Spillane Nichea S, Smith Gregory T
Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
Psychol Bull. 2009 Mar;135(2):344-346. doi: 10.1037/a0014997.
We argue that ongoing criticism of existing theories, the development of alternative theories, and empirical theory tests offer the best chance for advancing American Indian research. We, therefore note our appreciation for Beals et al.'s comments. We nevertheless did disagree with many of Beals et al.'s specific claims, noting that (a) our characterization of the existing literature on reservation-dwelling American Indian drinking was accurate; (b) no argument made by Beals et al. undermines their theoretical contention that there is a relative lack of contingency between access to basic life reinforcers and sobriety on many reservations; (c) our theory was developed in a responsible manner: a reservation-tied American Indian developed the theory, which was reviewed by a reservation leadership team, a cultural consultant, and reviewers for this journal, at least one of whom consulted leaders of other reservations; and (d) our theory was based on previous interdisciplinary theory development. We encourage the development and testing of new, alternative theories.
我们认为，对现有理论的持续批评、替代理论的发展以及实证理论检验为推进美国印第安人研究提供了最佳机会。因此，我们对比尔兹等人的评论表示感谢。然而，我们确实不同意比尔兹等人的许多具体主张，指出：(a) 我们对关于居住在保留地的美国印第安人饮酒的现有文献的描述是准确的；(b) 比尔兹等人提出的任何论点都没有削弱他们的理论观点，即在许多保留地，获得基本生活强化物与保持清醒之间相对缺乏偶然性；(c) 我们的理论是以负责任的方式发展起来的：一位与保留地有联系的美国印第安人提出了该理论，该理论经过了一个保留地领导团队、一位文化顾问以及本期刊的审稿人的审查，其中至少有一位审稿人咨询了其他保留地的领导人；(d) 我们的理论是基于先前的跨学科理论发展而来的。我们鼓励新的替代理论的发展和检验。
