{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024750980984002413, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004527618472683369, 'mean_word_length': 5.43495145631068, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 6, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Therapeutic Factors in Group Psychotherapy . By S. Bloch and E. Crouch. (Pp. 342; £16.00.) Oxford University Press: Oxford. 1985.

does not occur, gender schema theory encourages discussion of how and why these variations occur. In contrast, Spence & Helmreich's approach is an example of psychological trait research, in that they conceptualize masculinity and femininity as two stable trait dimensions at the core of the personality. Masculinity is instrumental/ agentic and femininity is expressive/communal in nature. Androgyny refers to the possession of high levels of these two traits as measured on the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ). The other major instrument is the Bern Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) which aims to assess the extent to which society's definitions of desirable female and male attributes are reflected in an individual's self description. Both approaches share a focus upon sex role related differences in adulthood and an interest in expanding discussion of femininity and masculinity beyond the traditional assumption of sex-role research. However, there are significant differences in terms of focus, their views of masculinity and femininity as currently measured, and their conceptualization of androgyny. In general, Bern's work has been more expansive in the range of variables covered, hypotheses and implications for sex roles. Spence & Helmreich have focused more precisely on a well defined type of sex role variable, personality traits, and have limited their expectations to these following directly from their definitions of these trait dimensions. Most studies of androgyny employ late adolescent and adult samples. The work usually involves exploring the correlates and consequences of possessing varying degrees of masculinity and femininity, with individuals being split into one of four sex role categories. The androgynous type endorses high levels of both feminine and masculine characteristics as selfdescriptive, and is often hypothesized to enjoy the psychological benefits of each dimension for example, such people can be independent and capable ofleading others (traditionally masculine) yet nurturant and sensitive of others (feminine). Three other sex role categories are described by varying combinations of masculinity and femininity: masculine (high masculine, low feminine), feminine (high feminine, low masculine), and undifferentiated (low on both). Feminine and masculine (or sex-typed) individuals are believed to be disadvantaged to some extent because of their endorsement of one dimension. Undifferentiated persons are viewed as suffering the greatest psychological difficulties of all. Since the mid 1970s hundreds of articles have been published on the meaning, correlates and consequences of androgyny, so that a critical review and synthesis of current theory and research has been urgently needed. In this book Dr Cook covers such topics as definitions and assumptions about androgyny, measurement issues, a review of research results, suggestions for future research on androgyny and its applications in psychological practice and counselling. It will be of interest to a variety of students, research workers and practitioners who are interested in the prospect of a society that is moving towards less rigid sex role differentiation.