Question 1:
a)
Wanting to check up on the Chris Evans 1991 paper which compared the
construing of a group of women referred to counselling for an eating
disorder with a group of women, without such problems.
Was this paper: RYLE, A. & EVANS, C.D.H (1991):
SOME MEANINGS OF BODY AND SELF IN EATING-DISORDERED AND COMPARISON SUBJECTS
BRITISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1991, Vol.64, No.Pt3, pp.273-283 ?
b)
Was the Bailey & Sims paper
"THE REPERTORY GRID AS A MEASURE OF CHANGE AND PREDICTOR OF OUTCOME IN THE
TREATMENT OF ALCOHOLISM"
BRITISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1991, Vol.64, No.Pt3, pp.285-293 ?
Question 2:
When inteventions do seem very successful, do the effect sizes tend to be
so big that there is little need to quibble about the statstical niceties?
There seems at first sight to be all sorts of objections to treating
distances in grids from different people with different consruct systems as
if they provided a common metric. But if the effects are very big, maybe
it/s not so bad. The Bailey & Sims idea recounted by Bob ( - haven't read
their paper yet!) of standardising the distance betwen elements in some
way, in terms of total variation in the grid, seems a good idea to me.
Tony Downing,
Dept. of Psychology, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, England.
A.C.Downing@ncl.ac.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%