ABSTRACT
In the 1960s, applied psychology was confronted with a professional dilemma. Research had shown that traditional approaches of counseling and psychotherapy had at best achieved only very modest positive effects (Smith & Glass, 1977). In fact, much earlier research had shown no effect whatsoever (Bergin, 1963; Eysenck; 1978, Levitt, 1967). Partly as a result of these findings some leaders within the psychological establishment called for what was then viewed as a radical change. Miller (1969), in his presidential address to the American Psychological Association, urged that psychologists concentrate on giving their skills away to the lay public. He said that we should select principles and practices from the armamentarian of applied psychology and teach the public how to employ such knowledge and skills on its own behalf. At the same time, Kohlberg (1974) and his associates had completed a major review of child, adolescent, and adult development and reached a stark conclusion. “Put bluntly there is no research evidence indicating that clinical treatment of emotional symptoms during childhood leads to predictions of adult adjustment” (p. 251). Kohlberg, LaCrosse and Ricks (1970) noted further that “the best predictors of the absence of adult mental illness and maladjustment are the presence of various forms of competence and ego maturity in childhood and adolescence rather than the absence of problems and symptoms” (p. 1274).
