To B- or not to B- a relation

Philosophical Studies - In his seminal work, McTaggart (Mind 17(68):457–484, 1908; The nature of existence, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1927) dismissed the possibility of...     

To grit or not to grit,that is the question!

The current study tested the validity of grit as a non-cognitive construct related to, yet distinct from self-control. Data were collected from N = 1907 adults spanning the life-course (53.1% female, M age = 41.4 years). Associations between grit and present and past goals were very similar to ones observed with self-control. Extensive model tests using structural equation modeling provided evidence of substantial overlap between these two constructs, calling into question the conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of grit vis-à-vis self-control, as well as the importance of grit as a unique and independent characteristic salient for the pursuit and achievement of long-term goals. This finding was consistent and invariant across adult developmental periods. Study implications for grit-investment are discussed.     

To stay or to go, to speak or stay silent, to act or not to act: moral distress as experienced by psychologists

The moral distress of psychologists working in psychiatric and mental health care settings was explored in an interdisciplinary, hermeneutic phenomenological study situated at the University of Alberta, Canada. Moral distress is the state experienced when moral choices and actions are thwarted by constraints. Psychologists described specific incidents in which they felt their integrity had been compromised by such factors as institutional and interinstitutional demands, team conflicts, and interdisciplinary disputes. They described dealing with the resulting moral distress by such means as silence, taking a stance, acting secretively, sustaining themselves through work with clients, seeking support from colleagues, and exiting. Recognizing moral distress can lead to a significant shift in the way we perceive moral choices and understand the moral context of practice.     

To test or not to test: A clinical dilemma

This paper argues that clinicians are sometimes justified in not testing diagnoses or in not subjecting them to a full battery of tests. In deciding whether to conduct a test, a clinician may consider and weigh several different factors, including her confidence in her initial diagnosis, the specificity and sensitivity of the test, the consequences of making a false diagnosis, the pain, harm, and inconvenience caused by the test, and the costs of the test to the patient and society. This view suggests that diagnoses are fundamentally different from scientific hypotheses in that they are not always subjected to the same evidential standards.     

“To work,or not to work,that is the question” – Recent trends and avenues for research on presenteeism

ABSTRACT

This position paper brings together recent and emerging developments in the field of presenteeism. A critical synthesis of the evidence is needed due to persisting conceptual and methodological challenges as well as the increased volume of research in the field. This paper integrates emerging evidence and critical thinking into three areas: (1) concept, (2) measurement and methodological issues, and (3) the context of presenteeism. First, due to the variety of existing definitions, competing understandings, as well as the notion of positive presenteeism, it is important to reconsider the notion of presenteeism. Second, it is important to reflect on the measurement of the act of presenteeism and the productivity loss associated with that. Third, following the call to investigate presenteeism in specific contexts, it is important to explain the social, occupational, cross-cultural aspects, as well as the contemporary workplace changes. Based on this critical synthesis, we conclude by identifying recommendations for future research on presenteeism.     

Headache triggers: To avoid or not to avoid,that is the question

Abstract

Traditional clinical advice in the management of headaches is to avoid trigger factors. There is a danger, however, that avoidance of triggers results in a sensitisation process whereby tolerance for the triggers decreases, in a manner analogous to increments in anxiety arising from avoidance of anxiety-eliciting stimuli. Reported here are six single-case experiments in which the aim was to desensitise headache sufferers to an experimentally validated trigger, namely “visual disturbance”. The results demonstrated that repeated, prolonged exposure to a headache trigger led to desensitisation with participants experiencing less visual disturbance, less negative affect and less head pain in response to the trigger. These findings have theoretical significance as they speak to the issue of the aetiology of chronic headache, and practical significance as they suggest that a key aspect of current management may contribute to the disorder becoming worse rather than better.     

To be or not to be: Buddhist selves in Toronto

Buddhist identity: a Buddhist by any other name?When we talk about a ‘Buddhist’ or ‘Buddhists’ in Canada and the United States, what exactly is our referent—a label or category, an identity, or perhaps something more? Is the term ‘Buddhist’ signifying a reified object (or subject?), one that subsumes all sorts of practices, beliefs, philosophies, and preconceptions under its umbrella? Or can the term be used to signify choice, personal commitment, motivation, partiality, and perhaps even struggle? We have a great many labels and categorizations of the differences among and between Buddhists, but can we really assume that the term ‘Buddhist’ itself is unproblematic? Calling someone a Buddhist in the West, or ‘naming’ them as such, appears initially and on the surface a fairly straightforward undertaking. And yet, the very act of naming itself is a composite of assumptions and expectations. In much of the anthropological literature on initiation rituals, the act of naming has been construed as more-or-less a societal quest for order and control of the individual. Naming marks who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’. Being named is an important marker of social identity, socialness, and social belonging (inter alia, Jell-Bahlsen 1989; Jacquemet 1992; Cohen 1994).     

To be me or not to be me: About alienation

This article is about the experiential side of the concept of alienation and its relations to the stress process in the context of work and organization. We distinguish two kinds of alienation: primary alienation, the experience or feeling that something is different from normal, and secondary alienation, the absence of an experience of or feeling about something abnormal. After having gone into everyday reality and how it can be so disturbed that alienation ensues, we go further into the experiences involved in both kinds of alienation and their positive and negative consequences. Secondary alienation is described as a common final path in the second stage of a human stress process. In the discussion, we pay attention to the social scientific tradition of alienation as result of an evil societal influence, which has turned out to be an unfortunate approach. Instead, we advocate an approach that conceives alienation as the outcome of a personal choice. Lastly we indicate shortly what can be done about secondary alienation.     

To a young basic scientist, about to embark on a program of translational research

From recent commentaries about the role of basic behavior scientists in translational research, I distill some advice to young investigators who seek to apply their basic science training to translational studies. Among the challenges are (a) devising use-inspired research programs that complement, and are not redundant with, existing efforts in basic and applied behavior analysis; and (b) making tactical decisions, such as the selection of methods and collaborators, based on the research topic rather than, necessarily, the existing traditions in behavioral research. Finally, it must be recognized that although use-inspired basic research has the potential to attract support to basic laboratories and contribute to "saving the world," neither of these outcomes is guaranteed. I discuss the relative risks for basic scientists who proceed with use-inspired basic research rather than ignore such translational questions.