Abstract The cost of nuclear power has escalated significantly in recent years, confounding the optimistic projections of planners and contributing to a serious slowdown in the industry. In this paper we investigate the factors underlying nuclear cost escalation and specify a nonlinear regression technique that identifies costs caused by public and professional uncertainty about future technological performance as opposed to costs based on objective design and construction-related factors. Using multivariate analysis of variance we establish a positive relationship between costs related to uncertainty and such plant specific factors as size, age, and vintage (year of initial operation). Specifically, uncertainty and its associated costs are shown to be greater for larger plants with more advanced technology and to decrease as plants accumulate operating experience. This result suggests that the tendency in the industry toward rapid deployment of large plants with innovative technologies has had a deleterious impact on power generation costs.

The problem of cooperation is addressed here in relation to the possible invalidation of experimental and psychometric results produced by either a lack of effort or inability, on the part of subjects, to give the necessary attention to make a sampling of psychological function a fair one. The author draws on findings from a group of psychological tests and experiments conducted at the Worcester State Hospital on schizophrenic and other subjects. A rating system for evaluating cooperation level used at Worcester is discussed, as is the complexity of the cooperation problem. Results are considered in terms of: a) the distribution of cooperation and representativeness among the various psychoses and normal subjects examined; b) correlation of cooperation and representativeness with performance; and c) change in score with change in cooperation on selected tasks where the tests were repeated. Correlations of score and cooperation reached modal levels of .60, and changes in score were generally correlated with cooperation.

Data about numerous repeated administrations of the Kent-Rosanoff Association Test to schizophrenic subjects not found elsewhere in the literature are presented. A quantitative scoring system, in the form of a Composite Index, is also provided. And lastly, association results offer further evidence for the theory of segmental set. Data are provided on the responses of 60 schizophrenic patients and 60 normal subjects (college and noncollege) on two repetitions of the test, and five repetition for schizophrenics. Results of the comparison between schizophrenics and normals indicate that schizophrenics give fewer most common, more individual, and more unusual responses; have a higher Composite Index; have a lower percentage of responses given in identical form; and show less learning ability on test repetition. As between paranoids and hebephrenics, paranoids have higher repetition scores, and given more most common, more individual, and fewer unusual responses. These results reflect clinical condition and are viewed as corroborating the segmental set hypothesis.

This paper is a somewhat modified version of the inaugural Rapaport—Klein Memorial Lecture at Austen Riggs Center presented June 21, 1974. The author describes the experiences, the series of “apprenticeships” and clinical exposures, which coalesced into his education, from teenage days in the New York Madison House settlement, through Harvard undergraduate and graduate work, to Worcester State Hospital as head of psychological services and research. In conclusion, the author discusses the effects of the kinds of training experiences he has described on the issues that arose in the formulation of formal standards of training in clinical psychology.

Clinical psychology is a specific branch of the scientific discipline of psychology. It is considered the largest subfield and has the largest number of practitioners today. Clinical psychology deals with integrating science, theory and clinical knowledge to understand, prevent and relieve psychologically based stress or dysfunction. Additionally, clinical psychology tries to promote well-being and personal development. Clinical psychologists use many different types of psychological assessments and psychotherapy to assist their patients. Despite the specification of “clinical” many clinical psychologists also spend a lot of time engaged in research, teaching, consultation, forensic testimony and program development.

Journal of the History of the Behavioral SciencesVolume 10, Issue 3 p. 275-280 Article Grace Helen Kent David Shakow, David Shakow National Institute of Mental Health; Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration; U. S. Department of health, Education, and Welfare; Bethesda, Maryland 20014Search for more papers by this author David Shakow, David Shakow National Institute of Mental Health; Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration; U. S. Department of health, Education, and Welfare; Bethesda, Maryland 20014Search for more papers by this author First published: July 1974 https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(197407)10:3<275::AID-JHBS2300100302>3.0.CO;2-JCitations: 2AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Citing Literature Volume10, Issue3July 1974Pages 275-280 RelatedInformation

The importance of emphasizing research, and the problems of research training, its goals, the groups involved, the content and implementation of a training program, and its appropriate settings are dealt with in this paper. The goals are considered within the context of the Jamesian theme—how to obtain a greater use of the potentialities of men. Discussed are the four major problems in the field of mental health: (1) provision of the proper theoretical model, (2) reduction in status differentiations among the groups involved, (3) optimal training for all personnel in any way to be associated with research, and (4) the possible reorganization of the professions. A general program for research training, in terms of both substance and methodology, is proposed, with the assumption that each discipline or group would provide the specific program best designed for its own needs.

National Institute of Mental Health, Health Services and Mental Health Administration, Public Health Service, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bethesda, Maryland

1National Institute of Mental Health, Health Services and Mental Health Administration, U.S. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bethesda, Maryland