The development of the Grief Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) is reported. This questionnaire is an instrument for measuring various components of grief, including somatic reactions, general grief reactions, search for explanation, loss of social support, stigmatization, guilt, responsibility, shame, rejection, self-destructive behavior, and reactions to a unique form of death. Initial results with the GEQ suggest its potential to differentiate grief reactions experienced by suicide survivors from those experienced by survivors of accidental death, unexpected natural death, and expected natural death. Conclusions support its use in redressing common methodological criticisms of suicide survivor research. Six additional benefits derived from use of this instrument are discussed.

High-energy radiation caused by exoplanetary space weather events from planethosting stars can play a crucial role in conditions promoting or destroying habitability in addition to the conventional factors. In this paper, we present the first quantitative impact evaluation system of stellar flares on the habitability factors with an emphasis on the impact of Stellar Proton Events. We derive the maximum flare energy from stellar starspot sizes and examine the impacts of flare associated ionizing radiation on CO 2 , H 2 , N 2 +O 2 -rich atmospheres of a number of well-characterized terrestrial type exoplanets. Our simulations based on the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System [PHITS] suggest that the estimated ground level dose for each planet in the case of terrestrial-level atmospheric pressure (1 bar) for each exoplanet does not exceed the

This article describes the role of inadequate construct definition in the current problems involving measurement of counseling performance and suggests potential responses for improving measurement capability.Despite the fundamental role of assessment in counselor training, research, and practice , the development of effective methods for measuring counseling performance has proved to be a difficult task. A variety of factors seem to interact with one another to perpetuate existing barriers to the development of more effective measurement methodologies. Perhaps the most important of these factors is the lack of any clear, consistent, and comprehensive definition of effective counseling performance. What exactly is this phenomenon that we are trying to measure? What are the underlying dimensions that comprise effective counseling performance? Up to now, these questions have not been addressed in any formal systematic manner such that a clear definition of effective counseling performance has emerged. In the absence of an adequate definition of the construct, the delineation of specific assessment criteria, which relates directly to the validation of performance measures, has not been possible.Before substantial improvements in our ability to effectively measure counseling performance can be achieved, basic questions such as those above must be addressed. The purposes of this discussion are to briefly review current problems in assessing counseling performance, to examine the fundamental role of inadequate construct definition in current problems, and to suggest potential directions for enhancing measurement capabilities.

The relevant literature indicates inconsistent results regarding the effects of source of ratings (self, peer, supervisor) on ratings of counseling performance. In this study, 33 first-year graduate students completed a simulated counseling interview. Self-, peer, and supervisor ratings were obtained for the simulated interviews using seven different measures of counseling performance. The results of a multivariate analysis of variance indicated statistically significant differences among self-, peer, and supervisor ratings. Univariate F ratios indicated statistically significant differences on four of the seven dependent measures. Implications of these results for training and research are discussed.Rating scales have clearly been the predominant approach to measuring counseling performance (Tinsley & Weiss, 1975). Matarazzo (1971) aptly describes counseling performance as a "combination of conceptual, experiential, and behavior learning in a constantly shifting, never duplicated stimulus situation" (p. 942). Coupling this complexity with the subjectivity involved with rating scales has produced measures of counseling performance that are fallible. The general barriers in establishing their construct validity have been well-defined (Thoresen, 1977), and the absence of an adequate definition of the construct has received attention (Blaas & Heck, 1975;Stokes, 1977;Trotzer, 1976).A substantial body of literature has provided evidence of a number of specific factors that confound performance ratings, for example, counselor characteristics (Carter, 1978; Loesch, Crane, & Ruckner, 1978), client characteristics (Heppner & Heesacker, 1983), and interviewer attractiveness and attire (Carter, 1978;Kerr & Dell, 1976). Ford's (1979 review concluded that self-, peer, and expert performance ratings "covary significantly . . . especially after extensive training programs" (p. 94). However, client, therapist, and expert judges' and peer ratings have often disagreed (

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between burnout and the expectations about selected job factors of state agency rehabilitation counselors in North Dakota. Rehabilitation counselors completed the Maslach Burnout Inventory and an Expectations Questionnaire. Results of the analyses indicated that burnout is negatively related to current job expectations and positively related to job expectations at the time of initial employment in the rehabilitation field and to changes in expectations. These and other results, and the implications are presented and discussed.