BredesenK. K.: Small group work — the need for some guidelines.Amer. J. Psychiat., 126: 876-877, 1969.
2.
CalameB. E.: The truth hurts: Some companies see more harm than good in sensitivity training.The Wall Street Journal49: 1 and 15, 1969.
3.
Council on Mental Health (AMA): Statement on sensitivity training.AMA Mental Health Newsletter No.3: 4, 1969.
4.
CrawshawR.: How sensitive is sensitivity training.Amer. J. Psychiat., 126: 868-873, 1969.
5.
EnglishJ. T.: Sensitivity training: Promise and performance.Amer. J. Psychiat., 126: 874-876, 1969.
6.
FrankL. J.: “Training and therapy” in T-group Theory and Laboratory Method. Edited by BradfordL. P., GibbJ. R., and BenneK. D.New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1964.
7.
GottschalkL. A.: Psychoanalytic notes: T-groups at the human relations laboratory, Bethel, Maine.Compr. Psychiat., 7: 472-487, 1969.
8.
GottschalkL. A., PattisonE. M.: Psychiatric perspectives on T-groups and the laboratory movement: An overview.Amer. J. Psychiat., 126: 823-839, 1969.
9.
JaffeS. L., SchereD. J.: Acute psychosis precipitated by T-group experiences.Arch. Gen. Psychiat., 126: 823-839, 1969.
10.
KuehnJ. L., CrinellaF. M.: Sensitivity training: Interpersonal “overkill” and other problems.Amer. J. Psychiat., 126: 108-112, 1969.
11.
N.T.L. Institute for Applied Behavioral Science: Emotional stress and laboratory training.N.T.L. Institute News and Reports3: 1-2, 1969.
12.
ShepartH. A.: Sensitivity training.Occupational Mental Health Notes (National Clearinghouse for Mental Health Information) April: 1-2, 1968.
13.
StorrowH. A.: What happened at Bethel: A personal view of human relations training.J. Nerv. Ment. Dis., 138: 491-497, 1964.
14.
WhitmanR. H.: “Psychodynamic principles underlying T-group processes” in T-group Theory and Laboratory Method. Edited by BradfordL. P., GibbJ. R., and BenneK. D.New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1964.