Glacial Geology of the Schoharie Valley

Guidebook for field trips in New York, Massachusetts and Vermont: 61st annual meeting at the State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York October 10, 11, 12, 1969: Trip

RESTRICTION OF SPECIFICITY IN THE PRECURSORS OF BONE MARROW-ASSOCIATED LYMPHOCYTES

Previous work has shown that the immediate precursor of B lymphocytes (PB cell) has many properties that distinguish it from both B lymphoctes and hemopoietic stem cells. Size, density, tissue distribution, and sensitivity to cytotoxic antisera differ for each type of cell. The work described here was designed to study three aspects of the differentiation of PB cells. First, since PB cells probably have immunoglobulin surface receptors, fluorescein-labeled anti-immunoglobulin antiserum was used in an attempt to investigate directly the physical properties of PB cells. The use of this labeled antiserum revealed a population of cells with properties similar to the PB cells defined by the functional assays. Second, the differentiative potential of PB cells was studied by comparing the size of the total population of PB cells, as determined with fluorescein-labeled anti-immunoglobulin antiserum, to the size of the population of PB cells responding in a functional assay with a specific antigen. The cells responding in the functional assay represent only 0.1% of the total population of PB cells. This observation suggests that PB cells are not pluripotent stem cells of the immune system. Finally, the kinetics of the differentiation of PB cells to B lymphocytes was studied. The differentiation to mature lymphocytes involves at least one intermediate stage in which cells larger than mature B cells are active in a functional assay for B cells. These large B cells are present in irradiated mice soon after transplantation of PB cells, but by 20 days the majority of the B cells are typical small lymphocytes

Attribution processes of family members and therapists.

The new epistemology of second order cybernetics and constructivism has influenced a shift in the emphasis from behavior to meanings by the systemic family therapies. While this shift to an emphasis on cognition represents a further step in the evolution in the family therapy movement, the manner in which it has been presented provides continued support for a number of criticisms. Included in these are complaints that the systemic family therapies have erroneously rejected individual psychological models, tended to generate theoretical statements that are vague and abstract, and inappropriately discouraged the development of empirical research. This study employed concepts and research findings, from family theory and attribution theory to identify a number of theoretically and clinically relevant issues pertaining to family members and therapists during a course of family therapy. Specific areas of interest included the relationships of family members\u27 and therapists\u27 attributions at the beginning and after a period of family therapy, the relationships of pre-treatment to post-treatment attributions, and the relationships of attributions to therapeutic outcome. Eight families and their family therapists participated in this study. All subjects completed an amended version of the 4-ADS, a direct rating instrument that measures an individual\u27s attributions on the causal dimensions of Locus, Stability, Globality and Controllability. A dimension of Intentionality was added, as well. Attributional ratings were made at the start of therapy and following a period of two months for a presenting problem identified by the family. All subjects were also asked to indicate whether or not there had been improvement in the presenting problem following therapy. For the most part, the attributions made by family members did not differ significantly. Likewise, therapists\u27 attributions did not differ significantly from family members\u27 attributions. Consistent with previous attributional studies of families in therapy, there were only a few instances in which family members\u27 or therapists\u27 attributions changed over the course of therapy. Similarly, there were few instances in which changes in the presenting problem were accompanied by changes in attributions