Independence training,need achievement and need affiliation

American white and American Indian grade school boys and girls from the North Central Plains are studied. The previously shown significant and positive relationship between high need achievement and low need affiliation is hypothesized to be a culturally based and sex related phenomenon. The early training of Plains Indian children especially that of boys emphasizes early independence rather than either affiliation or achievement. As hypothesized, it was found in this study both that white children had significantly higher need affiliation scores than Indian children and that boys indicated higher need achievement than girls, indicating cultural and sexual differences. It appeared also that success is a more potent condition for Indian boys in intensifying need achievement scores, whereas failure intensifies the need achievement scores of white children. This suggests that perceived success and failure operate differentially between these cultural groups. Other results also corroborate earlier findings of the culture bias of « standard » intelligence tests.     

The need to explain

How do reasoners deal with inconsistencies? James (1907) believed that the rational solution is to revise your beliefs and to do so in a minimal way. We propose an alternative: You explain the origins of an inconsistency, which has the side effect of a revision to your beliefs. This hypothesis predicts that individuals should spontaneously create explanations of inconsistencies rather than refute one of the assertions and that they should rate explanations as more probable than refutations. A pilot study showed that participants spontaneously explain inconsistencies when they are asked what follows from inconsistent premises. In three subsequent experiments, participants were asked to compare explanations of inconsistencies against minimal refutations of the inconsistent premises. In Experiment 1, participants chose which conclusion was most probable; in Experiment 2 they rank ordered the conclusions based on their probability; and in Experiment 3 they estimated the mean probability of the conclusions' occurrence. In all three studies, participants rated explanations as more probable than refutations. The results imply that individuals create explanations to resolve an inconsistency and that these explanations lead to changes in belief. Changes in belief are therefore of secondary importance to the primary goal of explanation.     

The need to dominate

The American Journal of Psychoanalysis -     

The need of courage

A brave man leaveth not the battle, He who flieth from it is no true warrior, In the field of this body a great war is toward Against Passion, Hunger, Pride and Greed, It is for the Kingdom of Truth, of Contentment and of Purity that this battle is raging: And the sword that ringeth most loudly is the sword Of His name.

—KABIR, Hindu Poet

     

The need to explain

How do reasoners deal with inconsistencies? James (1907) believed that the rational solution is to revise your beliefs and to do so in a minimal way. We propose an alternative: You explain the origins of an inconsistency, which has the side effect of a revision to your beliefs. This hypothesis predicts that individuals should spontaneously create explanations of inconsistencies rather than refute one of the assertions and that they should rate explanations as more probable than refutations. A pilot study showed that participants spontaneously explain inconsistencies when they are asked what follows from inconsistent premises. In three subsequent experiments, participants were asked to compare explanations of inconsistencies against minimal refutations of the inconsistent premises. In Experiment 1, participants chose which conclusion was most probable; in Experiment 2 they rank ordered the conclusions based on their probability; and in Experiment 3 they estimated the mean probability of the conclusions' occurrence. In all three studies, participants rated explanations as more probable than refutations. The results imply that individuals create explanations to resolve an inconsistency and that these explanations lead to changes in belief. Changes in belief are therefore of secondary importance to the primary goal of explanation.     

The role of need level and/or need salience as moderators of the relationship between need satisfaction and work alienation-involvement

Contrary to previous findings documenting the importance of higher-order need satisfaction, a recent study by G. J. Gorn and R. N. Kanungo (Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980, 26, 265–277) has indicated that satisfaction of lower-order needs may lead to job involvement if such needs are salient. Data from a heterogeneous sample of 632 employees from six organizations were used to test six hypotheses concerning the effects of need level (higher vs lower order) and need salience as moderators of the relationship between need satisfaction and alienation-involvement. Three different ways of operationalizing need saliency were used, including a replication of Gorn and Kanungo's procedure. Higherorder need satisfaction was correlated with alienation-involvement scores to a significantly greater degree than was lower-order need satisfaction, even for those for whom lower-order needs were most salient. Need saliency was not found to moderate the need satisfaction-involvement relationship when need level was controlled. Issues regarding the operationalization of “need salience” were discussed and a new measure of alienation-involvement (the A-I Scale) was introduced. Implications for further empirical investigations of the need saliency issue were noted, as was the universal application of job enrichment programs aimed at promoting higher-order need satisfaction.     

Testing the need for novelty as a candidate need in basic psychological needs theory

Motivation and Emotion - The purpose of this research was to test novelty as a candidate basic psychological need according to the inclusion criteria established within basic psychological needs...     

人类需要发展科学——从汶川大地震的“多么想……”谈起

汶川大地震中一位救援者说，他多么想多有几只手，来尽快挖出那些被掩埋的受难者。这简单朴实的语言，使人心颤，使人沉思!