This article focuses on growth-promoting aspects in the environment, and the authors propose a strength-based, dynamic model of person-environment interaction. The authors begin by briefly discussing the typical recognition of contextual variables in models that rely on the concept of person-environment fit. This is followed by a review of recent approaches to incorporating positive environmental factors in conceptualizations of human functioning. These approaches lead to an alternative model of personenvironment interaction in which the engagement construct (i.e., the quality of a personenvironment relationship determined by the extent to which negotiation, participation, and evaluation processes occur during the interaction) replaces the static notion of fit. Finally, the authors outline recommendations for overcoming environmental neglect in research, practice, and training.

Ethical assessment practices require practitioners to examine assessments in terms of their appropriateness for male and female clients. This article explores gender differences on career assessments in the areas of individual differences and career choice process with a focus on ethical implications for gender-sensitive career assessments. Although the focus of this discussion is on career assessment with women, the suggestions also apply to male clients. Recommendations for gendersensitive career assessment and interpretation are provided.

The idea that environmental factors influence how an individual functions is well accepted in psychology. In the early 1900s, this notion was popularized by behaviorists who argued that individual behavior could be explained, predicted, and modified if the mechanisms underlying environmental influences were understood (Conyne & Clack, 1981). In their efforts, behaviorists discovered principles by which the environment can affect behavior (e.g., punishment and reinforcement). These principles have proven so powerful that they have been adopted implicitly and explicitly in current conceptualizations of the environment (Walsh, Craik, & Price, 2000). Yet, despite knowledge of the principles by which the environment can shape the individual, there is a dearth of scholarship devoted to identifying the specific environmental variables that do the shaping. One reason for this scholarly lacunae is that environmental contexts are difficult to operationalize. A second reason could be the ideology of individualism that focuses on the person as the responsible agent of behaviors. A third reason is that the assessment of the environment may seem fruitless to some because the context may be perceived as fixed or too difficult to change.To advance our understanding of human functioning, we must find a way to reliably operationalize environmental variables. Also, attention should be paid to discovering aspects of environments that promote healthy functioning and growth of individuals. Fortunately, work is being done to establish a scientific foundation that includes positive environmental characteristics (see Friedman & Wachs, 1999;Moos, 1991;Walsh & Betz, 1995). Researchers seek to understand and describe growth-promoting variables in the environment by defining positive constructs precisely and investigating them empirically. Such rigorous scientific investigation of positive environmental constructs may unleash a heretofore untapped force for change (Conyne & Clack, 1981). As