Re Martin's invitation to publish PCT self research

[From Dick Robertson] (951008.1752CDT)
Hello Martin, in reply to your post of Fri, 6 Oct 95 11:14:59 EDT

It may sound a bit far-fetched, and perhaps it may not be appropriate, but
if you are interested, I'd like to consider that work for the special
issue on PCT of the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies that I
am editing.

I would be delighted to have either one or both of our self papers
published, if you find them suitable. I imagine David would too, but I'll
leave him say for himself. I'm answering you on the net in hopes David
sees this and replies for himself, and also to set the non-publishing
record straight in case any one else is interested.

First, there were two papers. The first was "The self as a control system"
in which we reviewed a lot of previous publications on the self and showed
they fell into two groups. One group contained papers that described
phenomena of dependent variables concerning self, self-concept, self-image,
etc. We proposed they should be called self-image variables. The other
group contained studies related to the independent variables. We proposed
that the whole mess could be more sensibly organized by the concept of a
control system that controlled perceptions (self-perceptions, attributions,
etc.) a person would hold about himself.

The second paper was "Testing the self as a control system," in which we
showed (to our satisfaction anyway) that a (or several) personally stated
self attribution would be corrected like a controlled variable if disturbed
and thus it met the definition of a control system by passing the test for
a controlled variable.

Both papers were rejected, first by the American Psychologist, and then by
Psychological Review. One reviewer kindly did say he thought one_I think
the second_ought to be published somewhere. But, the changes recommended
by the Psych Rev reviewers were contrary to those suggested by the first
group. So I thought I could see where further efforts would go down the
tubes, especially when one reviewer's main complaint was that we seemed
ignorant of feed-forward.

The problem is that both papers were originally written on Apple two.
I managed to get the second paper converted into PC wordperfect 5.1 but I
can't find a PC file for the first paper. I do have a hard copy of it.

I could send you hard copies of both, or the file on the second, or a disk
on the second. I think I have found the old Apple disk with the first
paper on it and maybe I could find someone who can convert apple II to
ASCII for PCs.

Let me know what you think.

Best, Dick R.