Garfield (1982) and Frank (1982) contributed to Goldfried’s (1982)
excellent book on common factors, Converging Themes in Psychotherapy,
which reprints Rosenzweig’s 1936 paper, but neither referenced him in that
volume.
Picking up on Frank’s far-reaching discussion of placebo, the 1970s
included related works from theorists who conceptualized the common
factors in terms of placebo effects (e.g., Shapiro, 1971; Shapiro & Morris,
1978). The 1970s also ushered a more refined definition of the basic ingre-
dients of psychotherapy (e.g., Garfield, 1973; Strupp, 1973), an increased
empirical argument for the common factors (e.g., Strupp & Hadley, 1979),
7. 16 Duncan
and the empirical confirmation of yet another Rosenzweig brainchild, the
dodo bird verdict (Luborsky, Singer, & Luborsky, 1975).
A CONVERSATION WITH SAUL ROSENZWEIG
The following conversation occurred at Dr. Rosenzweig’s office in St.
Louis on October 12, 2000. Segments of some of his papers are intertwined
in the conversation to provide the reader additional context to understand
our discussion. Our conversation began in the living room of his office,
migrated to the study, continued in a 1965 Buick Skylark, unfolded over
lunch at the faculty restaurant at Washington University, and concluded
back in his study over wine and nuts in the delightful company of his wife
Louise and assistant Amy Hackney, a PhD candidate in social psychology
at St. Louis University. It is my hope that this conversation will allow the
reader to discover and appreciate, as I did, the many contributions of Saul
Rosenzweig to modern psychotherapy and integration.
Barry Duncan (BD): I am very pleased you consented to having me come
out here and talk with you. I must have sounded wacky when I called
you. Here I am working on this article about your work, and it was just
incredible to find out that . . .
Saul Rosenzweig (SR): You thought I might have been in the other world,
huh?
BD: Yes, yes.
SR: Then you would have to get a soothsayer or something to communicate
with me.
BD: That’s right. (laughing) Well I have to admit something else to you. I
was writing the article as if I was interviewing you.
SR: You were interviewing me? Oh, I see.
BD: Yes.
SR: Well that’s very interesting.
BD: So here I was using you as a literary device and all along I could have
asked you these questions.
SR: How did you discover that I was still alive and going?
BD: I did a search on the Web and found your Web site.
SR: Oh yes, I was on there, I have that Web site.
BD: Well I am so glad that you did, because I would have been forever
embarrassed about writing about you and not talking to you. So you
saved me from great academic embarrassment.
SR: That’s good. (laughing) Where do you want to start?
BD: There’s so much of interest about your career, and of course, my
interests are around common factors, so I would like to start there. Who
8. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 17
or what inspired you to think about or write about implicit common
factors? Did you have a professor, or someone whom you had discussed
the ideas with?
SR: That’s a good place to start. Did you notice the wall hanging there? I
knew that I was going to show you that, but I didn’t realize it was so
relevant until now. I call it “the panorama of psychotherapy” and I did
that as a graduate student at Harvard Psychological Clinic in approxi-
mately 1932, when I got my PhD degree, and thereafter when I became
a research associate at the clinic with Dr. Henry Murray. You know that
name?
BD: Oh, yes.
SR: Well, he was my mentor at that time, my sponsor for my dissertation.
So, have you heard of Christiana Morgan?
BD: Yes.
SR: She was the one who really created the TAT [thematic apperception
test]. And, of course, it was there that I became interested in the pro-
jective techniques, and I studied frustration as part of my dissertation.
And that interest evolved into the Picture-Frustration Study, which is
now used worldwide. Most people know me by that test. I actually don’t
like the term test. I call it study because I think test implies right and
wrong answers. Study is much more the way in which the projective
techniques work. They emphasize the experience of the individual.
That’s why I called it the Picture-Frustration Study. Part of my inspira-
tion for that came from Galton, who introduced word association. Gal-
ton was one of the pioneers of psychology who I greatly admired. I have
all of the first editions of all of his books. Anyway, at the Harvard
Psychological Clinic, which started in 1927, I joined the faculty, the staff
there, as a research associate. Christiana Morgan was an associate of the
clinic, and as revealed later, she was really Henry Murray’s mistress.
BD: Oh really?
SR: There’s a book about that. Do you know about that book?
BD: No.
SR: It’s called Love’s Story Told by [Forrest G.] Robinson, and that is
really the biography of Henry Murray and tells about their relationship.
Then there’s another book about her and that’s called Translate This
Darkness [by Claire Douglas], which refers to her being brunette. That’s
the story of Christiana Morgan. She was a colleague of mine at the clinic,
and she had a hand in this wall hanging. There are some red places in
between the pictures, red vermilion. She painted those vermilion red
spots. I had an interest in history and psychotherapy from the very
beginning of my career, and so that’s why I did it. It begins at the left of
the top row and goes this way, starting with the Hindu god of the mind,
Indra, resurrecting a young boy. And then there are symbols of the
9. 18 Duncan
elements: air, fire, water, and earth. That’s in between that picture and
the next one, which is the Zodiac man, painted by Brown in 1470, taken
from [Fielding H.] Garrison’s famous History of Medicine. I gathered all
of these at the library at Harvard, from the rare book room. Then I had
the border, which is redwood, imported from California. The carvings
were put on there by a wood-burning set by an art student whom I knew.
At the clinic, there was a patient in occupational therapy. His name was
John. He was the one who did the framing of those pictures in the glass.
It was really a collaborative work.
BD: Yes.
SR: I was architect, the designer of it, John did the framing of the pictures
and I did all the research of course, and Christiana Morgan did the
vermilions, and this young man whose name I have forgotten did the
carvings. So as they say, the whole story is here and it goes on from the
Zodiac Man, which, of course, was used as a way of guiding medical
people. They weren’t really medicine doctors, they were astrologers, and
so the Zodiac Man was important to them. The third one is the confes-
sional, which is a form of therapy, but in the church. Next is the temple
of Aesculapius and the scene in Epidaurus. Aesculapius was the god of
health and medicine. People used to sleep in this temple in Greece and
they had dreams. And the priests would stay in this temple while they
would sleep and when they would wake, he would ask them about their
dreams—a predecessor to Freud’s interpretation of dreams. Then King
Louis X, the fourth picture, of France, applying the royal touch for the
cure of diseases. The royal touch was a very famous method, used not
only by King Louis X of France but by others as well. And then there’s
Jesus, the fifth one, casting out devils. Keep in mind that I am inter-
preting all these methods of healing as predecessors of psychotherapy.
And then the next one is the Egyptian goddess Isis and her son Horus.
Isis restored her son to health from a fatal disease. That one is from a
book called, Evil Eye. And then the last one at the top is of an American
Indian, a medicine man, in action. And that is from [Charles] White-
bread’s Medical Collection. Then as you continue, down at the bottom,
at the left, that’s a picture of Antoine Mesmer, the discoverer of hyp-
nosis, or animal magnetism. And that shows him with a subject at a
seance, who had been hypnotized or mesmerized. The people would sit
´
around holding hands, as well as objects that had been soaked in that
magnetized water, and were cured of illnesses, including, of course,
hysteria. Next comes Pinel, the famous man of France, removing the
chains from the insane at the Bicetre. And the next one is the revolving
chair for treating the insane. Darwin and Cox invented this in the early
19th century. Erasmus Darwin was the grandfather of Charles Darwin.
This comes from a book by [Emil] Krepelin, called A Hundred Years of
10. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 19
Psychiatry. Darwin’s grandfather was a famous physiologist-poet, and in
my own library I have his book, Botanical Garden, which is a book about
medicine. And then the next is an amulet, for overcoming the evil eye,
and then a reproduction of Rembrandt’s painting of David playing be-
fore Saul. The biblical story is that Saul was a man of moods and mel-
ancholia and David played music, which soothed him. That was the
beginning of music therapy, which was used quite a bit in mental hos-
pitals. And then the last one is, of course, the etching by Max Pollock of
Freud from the Menorah Journal. Finally, there is the symbolic serpent
of the medical profession. So it’s very nice that I can show this “pano-
rama of psychotherapy” to you because it is relevant to our discussion
today.
BD: How so?
SR: History is relevant to my interest in common factors. It was also
relevant that I actually did psychotherapy in the psychological clinic,
with Murray and Morgan. I had an office between Murray and Morgan.
I don’t know why they gave me such a special location. But the common
factors came out of my awareness that there was such a variety of
methods trying to reach the mind and doing mental tricks of various
kinds—like the evil eye, the royal touch, the revolving chair, and so on
and so forth. All seemed to have more in common, implicitly, than not.
All those precursors to psychotherapy from the panorama bear a re-
semblance to each other and later forms of healing like psychotherapy.
And I don’t know of anyone who suggested that to me, maybe I’ll
remember later, I don’t at this point.
BD: But largely it arose from your interest in history. Through your his-
torical analysis of psychotherapy, you realized the common elements of
all forms of influence and healing. That’s interesting because Frank used
a similar cross-cultural perspective of healing in his discussion of com-
mon factors.
SR: Yes, if I wasn’t interested in history, I wouldn’t have arrived at this.
That certainly had a lot to do with it. That combined with my own
psychotherapy experiences of what seemed to matter.
BD: I am very curious about how you came up with the quote from Alice
in Wonderland. Everybody thinks that either Frank or Luborsky origi-
nally invoked the dodo bird judgment, even though Luborsky says in his
article in the second line that you did. I hope this interview finally clears
this misconception.
SR: Yes, well, Luborsky called it the “dodo verdict.” That’s what he said,
what he did invent. But it was taken from “Some Implicit Common
Factors” (Rosenzweig, 1936).
BD: How did you come up with that?
SR: Well, I used to read all sorts of literature. I am very interested in
11. 20 Duncan
literature and creativity, which we will get to a bit later. One of the
people I studied was Lewis Carroll.
BD: Oh.
SR: And Edward Lear. In fact, I have a very special collection of Edward
Lear’s first editions. Edward Lear and Lewis Carroll are the two
founders of children’s literature in England and, Lewis Carroll, of
course, wrote the famous Alice in Wonderland. He was actually a pro-
fessor of mathematics at Oxford and his real name was Charles Dodg-
son. And he also wrote The Looking Glass and Hunting of the Snark. I
was very interested in that literature. As a matter of fact, I have first
editions of those books. I have a very special collection of children’s
literature. So that’s how I knew that material inside and out, and the
race is one of the famous incidents in that story which seemed to per-
fectly fit the state of affairs I was discussing in that article.
BD: Yes, it sure did. So the dodo bird came from your avid interest in
literature.
SR: Yes, oh yes. And specifically, my interest in literature evolved from the
psychology of creativity. I studied literature in terms of creativity. In
fact, the foundation which I started a few years ago, the Foundation of
Idiodynamics, Personality Theory, and Literary Creativity, has grown
from that interest. I have analyzed, via my idiodynamics, the work of the
Henry James Sr. family, Dodgson, and even Freud. Because Freud was
a better writer than he was a psychologist.
BD: He was persuasive.
SR: Very persuasive and very ingenious, and not understood. I don’t mean
that he’s misunderstood, but that he’s just not understood. . . . Well, it’s
time for lunch, but it is too late to call a cab, so I will drive. I still drive,
you know.
BD: I would be happy to drive, if you like.
SR: No one drives my car but me.
BD: Okay, sure. . . . (Arriving at the car) Wow, this is a quite a car. My son
Jesse has a ’69 Ford Falcon—he would love this. What year is it?
SR: It is a 1965 Buick Skylark. As cliched as it sounds, they don’t make
´
them like this anymore.
BD: Indeed they don’t. . . . (Continuing interview) So, what I would like to
do at this point is start with the 1936 paper and follow the trail of your
thinking from there. I thought at first that the common factors article
just stood by itself, that you did nothing else with that paper. But the
more I investigated, the more I saw that was a misconception I had
formed from only seeing the 1936 article referenced in the common
factors literature. That misconception is conveyed in our common fac-
tors book and I will be sure to correct it in the second edition.
SR: Oh sure, that’s natural, with a first edition. Happens all the time. You
12. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 21
always find new things after you have gone to print. I want to emphasize
that my thinking evolved from there—that 1936 article was a start of a
process that never stopped for me, that took me to many different
places.
BD: I will do my best to do so and you can look at this and make sure I
conveyed your process appropriately. So after the ’36 paper, what was
the reaction?
SR: Well, I’ll tell you a story that characterizes a lot of the reaction: There
was a psychiatrist whom I worked with at Worcester Hospital, Jacob
Kasanin, and he walked in my office holding the issue of the journal in
his hand, and said only “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.” (Both
laugh) I think he meant that it was controversial to challenge the special
validity that each psychotherapy believed it held.
BD: It still is, if you can believe that.
SR: Not surprising, really.
BD: Next came the 1937 paper “Schools of Psychology: A Complementary
Pattern.” You seem to take a different angle but in the same direction.
SR: That’s right. “Implicit Common Factors” spoke to the commonalities
that all approaches shared, and “Schools” spoke to the complementari-
ties that existed among approaches. “Implicit Common Factors” also
spoke to complementarities in some ways, especially in the discussion of
the many different types of interpretations from differing orientations
that can be “correct.”
BD: In the “Schools” paper, you make a strong case for a relatively simple
underlying pattern of complementarity, based on each approach’s spe-
cific representation of a problem, special methodology, and preferential
alliance with other sciences. You argue to “unite the warring factions” of
psychology through their complementarity and render the disagree-
ments among them as “arbitrary and unnecessary.” Not one to avoid
controversy, you also said, “schools have been committing a ‘fallacy of
arrogation,’ i.e., exploiting their concepts by unduly subordinating to
them phenomena for which they were not originally intended and for
which they are not really adequate.” You sound like an integrationist!
Those words could be in the mission statement of the journal that this
interview will appear in. That article has great relevance to much of
what is being said today. You picked up on some of those ideas in the
1940 presentation, which we will get to a minute.
SR: Yes, exactly, all of my early articles stressed different types of comple-
mentarity.
BD: Different types. Okay.
SR: Can we stay on this line of thought for a while?
BD: Sure.
SR: Those early articles were important and lead me to idiodynamics, but
13. 22 Duncan
I didn’t use that term until ’51. Actually the first form of complemen-
tarity that I discussed was between experimenter and experimentee
(Rosenzweig, 1933). The 1936 paper was the second type, and the
“Schools” (Rosenzweig, 1937) paper was yet another. The “Schools”
paper showed that the division of labor among the five then-current
schools represented a complementary pattern in which a certain type of
problem achieved acceptable resolution by methods and concepts ap-
propriate to the problem emphasized. When I wrote that paper, Neals
Bohr, the Scandinavian physicist, was an inspiration regarding comple-
mentarity. He introduced a similar way to solve seemingly irreconcilable
theories in physics. In 1927, the principle of complementarity was for-
mulated as an alternative to [Werner Karl] Heisenberg’s “indetermi-
nacy,” and as a new way of reconciling the conflicting conceptions of
light as consisting of waves, on one hand, or particles, on the other. To
Bohr, both formulations were justified and were equally correct once it
was recognized that each was served by a different observational ap-
proach. When my 1937 paper appeared, interestingly, Bohr was recom-
mending that complementarity be extended beyond the physical to the
natural sciences, including biology and psychology. So that notion of
complementarity was at the heart of my own thinking. That paper of
Bohr’s appeared not only in the same year but also in the same journal
as mine did (The Journal of Philosophy)! And probably for that reason,
I got a letter from Tolman, not the famous psychologist Edward Tolman,
but his brother, who was a physicist and dean of the California Institute
of Technology. And out of the blue one day, while I was still at Worces-
ter Hospital, I got a letter from him. In fact, I want to show you that
letter. (Shows BD the letter.) He wrote that to me in ’37. Richard was
the brother of the famous Edward Tolman, and he makes that joke there
in the very beginning, you see? I just prize this letter. . . . Okay, back to
common factors.
BD: Okay, how did the 1940 panel come together?
SR: Goodwin Watson organized it. I didn’t feel that it was a highly suc-
cessful meeting. I don’t know why I believe that, maybe because of how
it was presented or how I presented, but it certainly was on the common
factors topic.
BD: Watson was the chairperson, he wrote the summary at the end. That
panel is all but forgotten. You know that in two of the three references
I found to it, Carl Rogers is not even mentioned, and in one of the
references, you are not mentioned. So how could that get by?
SR: Yes, yes. Things fall through the cracks often, only to resurface later.
BD: So Alexandra Adler was one of the people.
SR: Oh yes, I remember her. She was, I think, the wife of, or at least some
relative, of Alfred Adler.
14. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 23
BD: Let’s see who else was on this. Frederick Allen.
SR: Frederick Allen was a Rankian. [Otto] Rank was an important figure.
Allen was the director of the Philadelphia Child Guidance Clinic.
BD: You elaborated on some things that I found very interesting: the
importance of the faith of the client in the therapist and the method, and
the notion of fitness. You actually said in that outline that the content of
the interpretation or approach was secondary to the common factors
and that it actually had more to do with the fitness for a specific patient.
The idea of fitness is a very important idea in integration.
SR: Yes, yes, and that actually was one of the conclusions of the panel,
about the uniqueness of the individual. I am very interested in the
uniqueness of the individual. Allport’s idea of uniqueness referred
mostly to traits. Idiodynamics stresses that it was not just a matter of
traits but also of the unique history, and the dynamic development of the
individual. So the fitness of the interpretation or method is obviously of
great importance, more so than its correctness.
BD: Do you recall your interactions with Carl Rogers? Rogers gives a fair
amount of emphasis to the impact of that panel on his thinking.
SR: Yes, I remember one time when I visited at his invitation, he was in
Chicago at the time and I gave a talk. I think at that time I was at the
Psychiatric Institute at the University of Pittsburgh. That must have
been like 1945. And he had a seminar group and he invited me to talk
on what I called “Understanding the Individual.”
BD: Rogers referenced you and the panel in his 1942 book, his first book,
and then he referenced you in later works as well, so I think that your
view of common factors was an influence on him, and perhaps your
interest in the individual reinforced his ideas as well.
SR: Oh yeah, he was interested in those ideas and really kept up with the
literature.
BD: I was wondering if there were any conversations that you remember
having with him about common factors.
SR: Well, I don’t remember any specifically, but when I visited him in
Chicago there must have been. I can’t imagine that we didn’t talk about
that because of his interest in the ’36 paper and our collaboration in the
1940 panel. That had a lot to do with my having been invited.
BD: Another interesting thing you said in that panel presentation was
about a “rapid course of treatment.” Do you remember what was behind
that? No one ever talked about . . .
SR: That was before brief psychotherapy.
BD: Yes, quite a bit! It was like 1946, Alexander is the . . .
SR: Franz Alexander.
BD: Yes. So you moved on from there and laid more groundwork for
idiodynamics through your analysis of Murray, [Gordon] Allport, and
15. 24 Duncan
[Kurt] Lewin, and again with an emphasis on complementarity. You
were always moving on to new projects, taking your ideas to the next
level, and expanding into new areas, but continually weaving in comple-
mentarity, history, and literature.
SR: Yes, that’s accurate. There actually was a couple of other common
factors works. A 1938 paper, “A Dynamic Interpretation of Psycho-
therapy Oriented Towards Research,” published in Psychiatry: Journal
of the Biology and Pathology of Interpersonal Relations.
BD: (BD has since read that paper.) In that paper you say, “When one is
thus prodded it requires but little reflection to realize that the effective
factors in any form of psychotherapy are not necessarily those upon
which its proponents insist. Unrecognized factors play a part and among
these there may be more that is common than different” (Rosenzweig,
1938, p. 522). You elaborate, like your 1940 panel presentation, more on
the faith of the client in the therapist and emphasize the importance of
not only recognizing common factors but also researching them. Pro-
phetic words indeed.
SR: The other one is a book I put together called Facets of Psychotherapy,
which brought my collected papers about common factors together, as
well as other ideas I had about psychotherapy (Rosenzweig, 1951). And
I actually have in my files, the manuscript that I submitted to Grune and
Stratton, the publisher. They had published my book Psychodiagnosis in
1949, and that’s why they were interested in another book. I sent it in
and a few months later I decided that it wasn’t good enough and I
wanted to rewrite some portions. It went through various revisions and
title changes, but it ultimately died in committee so to speak.
BD: Well, you went on to the next thing and didn’t want to go back.
SR: That’s it, that’s exactly it. To me, by the time I got to the next thing,
I saw the other as being over with.
BD: That book, Facets of Psychotherapy (Rosenzweig, 1951), would have
predated all the famous books about common factors, like Jerome
Frank’s, which came out in ’61. Your ideas got picked up a couple of
decades later, and then people became very famous for picking up on them.
SR: Yes, yes. Well, that is the way it works. And I became very interested
in history and literature as a basis for idiodynamics. Let me tell you
about that. In this approach, the individual is considered to be a universe
of psychological events, what I call the idioverse. The basic notion is that
these events when viewed in their entirety provide new insights at the
phenomenological level that can later be subjected to verification as
actual historical or biographical facts. I haven’t finished my publications
on that. I am currently working on the James family. I told you, upstairs,
about the book I am working on about Henry James. In his story, “The
Death of the Lion,” he mentions the larger latitude of the lion, which he
16. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 25
never defines. It’s sort of a special phrase, but unquestionably he means
bisexuality. And so, that is one way that I got out of the common factors,
I became interested in the creativity of these people. I have made an
in-depth study of Henry James in particular, but have also studied the
whole family and have published a couple of papers on them. I have a
special library on the James family, all the first editions of Henry James,
as well as William James, the father, which are really pretty rare. Idio-
dynamics was developed largely in terms of these literary figures, as well
as Freud himself. I reread all of Freud and studied his dreams. There
were about 24 in The Interpretation of Dreams, and each of those dreams
is analyzed on the basis of his own associations, but then carrying on
from where he left off. Freud refers to the same dream in a number of
places in the book. So I put together all of these in one section. Each of
these dreams I studied as a project by itself, using idiodynamics. And so
he was one of the figures. But I also did this with the Jameses, Henry
James especially, a [Nathaniel] Hawthorne, and [Herman] Melville. I
made a number of new, call them “discoveries” if you will, but a new
understanding.
A relationship between Hawthorne and Melville grew out of their
meeting in the Berkshires in 1850–51, where they were together for
about a year. And at that time, each one wrote their masterpiece. Moby-
Dick was written at that time by Melville, and Hawthorne was working
on The House of Seven Gables, which was his favorite book. And both
of those books grew out of the same sources which I have traced. So I
am working on a book about their association, when they were at “the
zenith,” which I call it—the height of their creativity and when they
produced their best work. Later Hawthorne got involved, because of a
need to make a living, with Franklin Pierce, the president. He was a very
unpopular president but he gave Hawthorne a well-paying job that Haw-
thorne needed badly. Melville died in obscurity, he was a customs officer
in the port of New York, and he died there completely unknown and
unrecognized. He is buried in the Bronx. In my studies, I visited that
grave by the way, as well as Hawthorne’s grave at Sleepy Hollow in
Concord, and Freud’s at Golders Green Crematorium in London. At
any rate I have studied these authors, including Freud himself, from the
point of view of idiodynamics . . . (Break for wine and nuts with Louise
Rosenzweig and Amy Hackney)
BD: So one thing that I am painting here, and I realize that it’s me doing
the painting, is that all the common factors roads lead back to you in
some way or another. I don’t know if you are familiar with the trivia
game about Kevin Bacon, the actor. This is kind of silly, so bear with me.
The game is called “Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.” The theme of the
game is to trace any actor to a movie with Kevin Bacon within six
17. 26 Duncan
connections. For example, the actress Joan Allen, in the movie, The
Contender. Also in the same movie is Christian Slater, who was in Mur-
der in the First with Kevin Bacon. The theory is that Kevin Bacon is the
center of the universe and all stretches out from that. (Laughs) So one
thing that I am getting from my investigation of the literature and my
discussion with you is that many of the people we typically associate with
common factors have some connection to you. Like Jerome Frank.
SR: Yes, I went to Harvard with him and had associations with him.
BD: Carl Rogers.
SR: I presented with Carl Rogers in 1940 and spoke to his group in 1945.
BD: Sol Garfield
SR: He was here at Washington University. He is Professor Emeritus also.
BD: And you knew Paul Hoch as well.
SR: Yes, well actually those things, I mean people interacted but that
doesn’t mean that they read everything that I published.
BD: True. So the fact that there is a gap in referencing you is not really a
problem for you.
SR: No, because that is the way that it works. I don’t think that the citation
of my work is that important. A lot of the same influences that influ-
enced me influenced them, except, perhaps, that they didn’t have the
same interest in history and literature, which brought me to many dif-
ferent places. That was different. But I don’t like to stress that because
I don’t know that it’s that important and these people wound up pub-
lishing a lot more on the common factors topic than me. And a lot of
times, people read things and take things in and forget where ideas come
from. That’s okay, that’s natural.
BD: Okay, but historically it’s important because it seems that after a lull
in discussion about common factors, a whole new generation of common
factors theorists started writing, and saying many things that you said.
SR: I see. That was true even more so about my first paper, the 1933 paper.
That paper was published in The Psychological Review and delineated
the influences between the experimenter and the experimentee. I
pointed out the biases of the experimental relationship, which were later
explored and developed by [Martin] Orne and [Robert] Rosenthal re-
garding demand characteristics and experimental bias. Yes, those were
discovered separately by Rosenthal, Orne, and by other people, and
they didn’t cite my paper either.
BD: Okay.
SR: But Rosenthal was very aware of that and called me up about 2 years
ago on the phone. He said that he was just going to give a speech to
accept an award from the Society of Experimental Social Psychology.
He said that he wanted me to know that at the beginning of the speech
he was going to give me credit, that I should really be getting the award.
18. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 27
BD: Well, he could send you the award. (Both laugh)
SR: Well, like I said, it has never really been that important to me, never
has been. Because I had been interested in something else by that time.
By the time someone was not referencing me, I was on to the next thing.
This isn’t about citations to me.
BD: That’s very interesting, you’re interested in something else, so the fact
that it’s not cited is not a problem for you. Actually, the way it seemed
to work out is that later theorists referenced those who had been im-
pacted by your work, missing the connection with your ideas. It’s fasci-
nating that you wrote two papers in the ’30s that were very influential,
but initially unrecognized, and then people take the ball and run with it,
get credit, and then the field finally starts recognizing you.
SR: Well, often people read something that interests them and then they
forget the source. That’s natural, that’s the way things go. And then
sometimes people don’t cite what came before because it lessens their
own contribution.
BD: They think it does.
SR: To me that’s not true. It’s important to some people to shine. What is
that “15 minutes of fame”? Who said that, [Andy] Warhol? That’s the
sort of thing that many people are just dying to have.
BD: Yes, that’s true.
SR: Actually, the way the universe evolves and so on, in the end, what is it
about? What will it matter anyway, who said what and when, when I am
dead and buried? Ashes to ashes and dust to dust. My passion lies in my
current work. The joy is in the moment of discovery and so on—that’s
it. It’s like falling in love, it doesn’t last for 20 years, or maybe it does.
But it goes through an evolution. And maybe, somewhere down the line,
someone will pick up on it—if they reference me fine, if not, that is the
way it goes. I doubt if I’ll notice when it is all said and done. And so on.
A PERSONAL NOTE
It was a crisp, gorgeous autumn day in St. Louis. The leaves were just
starting to turn. The city was all a flutter because the St. Louis Cardinals
were hosting the New York Mets in the National League Championship
Series. The beauty of day, the majesty of the mature trees just tinged with
color, and the background of playoff excitement forecast an enjoyable
adventure, perhaps even one that could approach my anticipations. It was
not only a delightful experience that I will always cherish, but it also far
exceeded all my expectations. I was impressed by Dr. Rosenzweig in so
many ways and at so many levels that I am still sorting it all out.
19. 28 Duncan
Roediger (2000) perhaps best summarized Rosenzweig’s career:
He was friends with B. F. Skinner and he corresponded with Freud. He helped
usher in experimental studies of psychoanalytic concepts, discussed implicit com-
mon factors in all therapies, and his influence still resonates in theoretical and
applied areas, as well as in the careers of countless distinguished researchers. When
you talk about Saul Rosenzweig, you’re talking about the history of psychology.
(p. 1)
Indeed, talking to him was like reading a novel about the history of psy-
chology; the textured and personal stories he told breathed life into long-
forgotten names in long-forgotten textbooks. Discussing his contributions,
traveling to lunch in his beloved Buick Skylark, meeting his charming wife,
Louise, and hearing about his current projects all weave together in a way
that was both educational and inspirational. Dr. Rosenzweig not only
taught me about the history of common factors but also taught me about
scholarship, the ownership of ideas, and life.
His refreshing attitude toward his work and his lack of resentment
toward others achieving far more credit for similar ideas were astounding.
It stimulated a reevaluation of my own reactions to whether or not my
colleagues and I are referenced, and an enhanced appreciation of the privi-
leges inherent to the intellectual pursuit of ideas and their sharing with
others. Saul Rosenzweig demonstrated the joy of that privilege in his de-
scriptions of the Rosenzweig Jubilee held in his honor at Washington Uni-
versity. Many whose lives and work had been touched by him came to-
gether to chronicle his contributions and express their gratitude. I was
taken by his pleasure of that event—not in the credit given for his signifi-
cant contributions to the many different fields he has impacted, but rather
in his pride in teaching and inspiring others with his ideas. His work, his
life, and his amazing vitality and productivity offer not only hope of a
positive aging process but also a glimpse of the rewards of the unselfish and
humble pursuit of ideas.
REFERENCES
Duncan, B. L. (2002). The legacy of Saul Rosenzweig: The profundity of the dodo bird.
Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 12, 32–57.
Eysenck, H. (1952). The effects of psychotherapy: An evaluation. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 16, 319–324.
Fielder, F. E. (1950). The concept of an ideal therapeutic relationship. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 14, 239–245.
Frank, J. D. (1961). Persuasion and healing. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Frank, J. D. (1973). Persuasion and healing (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Frank, J. D. (1982). Psychotherapy in America today. In M. R. Goldfried (Ed.), Converging
themes in psychotherapy (pp. 78–94). New York: Springer.
Frank, J. D., & Frank, J. B. (1991). Persuasion and healing (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
20. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 29
Garfield, S. L. (1957). Introductory clinical psychology. New York: Macmillan.
Garfield, S. L. (1973). Basic ingredients or common factors in psychotherapy? Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, 9–12.
Garfield, S. L. (1982). What are the therapeutic variables in psychotherapy? In M. R. Gold-
fried (Ed.), Converging themes in psychotherapy (pp. 135–142). New York: Springer.
Garfield, S. L. (1992). Eclectic psychotherapy: A common factors approach. In J. C. Norcross
& M. R. Goldfried (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 168–201). New
York: Basic Books.
Goldfried, M. R. (1982). Converging themes in psychotherapy. New York: Springer.
Goldfried, M. R., & Newman, C. F. (1992). A history of psychotherapy integration. In J. C.
Norcross & M. R. Goldfried (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 46–93).
New York: Basic Books.
Heine, R. W. (1953). A comparison of patients’ reports on psychotherapeutic experience with
psychoanalytic, nondirective and Adlerian therapists. American Journal of Psycho-
therapy, 7, 16–23.
Hoch, P. (1955). Aims and limitations of psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychiatry, 112,
321–327.
Hubble, M. A., Duncan, B. L., & Miller, S. D. (1999). The heart and soul of change: What
works in therapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Luborsky, L. (1995). Are common factors across different psychotherapies the main expla-
nation for the dodo bird verdict that “everyone has won so all must have prizes”?
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 2, 106–109.
Luborsky, L., Singer, B., & Luborsky, L. (1975). Comparative studies of psychotherapies: Is
it true that “everyone has won and all must have prizes”? Archives of General Psychiatry,
32, 995–1008.
Roediger, H. (2000). Honoring Rosenzweig. Observer, 13(1), 28–29.
Rogers, C. (1942). Counseling and psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95–103.
Rosenzweig, S. (1933). The experimental situation as a psychological problem. Psychological
Review, 40, 337–354.
Rosenzweig, S. (1936). Some implicit common factors in diverse methods of psychotherapy.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 6, 412–415.
Rosenzweig, S. (1937). Schools of psychology: A complementary pattern. Philosophy of Sci-
ence, 4, 96–106.
Rosenzweig, S. (1938). A dynamic interpretation of psychotherapy oriented towards research.
Psychiatry, 1, 521–526.
Rosenzweig, S. (1940). Areas of agreement in psychotherapy. American Journal of Ortho-
psychiatry, 10, 703–704.
Rosenzweig, S. (1949). Psychodiagnosis: An introduction to the integration of tests in dynamic
clinical practice. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Rosenzweig, S. (1951). Facets of psychotherapy. Unpublished manuscript.
Rosenzweig, S. (1954). A transvaluation of psychotherapy: A reply to Hans Eysenck. Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 298–304.
Rosenzweig. S. (1978). Aggressive behavior and the Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study.
New York: Praeger.
Rosenzweig, S. (1986). Freud and experimental psychology: The emergence of idiodynamics
(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rosenzweig, S. (1987). Sally Beauchamp’s career: A psychoarchaeological key to Morton
Prince’s classic case of multiple personality. Genetic, Social, & General Psychology
Monographs, 113, 5–60.
Rosenzweig, S. (1992). Freud, Jung, and Hall the king-maker: The expedition to America
(1909). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
Shapiro, A. K. (1971). Placebo effects in medicine, psychotherapy, and psychoanalysis. In A.
E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp.
439–473). New York: Wiley.
Shapiro, A. K., & Morris, L. A. (1978). Placebo effects in medical and psychological therapies.
21. 30 Duncan
In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior
change (2nd ed., pp. 369–410). New York: Wiley.
Sollod, B. (1981). Goodwin Watson’s 1940 conference. American Psychologist, 36, 1546–1547.
Strupp, H. H. (1973). On the basic ingredients of psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 41, 1–9.
Strupp, H. H., & Hadley, S. W. (1979). Specific vs non-specific factors in psychotherapy: A
controlled study of outcome. Archives of General Psychiatry, 36, 1125–1136.
Watson, G. (1940). Areas of agreement in psychotherapy. American Journal of Orthopsy-
chiatry, 10, 698–709.
Weinberger (1993). Common factors in psychotherapy. In J. R. Gold & G. Stricker (Eds.),
Comprehensive handbook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 43–56). New York: Plenum.
APPENDIX
ABOUT SAUL ROSENZWEIG
Saul Rosenzweig, born in Boston in 1907, received from Harvard Uni-
versity in 1929 his bachelor of arts degree, summa cum laude, in philoso-
phy; in 1930, his master of arts degree; and in 1932, his doctoral degree in
clinical psychology. At the newly established Harvard Psychological Clinic,
he worked as research associate from 1929 to 1934. There, using laboratory
methods, he investigated the clinically derived concepts of psychoanalysis,
for example, repression. His first publication appeared in 1933 under the
title “The Experimental Situation as a Psychological Problem.” It antici-
pated the flurry of research in the 1950s on experimenter bias and related
problems in experimental social psychology.
In 1934, Rosenzweig joined the staff of the Research Service of the
Worcester State Hospital, Worcester, Massachusetts, where, until 1943, he
participated in a multidisciplinary investigation of schizophrenia, spon-
sored by the Rockefeller Foundation. He conducted psychotherapy with
schizophrenic patients and, in that context, developed concepts geared to
the diverse problems and levels of behavior. It was here that Rosenzwieg
(1936) wrote his classic paper on common factors and participated on the
prophetic panel of Goodwin Watson with Carl Rogers.
From 1938 to 1943, Rosenzweig was affiliate professor of psychology at
Clark University in Worcester. During this period, he developed the
Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study, based on a theory of aggression in
relation to frustration. This psychological instrument is now used world-
wide. The book, Aggressive Behavior and the Rosenzweig Picture-
Frustration Study, appeared in 1978.
From 1943 to 1949, Rosenzweig was chief psychologist at the Western
State Psychiatric Institute, Pittsburgh, and lecturer at the University of
Pittsburgh. Psychodiagnosis: An Introduction to the Integration of Tests in
Dynamic Clinical Practice was published in 1949.
22. A Conversation With Saul Rosenzweig 31
Since 1949, Rosenzweig has been professor in the Departments of
Psychology and Psychiatry at Washington University, St. Louis. In 1975 he
was appointed Professor Emeritus. Significant events of this period include
the following: appointment to the Study Panel of the History of the Life
Sciences, National Institute of Health; establishment of the International
Society for Research on Aggression, of which Rosenzweig was the founder
and first president; the publication of the much-cited response to Hans
Eysenck’s controversial paper (Rosenzweig, 1954); and establishment of
the Foundation for Idiodynamics and the Creative Process in 1972, of
which he is the managing director.
In 1950 Rosenzweig introduced the approach of idiodynamics, which
focuses on the dynamics of the life history by studying the blending of the
biogenic and cultural milieus in the matrix of the idioverse (the individual
world of events), with stress on the creative process. In 1986, Rosenzweig
published Freud and Experimental Psychology: The Emergence of Idiody-
namics, and in 1987, “Sally Beauchamp’s Career: A Psychoarchaelogical
Key to Morton Prince’s Classic Case of Multiple Personality.” By idiody-
namic methods, the real-life identity of this patient was discovered and the
etiology and development of her mental disorder demonstrated. Rosenz-
weig is the author of 200 other scientific, historical, and biographical ar-
ticles, including Freud, Jung, and Hall the King-Maker (1992), a New York
Times acclaimed book. This book applies the methods of idiodynamics to
the interactions of Freud, Jung, Hall, and James in connection with the
psychoanalytic expedition to America in 1909.