Linda M. Montgomery

Effects of family and marital psychotherapies: a meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis of 163 randomized trials (including 59 dissertations) examines a number of questions not studied in previous syntheses. These include differences in outcome associated with different theoretical orientations, differences between marital and family therapies versus individual therapies, the clinical significance of therapy outcome, differences between marital versus family therapies in both outcomes and problems treated, and the effects of various substantive and methodological moderators of therapy outcome. The review concludes with some observations about the methodological status of this literature.

How many studies are in the file drawer? An estimate from the family/marital psychotherapy literature

Abstract There has been much speculation but little data about the number of unpublished studies located in “file drawers.” If the number is high, and if those studies yield systematically different effects, then literature reviews that ignore them might yield biased results. As part of an ongoing meta-analysis of the effectiveness of marital/family therapies, the authors asked 519 randomly sampled members of five relevant organizations if they had file drawer studies. A total of 375 respondents yielded three such unpublished studies that would otherwise have qualified for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Resulting population estimates suggest that there may be almost as many family/marital psychotherapy studies in the file drawer as there are published studies and dissertations. However, because so few file drawer studies were actually obtained, very large confidence intervals surrounded the estimate of the magnitude of effect sizes. Hence the degree of bias resulting from the file drawer problem is still in doubt. Available evidence in this and other studies suggests that the conservative conclusion is to assume that population effect sizes are only 70–90% as large as those computed from published studies.

Leisure interest patterns and subjective stress in college students

A first study of the Leisure Interests Checklist (LIC) is reported based on a large (N = 670) normative sample of college students. Acceptable reliability was found on the total interest scores, and on both rationally- and factorially-derived LIC subscales. The BAROMAS stress scales were also studied concurrently with the same college students, and normative data are provided from that sample. Interest in very active diversions and Sports on the LIC did correlate with confidence in doing sports on the BAROMAS. Otherwise, the two instruments showed little overlap. Comparisons between ethnic and gender groupings mainly agreed with advance expectations by disclosing culturally conventional differences in response patterns. The LIC appears promising for future use in both applied and research contexts.

Finding Sarah: 49-year reunion with the chimpanzee of David Premack’s language studies.

Sarah the chimpanzee was the primary participant in David Premacks language studies initiated at University of California at Santa Barbara in 1967. The first author was an undergraduate assistant training Sarah from 1967 to 1969. This article describes some of the early work with Sarah and our recent search for her. Sarahs whereabouts during the intervening years, and subsequent reunion with her in 2016 at Chimp Haven, a chimpanzee sanctuary in Louisiana, are described. It was found that despite her illness, Sarah engaged with the first author and demonstrated that she remembered him and the mechanics of the communication procedure that served as the foundation for testing Sarahs cognitive reasoning abilities as they pertained to language. There was no evidence she remembered any of the 5 symbolic nouns that were presented during a matching-to-sample procedure. The authors expressed their gratitude to the staff at Chimp Haven for the excellent care of Sarah.