Do You See What I See? Patient and Clinician Perceptions of Underlying Dimensions of Suicidality

The clinical suicidology literature strongly emphasizes the importance of risk assessment. However, limited empirical data are available about the assessment process. The present study investigated the ways in which clinicians and patients perceive several theoretical dimensions related to suicide: psychological pain, external pressures/stressors, agitation/emotional upsetness, self-regard, and hopelessness. Data from the current sample suggest that clinicians and parasuicidal patients independently perceived most of these dimensions similarly, with the exception of agitation/emotional upsetness (perturbation). The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Do You ‘See’ What I ‘See’? Differentiation of Visual Action Words

Dickinson and Szeligo (Can J Exp Psychol 62(4):211–222, 2008) found that processing time for simple visual stimuli was affected by the visual action participants had been instructed to perform on these stimuli (e.g., see, distinguish). It was concluded that these effects reflected the differences in the durations of these various visual actions, and the results were compared to participants’ subjective ratings of word meaning but it was also possible that word characteristics like length might have influenced response times. The present study takes advantage of word length differences between French and English visual action words in order to address this issue. The goals of the present study were to provide evidence that (1) the processing time differences previously found were due to differences in the cognitive actions represented by these words (and not due to characteristics to the words themselves), and (2) that individuals subjectively differentiate visual action words in such a way that allows for predictable differences in behaviour. Participants differentiated 14 French visual action words along two dimensions. Four of these words were then used in the instructions for a size-discrimination task. Processing time depended on the visual action word in the instruction to the task and differed in a predictable manner according to word meaning but not word length.     

Do You See What I See? Effects of Group Consciousness on African American Women's Attributions to Prejudice

This study examined the effects of three types of group consciousness among African American women ( ethnic , feminist , and womanist ) on prejudice attributions and appraised personal significance ( centrality ) of a negative intergroup event. African American female college students  ( N = 123)  imagined themselves in an audiotaped scenario in which they overheard two European American male classmates make negative evaluations of them. The scenario provided no cause for the negative evaluations and no references to race or gender. Multiple regression analyses revealed that higher ethnic and womanist consciousness were related to increased prejudice attributions and greater centrality appraisals  ( p  <.05)  , while feminism had no effect. Results suggest that womanist consciousness may be more relevant than traditional feminist consciousness in predicting African American women's perceptions of prejudice.     

Is What You See What You Really Get? Comparison of Scoring Techniques in the Assessment of Real-World Divergent Thinking

In recent years, the social sciences have seen a resurgence in the study of divergent thinking (DT) measures. However, many of these recent advances have focused on abstract, decontextualized DT tasks (e.g., list as many things as you can think of that have wheels). This study provides a new perspective by exploring the reliability and validity evidence for several methods for scoring real-world DT tasks (i.e., tasks situated within a real-world problem or situation). The results suggest a combination of objective and subjective scoring methods may be optimal for originality scoring for contextualized DT tasks, which stands in contrast to recent research suggesting the objective, percentage scoring technique may be optimal for scoring originality on abstract tasks.     

What Do We See When We See Total Darkness?

Seeing total darkness is a peculiar perceptual state: in it, the subject is visually aware of something while seeming to fail to be aware of anything. Recent treatments of the topic (Sorensen 2008 , Soteriou 2000 ) leave this particular puzzle unsolved. Here, I attempt a solution. Following Dretske, I begin by suggesting that the perceptual report ‘S sees (total) darkness’ is ambiguous between two distinct kinds of perceptual states: epistemic and non‐epistemic. This will lead to an examination of the metaphysics of what is supposed to be seen. I show, on the one hand, the difficulty of reducing the perception of total darkness to the perception of a particular instantiation of a property, and on the other, that it has important similarities with the perception of (non‐particular) ‘stuff’. I propose, finally, that the solution to the puzzle might involve postulating a novel ontological status for total darkness: that of a ‘concrete universal’. Potential implications of interest for particularism and for naïve realism are suggested.     

What Do You Do with Misleading Evidence?

Gilbert Harman has presented an argument to the effect that if S knows that p then S knows that any evidence for not- p is misleading. Therefore S is warranted in being dogmatic about anything he happens to know. I explain, and reject, Sorensen's attempt to solve the paradox via Jackson's theory of conditionals. S is not in a position to disregard evidence even when he knows it to be misleading.     

Do You See What I See? The Influence of Gender Stereotypes on Student and Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Perceptions of Violent Same-Sex and Opposite-Sex Relationships

ABSTRACT

Forty-one men and 67 women undergraduate students, as well as 35 men and 27 women Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers, rated the abusiveness of intimate partner violence (IPV) vignettes portraying each possible gender combination of victim and perpetrator (Harris &; Cook, 1994 Harris, R. J. and Cook, C. A. 1994. Attributions about spouse abuse: It matters who the batterers and victims are. Sex Roles, 30: 553–565. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Rating differences according to victim and perpetrator gender, occupation (student or RCMP officer), and participant gender were anticipated. Analyses found that student and RCMP ratings of abuse severity were both highest for the male-female scenario. However, the RCMP considered the female-male, male-male, and female-female scenarios to be more abusive than did the students. Our findings suggest that, while the RCMP appeared to be more sensitive to male and same-sex victims than students, both groups remain somewhat biased.     

Is What You Feel What They See? Prominent and Subtle Identity Signaling in Intergroup Interactions

Individuals often signal group affiliations to others, and the display of such identity signals is frequently rather subtle. While prior work has focused on understanding an individual's choices of subtle versus prominent signals, in this work, we look at the downstream consequences of such choices. Specifically, we explore how the prominence of identity signals may affect one's behavior in intergroup interactions. Drawing from literature on processing fluency, we propose that the use of difficult to process (subtle) identity signals in intergroup interactions leads signalers to experience identity threat, lowering confidence in their identity and leading them to engage in behaviors to recover from this experience. Across three different identity domains (college affiliation, political affiliation, and brand loyalty), we show that when individuals use difficult to process identity signals, they derogate out‐group members in communication and behave less cooperatively in intergroup interactions. We find that these effects depend upon the observability of the signals by out‐group members and only occur for individuals who are highly identified with the in‐group. We also find that the effects are attenuated when behavior towards members of the out‐group is made public. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do You Reap What You Sow? The Effect of Cyberostracism on Moral Impurity

Two experiments tested whether cyberostracism increases people’s perceived moral impurity and their tendency to purchase cleansing products. In both experiments, participants were first either ostracized or included in a web-based social interaction. Next, they completed self-report measures to assess their perceived moral impurity and tendency to purchase cleansing products. The results showed that participants who were ostracized reported a higher level of moral impurity and a higher tendency to purchase cleansing products. These findings advance our current understanding on the effect of online social interaction on people’s moral self-perception.     

What Revolution Would You Like to See In the Field of Psychotherapy? Introduction

Contributors to a theme issue were invited to address two questions: (a) What revolution would you like to see in the field of psychotherapy? (b) What makes it revolutionary? That is, how and why is it revolutionary? In a spirit of helping contributors do their job, an attempt is made to clarify the meaning of a revolutionary new idea in the field of psychotherapy by identifying components that do not especially belong, and by proposing components that can be thought of as defining the proposed meaning.     

Is It What You Do,or When You Do It? The Roles of Contingency and Similarity in Pro‐Social Effects of Imitation

Being imitated has a wide range of pro‐social effects, but it is not clear how these effects are mediated. Naturalistic studies of the effects of being imitated have not established whether pro‐social outcomes are due to the similarity and/or the contingency between the movements performed by the actor and those of the imitator. Similarity is often assumed to be the active ingredient, but we hypothesized that contingency might also be important, as it produces positive affect in infants and can be detected by phylogenetically ancient mechanisms of associative learning. We manipulated similarity and contingency between performed and observed actions in a computerized task. Similarity had no positive effects; however, contingency resulted in greater enjoyment of the task, reported closeness to others, and helping behavior. These results suggest that the pro‐social effects of being imitated may rely on associative mechanisms.