Postoperative spinal patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions and were taught five adaptive movements by occupational therapists. The Control group received routine hospital occupational therapy; the Placebo group participated in an imagery relaxation task unrelated to the mental practice task of the Imagery group, which was shown line drawings of the adaptive movements under study, provided movement instructions, and asked to mentally practice each movement in a familiar, daily living situation. Thirty-five patients returned for follow-up, and a measure of outcome was obtained through the use of a quantified movement assessment instrument. Subjective ratings for anxiety, rumination, and imagery were made by the occupational therapists. An occupational motoric-symbolic rating scale was developed to assess the symbolic portion of the patient's job experience. Statistical procedures including chi square, analysis of variance, and Pearson correlation were performed. Results were in the predicted direction although statistical significance was not achieved. Possible explanations for the obtained results were discussed.

The purpose of this study was to validate a stress inventory which would differentiate between a normative group and a patient population suffering from environmental illness. The hypotheses of this study were: (1) the Total Stress Load Inventory would be predictive in discriminating between clinical ecology patients and a normative group; (2) each section or subscale of the Total Stress Load Inventory would be predictive of psychological, cognitive, nutritional, and/or medical factors.

A serious problem confronts the psychologist whose patient threatens, within the privacy of a therapy session, to inflict violent harm upon some third person. Therapists in Texas face a risk of unjust legal liability because of a lack of widely accepted, clearly and fully articulated standards. A questionnaire was submitted to Texas psychologists and Texas judges of mental illness courts. It involved a hypothetical case of a patient who threatened to kill his girlfriend. The hypothesis that no consensus exists at present among psychologists or judges appears to be supported by the data. Comparisons are made of the attitudes of psychologists and judges. Correlations between psychologist attitudes and certain demographic and practice variables are reported. The need for new legislation in Texas concerning legal liability of therapists for the violent behavior of patients is discussed. Proposed legislation for Texas is set out. Among its important features are (1) recognition that continued therapy is itself a protective strategy and (2) establishment of good faith as the standard by which the behavior of the therapist is to be judged.

The purpose of the study was to develop a revision of the logical reasoning section of the California Test of Mental Maturity which increases its discriminative ability while maintaining an acceptable measure of reliability. Subjects were 102 students of general psychology classes at North Texas State University. All were administered the Logical Reasoning section of the California Test of Mental Maturity in its original form and an experimental revision of it (LRTR). The Wesman Personnel Classification Test was administered at the same time to demonstrate the tests' construct validity. Pearson product-moment correlations, item and homogeneity analyses were run. Results indicated that the revised test correlated significantly with the original test and the WPCT. Internal validity of the revised test was satisfactory, showing an improvement over the original test in terms of clarity, reliability and homogeneity.