The mental health problems of modern society are complex and deeply rooted. There is growing evidence that one or more problem-solving processes affect psychological stress and behavioral maladjustment (Heppner & Anderson, 1985; Heppner, Neal, & Larson, 1984; Kobasa, 1982; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Nezu, 1986;SpivackL D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1982; Heppner et al., 1984). In 1979, Horan declared that we have not yet developed a technology for assisting people with their decision making and problem solving. While our sophistication in problem-solving training has increased in the last decade, there is still considerable truth in Horan's conclusion. Perhaps the most solid training evidence exists for the social problem-solving model of problem-solving training (D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1982; Nezu, 1986). Real-life problem solving or coping is an incredibly complex process (D'Zurilla, 1986; Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987). Steinberg (1982) has noted that little is known about how people cope with their real-life personal difficulties, which may very well be due to the complexity of this phenomenon called problem solving. Not surprisingly, the lack of understanding about real-life problem solving has most likely impeded the development of problem-solving training. To help a person become a better problem solver is often not a small task, especially if the client has severe problem-solving deficits and has not consistently adapted well to his/her environment for several years. From my clinical experience I have been impressed with the difficulty in changing deeply ingrained, maladaptive behavior patterns. It is erroneous to assume that three or four sessions with problem-solving training will make much of a difference with a chronically poor problem solver. It is important to remember that often clients have spent years learning maladaptive problem-solving styles, that these maladaptive styles usually serve some psychological function for the client, and that it will be difficult for training to erase these maladaptive styles. The purpose of this special issue is to stimulate the thinking of both practitioners and researchers about problem-solving training for adults. My basic belief is that while our problem-solving training is becoming increasingly more complex, sophisticated, and successful, there is a great deal that we do not know about problem solving and, subsequently, problem-solving training. My plan was to invite established professionals to write about problem-solving training from different perspectives with the goal of stimulating training ideas. In part, based on some previous thinking (Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987), as well as after reflecting on the articles in this issue, I am becoming more convinced that progress in problem-solving training can be greatly enhanced if we would attend more closely to at least five major issues. First, we need to attend to how people process information as they attempt to cope with troublesome problems. In particular, I believe that problem-solving training needs to examine in greater detail clients' existing knowledge bases, how they process information, and how they use their knowledge bases to regulate their cognitions, affect, and behavior with special problems. Second, I especially believe that the role of affect has received less attention than it deserves in problem-solving training, particularly the socalled "intuitive" process (see Brammer's article) as well as the negative states people try to regulate. If our goal is to help clients with affective problems and processes, we need to focus specifically on affective processes in training. Third, I believe how people distort information is a critical process in problem solving, and therefore an essential topic for training (see Strohmer & Blustein). …