James M. Graham

Breast cancers are divided into subtypes with different prognoses and treatment responses based on global differences in gene expression. Luminal breast cancer gene expression and proliferation are driven by estrogen receptor alpha, and targeting this transcription factor is the most effective therapy for this subtype. By contrast, it remains unclear which transcription factors drive the gene expression signature that defines basal-like triple-negative breast cancer, and there are no targeted therapies approved to treat this aggressive subtype. In this study, we utilized integrated genomic analysis of DNA methylation, chromatin accessibility, transcription factor binding, and gene expression in large collections of breast cancer cell lines and patient tumors to identify transcription factors responsible for the basal-like gene expression program. Glucocorticoid receptor (GR) and STAT3 bind to the same genomic regulatory regions, which were specifically open and unmethylated in basal-like breast cancer. These transcription factors cooperated to regulate expression of hundreds of genes in the basal-like gene expression signature, which were associated with poor prognosis. Combination treatment with small-molecule inhibitors of both transcription factors resulted in synergistic decreases in cell growth in cell lines and patient-derived organoid models. This study demonstrates that GR and STAT3 cooperate to regulate the basal-like breast cancer gene expression program and provides the basis for improved therapy for basal-like triple-negative breast cancer through rational combination of STAT3 and GR inhibitors. Significance: This study demonstrates that GR and STAT3 cooperate to activate the canonical gene expression signature of basal-like triple-negative breast cancer and that combination treatment with STAT3 and GR inhibitors could provide synergistic therapeutic efficacy.

The self‐expansion model posits that engaging in challenging activities with one's romantic partner increases the quality of that romantic relationship. Research on flow suggests that the optimal level of challenge for such experiences is determined by the skill of the individual. In a series of 5 studies spanning experimental, survey, and experience sampling methodologies, we elaborate on the self‐expansion model to describe how activity challenge effects romantic relationship quality. The results suggest that engaging in challenging activities with one's partner results in increases in relationship quality, though this effect is dependent on the skill of the individual. Changes in affect appear to fully mediate this process. We present a theoretical model combining self‐expansion and flow theories.

This study is a reliability generalization meta-analysis that reviews 5 of the most frequently used continuous measures of adult attachment security: the Adult Attachment Scale, Revised Adult Attachment Scale, Adult Attachment Questionnaire, Experiences in Close Relationships, and Experiences in Close Relationships–Revised. A total of 313,462 individuals from 564 studies provided 1,629 internal consistency reliability estimates for this meta-analysis. We present the average internal consistency reliability of scores for each measure and test the consistency of score reliabilities across a wide variety of sample characteristics. In light of this, we highlight several issues in the measurement of adult attachment security and make concrete recommendations for researchers seeking to measure adult attachment.

The beneficial effect of social support on the well-being of individuals and romantic relationships has been extensively studied in married heterosexual relationships. The direct effects model suggests that social support is directly associated with well-being, while the social buffering model describes how social support can protect individual well-being from the negative impact of stress. In the present study, we seek to test the extent to which these processes apply to gay and lesbian couples. We use a sample of 111 gay, lesbian, and married heterosexual couples to test the predictions of the social buffering models across relationship types. Irrespective of sexual orientation, the results suggest that social support from family and friends is directly related to well-being, while support provided by one's romantic partner buffered individual well-being from the negative impact of stress. The direct and buffering effects of partner support on romantic relationship quality were likewise consistent across couple types. While the amount of social support received from family members had a beneficial effect on the relationship quality of heterosexual couples, family support was unrelated to relationship quality in same-sex couples. Furthermore, the relation between friend support and relationship quality differed across couple types. We discuss the results in the context of the unique challenges faced by same-sex couples.

In the face of the rising number of doctoral recipients in professional psychology, many have voiced concerns about the quality of nontraditional training programs. Past research suggests that, on a variety of outcomes, graduates from clinical PhD programs outperform graduates from clinical PsyD and, to a lesser extent, counseling PhD programs. We examine an aggregate archival dataset to determine whether student or university characteristics account for the differences in outcomes among programs. The data show meaningful differences in the outcomes of clinical PhD, PsyD, and counseling PhD programs. Furthermore, graduates from research‐intensive universities perform better on the psychology licensure exam and are more likely to become American Board of Professional Psychology diplomates. The available data support the notion that the ability to conduct research is an essential component of graduate education. In this light, PsyD programs represent a unique opportunity to train students in the types of evaluation and outcomes assessments used by practicing psychologists. We discuss implications for graduate‐level training in professional psychology. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol 67:1‐15, 2011.

We conducted a reliability-generalization meta-analysis of 7 of the most frequently used measures of relationship satisfaction: the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Test (LWMAT), the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (KMS), the Quality of Marriage Index, the Relationship Assessment Scale, the Marital Opinion Questionnaire, Karney and Bradbury's (1997) semantic differential scale, and the Couples Satisfaction Index. Six hundred thirty-nine reliability coefficients from 398 articles and 636,806 individuals provided internal consistency reliability estimates for this meta-analysis. We present the average score reliabilities for each measure, characterize the variance in score reliabilities across studies, and consider sample and study characteristics that are predictive of score reliability. Overall, the KMS and the LWMAT appear to be the strongest and weakest measures, respectively, from a reliability perspective. We discuss the importance of considering reliability invariance when making cross-group comparisons and provide recommendations for researchers when electing a measure of relationship satisfaction.

The present study identifies the higher-order factors underlying the most popular measures of love in use today through meta-analytic factor analysis. Eighty-one studies representing 103 samples and 19,387 individuals provided data for the meta-analysis. The reported correlations between several commonly-used measures of love were aggregated across studies to form a meta-analytic correlation matrix, which was then subjected to principle components analysis. Factors suggesting general love, romantic obsession, and practical friendship emerged. Love was positively and obsession was negatively associated with relationship satisfaction and length.The results corroborate recent conceptualizations of love and point toward the need for measurement methods other than global self-report in the field of love research.

The present study is a reliability‐generalization meta‐analysis of 5 commonly used measures of romantic love: Rubin’s Loving and Liking scales, the Love Attitudes Scale, the Love Attitudes Scale–Short Form, the Passionate Love Scale, and the Triangular Love Scale. Data from 127 studies representing 38,132 participants provided internal consistency reliability estimates. The studies provide information on the average score reliability across studies and the effect of sample characteristics on score reliability across measures. The reliability of scores from several measures proved to be susceptible to the influence of sample characteristics, most notably, the ethnicity of the sample. The discussion provides recommendations to researchers and focuses on the ramifications of score reliability on love research.