The overwhelming flow of publications places a special burden on reviewers and journals to limit review space to items that should be especially brought to the readers' attention. Many publications must be ignored simply because they are not important. (Some are ignored even though they are important.) Sometimes, however, an unimportant book is so bad that it should be roundly denounced. Such is the case with this tiny piece, and although I myself usually write reviews only when want to bring a good thing to others' attention, I make an exception here to detail the reasons why I would enjoin you to avoid this book. It presents one near-verbatim record very short condensations of five psychoanalytic-type interviews each with a dozen nurses, chosen randomly from the day roster of one hospital. All the nurses on the day roster had agreed berorehand to participate in the research, if
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stewart E. Perry (1966) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: