We appreciate the thoughtful commentary on our paper that Dr. Wassenaar provided and welcome the opportunity to address several concerns raised in it. Because of space limitations, we did not cover all aspects of the study in the article, and we are pleased to have an opportunity to clarify several
The crucial role of criterion A: A response to Maier's commentary
β Scribed by F. W. Weathers; T. M. Keane
- Publisher
- Springer
- Year
- 2007
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 52 KB
- Volume
- 20
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0894-9867
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
Abstract
We thank Maier for his thoughtful comments (this issue, pp. 925β926) and appreciate the opportunity to further explicate our views regarding the Criterion A problem. According to Maier, the obvious conclusion to be drawn from our article (Weathers & Keane, 2007) is that Criterion A should be eliminated. We believe the opposite, given the current conceptual and empirical status of the posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) construct.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
Reinterpretations of Libet's results have received support from most commentaries. Libet's arguments against alternative hypotheses are contested. Latency depends on intensity. Integration of intensity and duration explains the Minimum Train Duration. Analogies of Libet's timing of intentions with c
We truly appreciate the very thoughtful comments prepared in response to our initial position paper (Lunetta & van den Berg, 1995), and we also appreciate the opportunity to continue the dialogue with some brief, additional commentary. It is impressive that comments were prepared in so many "distant