Search

We administered an Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) to several outpatient groups—paranoid schizophrenics (n =32), nonparanoid schizophrenics (n =30), and depressives (n =30)—as well as to a normal comparison group of community college students (n =30). Depressives evidenced a more pessimistic explanatory style than paranoid and nonparanoid schizophrenics and normals. Six months later, among those outpatients experiencing hassles, individuals who attributed good events to stable, global, and internal causes were functioning somewhat better than those who attributed good events to unstable, specific, and external causes. We operationalized explanatory “flexibility” as the range of scores on the ASQ and found that outpatients with larger range scores for bad events (presumably showing more flexibility) functioned better than those having smaller range scores.

Contexts of knowing are differentiated into four types through the constructs of "regulativeness" and "constitutiveness." The strength of these constructs is suggested through their tacit or explicit use in the social study of science. The value of the differentiation is noted through the consequences of the model for our understanding of scientific misconduct.

Peers’ reviews of manuscripts submitted for journal publication contain meanings that are more professional than the specific correctives and suggestions they contain. This article examines the deeper meanings evident in the review process—from reviewers’ reactions, an editor’s letters to authors, and authors’ reactions to the materials received. Silverman argues that the peer review process constructs and reconstructs for authors the meaning of their membership in professional communities.

(1991). Plastic Buffalo Humps: Theory as Sludge in the Journal of Higher Education. The Journal of Higher Education: Vol. 62, No. 6, pp. 682-694.

tion of the role of the interocular discrepancy for binocular space perception. Prior to his researches, several individuals had observed an essential component of Wheatstone's innovation: in binocular vision, the two eyes receive slightly different images.2 Kepler and Descartes had surmised that the muscular sensations arising from the convergence of the eyes in binocular vision might play a role in measuring the proximity of objects." But Wheatstone was the first to propose that the mind fathoms visual space by combining the information from a pair of two-dimensional, monocular pictures. "It being thus established," Wheatstone wrote, "that the mind perceives an object of three dimensions by means of the two dissimilar pictures projected by it on the two retinae, the following question occurs: What would be the visual effect of simultaneously presenting

Journals publish articles whose crafting shapes how we know about the topics addressed. This paper indicates the relation of sixteen article types to fifty-five topics of manuscripts published in the core higher education journals. The data are presented, as well, by journal of publication and by gender of senior author.

This paper is an analysis of the review for publication of an earlier manuscript that was submitted to a journal in the developing field of “higher education”. The earlier paper originated as a conference presentation and was subsequently revised for journal submission. The manuscript was rejected by the editor on the basis of reviewers' comments. In an article that follows, the author presents sections of the earlier paper and the reviewers' comments pertaining to those sections of the original manuscript. The reviewers' comments are analysed on the basis of a certainty‐uncertainty continuum that it is argued is manipulated to justify the reviewers' epistemological biases. Implications for the field of higher education are discussed.

Under the assumption that a field of study is based largely on communications systems, this study examines the publication processes preferred by members of the American Association for Higher Education, the Association of Professors of Higher Education, and editors of journals in higher education. The research focuses on desired standards of both authors and editors in the review process, specific criteria for manuscript selection, as well as authors' rationales for publication and criteria used in selection of journals for manuscript submission.

Five interorganizational relationships among higher educational institutions, representing major structural and functional variations, were studied intensively using field research procedures to elucidate determinants of successful cooperative activities. Among the factors to be taken into account relative to the operational success of voluntary consortia are member institutional prestige, strength, developmental level, and climate. Further, problem solving and resource distribution, as two major benefits of cooperation, result in different interorganizational patterns.

Using a framework for analyzing manuscripts that appear in the higher education journal literature, this paper examines eight core journals' publishing patterns for the period 1975 to 1981. In addition to examining publishing patterns by year and journal, the paper also presents the institutional affiliations and roles of papers' senior authors. The data, which comprise the operational editorial policies of higher education journals, can be used by authors, editors, and other field members to better understand the epistemological directions of journals in higher education.

This paper presents citation data for higher education journal articles published in the core literature from 1975 to 1981. Using a 16-part framework that captures the epistemological variety of journal articles, we note by journal title authors' use of a number of source categories, such as journal articles, books, monographs, legal opinion, and newspaper articles. In addition, we examine reference use trends over the period covered by the research and by the role and institutional location of articles' senior authors. It is argued that the publishing medium, article type, and author demographic factors are related to the use of different type reference work as manuscripts are constructed.

This paper examines the demographic, role and ideational characteristics of journal editors in the field of education. Gatekeepers of research, scholarly, professional and associational journals, while exhibiting differing background characteristics and levels of commitment to role functions devote insufficient attention to editorial concerns, given the significance of publication to the field and to prospective authors. Editors fail to enunciate clear, defensible approaches to education but are committed to the notion of “balancing.” They perceive themselves as orchestrators of the field and seem to have a commitment less to specific content than to the process of knowledge dissemination.

Typically, editors' decisions regarding the publishability of research and scholarly knowledge are based on reviews by persons who make professional judgments about the quality of work before them. While peer review has been examined through many frames of meaning, this article develops an approach to understanding the process through aesthetic theory. It is argued that the "ideal" review embodies levels of engagement, various foci, and different dimensions. The framework is applied to actual manuscript reviews and research, and professional suggestions are developed as they pertain to the shape of our professional judgment.

This paper examines the interactions that authors of articles appearing in the core higher education journals have with members of the field subsequent to the publication of their work. Interactions were examined by the epistemological structure of the articles and data suggest that papers with different structures exact different types of reader-initiated reactions, though there are similarities regardless of type. It appears that published scholarship leads to further activities in research, scholarly, and professional sectors as a consequence of readers' initiatives and the resulting responses by authors. It is argued that examinations of knowledge use should go beyond traditional conceptions and examine the development of new communities of interest as professional actors attempt to fulfill varied agendas on the basis of published scholarship.