What Is Called Self in Educational Research and Practice?

Without a contextualized definition of self, a growing body of educational research in Asian countries attempts to measure students’ sense of self, such as self-esteem. The research is usually based on theories and measurements that characterize students as conscious and independent selves in an individualist society. This sharply contrasts with the interdependent and unconscious sense of self in a collectivist society. To avoid a misleading assessment of self, researchers and policy makers need to know how students develop a self-construal in a sociocultural context. Therefore, this review of the cultural differences aims to provide a multifaceted definition of self.     

Research on calling: What have we learned and where are we going?

Work as a calling is an emerging concept for scholars across a variety of psychological disciplines. In the current paper, the extant literature on calling is reviewed, showcasing its salience among college student and adult populations and highlighting consistent links between perceiving a calling and heightened levels of career maturity, career commitment, work meaning, job satisfaction, life meaning, and life satisfaction. These links appear most robust when individuals are actually living out their calling at work. Seven suggestions are proposed for future researchers to better understand what it means to have and live a calling: developing a stronger conceptual understanding, collecting more longitudinal data, studying more diverse cultural groups, focusing on behavioral outcomes, examining the dark side of a calling, building theory, and testing interventions. It is hoped that the promising research base and vast areas of potential growth will continue to make the study of calling attractive to scholars across psychological disciplines.     

Research on calling: What have we learned and where are we going?

Work as a calling is an emerging concept for scholars across a variety of psychological disciplines. In the current paper, the extant literature on calling is reviewed, showcasing its salience among college student and adult populations and highlighting consistent links between perceiving a calling and heightened levels of career maturity, career commitment, work meaning, job satisfaction, life meaning, and life satisfaction. These links appear most robust when individuals are actually living out their calling at work. Seven suggestions are proposed for future researchers to better understand what it means to have and live a calling: developing a stronger conceptual understanding, collecting more longitudinal data, studying more diverse cultural groups, focusing on behavioral outcomes, examining the dark side of a calling, building theory, and testing interventions. It is hoped that the promising research base and vast areas of potential growth will continue to make the study of calling attractive to scholars across psychological disciplines.     

Finding Spirits in Spirituality: What are We Measuring in Spirituality and Health Research?

Journal of Religion and Health - What are we asking when we ask about spirituality? When research subjects check survey boxes for “religiosity” and “spirituality” measures...     

Where did the cycle begin?: Origins of action planning and their influence on practice

The origins of action planning and action plans are explored and the possible influence of different antecedents on practice is considered. The perceptions of those involved in developing, managing and implementing action planning are discussed. Analysis indicates a lack of clarity concerning the origins of the process and a tendency to view it as a recent 'common-sense' development. As a result, tensions arising from the influence of contrasting models appear to remain unrecognised, and the training needs of helpers, particularly in relation to the acquisition of guidance skills, are underestimated.     

Commentary: Why Do Research on Spirituality and Health, and What Do the Results Mean?

I address two related questions in this article. First, why conduct research on religion/spirituality (R/S) and health? Second, what are the dangers of misinterpreting or misapplying the results from such research? If relationships are found, so what? What is the practical value or clinical relevance of such information? Why should investigators spend time and scarce financial resources to explore such connections? What might health care professionals do differently as a result? How would people live their lives differently in light of such information? Questions like these need solid answers for the field to continue to move forward. Related to the "So what?" question is the issue of how results from research in this area are translated into popular understanding and application. After discussing why conducting research on religion and health is important, I identify a recently published research report that focuses on the relationship between R/S and self-control, an article that received considerable media press coverage. I present the results reported by the authors of this study and then examine a column written about the study that appeared in the New York Times. Finally, I explore what the findings mean, how the media portrayed the findings, and problems that might result depending on how people applied those findings.     

Responsible Research: What is Expected?

"Responsible research" and "good science" are concepts with various meanings depending on one's perspective and assumptions. Fellow researchers, research participants, policy makers and the general public also have differing expectations of the benefits of research ranging from accurate and reliable data that extend the body of knowledge, to solutions to societal concerns. Unless these differing constituencies articulate their differing views they may fail to communicate and undermine the value of research to society.     

Email, voicemail, and privacy: What policy is ethical?

Business people repeatedly asked Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) to recommend a policy to deal with email and voicemail. After many such requests to our organization, we attempted to construct guidelines that we could endorse. This paper outlines the guidelines that we proposed and the public reaction to them. The paper discusses the tensions inherent in a business environment, and the means of identifying ethical behavior for both companies and their employees. A version of this paper was presented at ETHICOMP98, the Fourth International Conference on Ethical Issues of Information Technology, March 25–27, 1998. Erasmus University, the Netherlands. Dr. Woodbury is the former Chair of CPRS. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. She is also a curriculum developer and faculty member of the Information Group of the Women’s International University (ifu) in Germany in 2000.     

Social influence on physics and mathematics: local or attributive?

Summary  The article is devoted to the nature of science. To what extent are science and mathematics affected by the society in which they are developed? Philosophy of science has accepted the social influence on science, but limits it only to the context of discovery (a “locational” approach). An opposite “attributive” approach states that any part of science may be so influenced. L. Graham is sure that even the mathematical equations at the core of fundamental physical theories may display social attributes. He has used the investigations of the famous Soviet physicist V. Fock on the General Theory of Relativity which were under the influence of Marxism. The Goal of the article is to demonstrate: 1) Why Soviet science is not an appropriate subject-matter for testing the thesis of social constructivism, 2) That differnt levels of science and different stages in the development of science undergo social influences in different degrees ranging from very significant and unavoidable to absolutely trivial and easy eliminated.     

Can,and should,behavioural neuroscience influence public policy?

Recent years have seen enormous demand amongst policy makers for new insights from the behavioural sciences, especially neuroscience. This demand is matched by an increasing willingness on behalf of behavioural scientists to translate the policy implications of their work. But can neuroscience really help shape the governance of a nation? Or does this represent growing misuse of neuroscience to attach scientific authority to policy, plus a clutch of neuroscientists trying to overstate their findings for a taste of power?     

Comparative Philosophy and the Tertium: Comparing What with What,and in What Respect?

Comparison is fundamental to the practice and subject-matter of philosophy, but has received scant attention by philosophers. This is even so in “comparative philosophy,” which literally distinguishes itself from other philosophy by being “comparative.” In this article, the need for a philosophy of comparison is suggested. What we compare with what, and in what respect it is done, poses a series of intriguing and intricate questions. In Part One, I offer a problematization of the tertium comparationis (the third of comparison) by examining conceptualizations of similarity, family resemblance, and analogy, which it is sometimes argued can do without a tertium comparationis. In Part Two, I argue that a third of comparison is already required to determine what is to be compared, and insofar as that determination precedes the comparison that tertium may be called “pre-comparative.” This leads me to argue against incomparability and to show how anything can indeed be compared to anything. In Part Three, I relate my arguments to what is today commonly labelled “comparative philosophy.” Finally, I raise some questions of ontology and politics in order to demonstrate the relevance of a philosophy of comparison.     

The Effect of Participating in Suicide Research: Does Participating in a Research Protocol on Suicide and Psychiatric Symptoms Increase Suicide Ideation and Attempts?

The effect of engaging in an intensive research protocol that inquired extensively about psychiatric and suicide symptoms and exposed participants to a number of images, including suicide-related content was explored. Individuals experiencing a major depressive episode were called at 1 and 3 months after the initial protocol. Participants were asked about changes in suicide ideation and the occurrence of self-harm or suicide attempts following participation. Participants reported experiencing reductions in suicide ideation at the first follow-up and no changes at the second follow-up. No participant reported having engaged in self-harm or having attempted suicide at either follow-up. Results suggest that basic science/nontreatment research can be conducted safely with suicidal participants and in a manner that does not increase suicide symptoms or suicide risk.     

Can research influence clinical practice?1

After briefly reviewing the unfavourable reception accorded empirical research by parts of the psychoanalytic community, as well as some of the benefits to clinical practice of analysts being involved in research activities, the author examines whether the findings of process and outcome research in psychotherapy and psychoanalysis can help identify the most appropriate forms of intervention for producing therapeutic change, given the specific condition of the patient and the relationship that the individual establishes with the analyst. He argues that research findings can influence clinical practice on various levels and in different areas, and goes on to examine a number of related issues: the specificity of therapeutic interventions versus the relevance of common curative factors; the dyadic conception of technique and ways of understanding the therapeutic action of the treatment alliance; and the strategic or heuristic conception in psychoanalytic therapy. Finally, the author presents clinical material with the aim of illustrating how the knowledge acquired through research can be applied to psychoanalytic treatment.