What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research

It is a common practice to export instruments developed in one culture to another. Little is known about the consequences of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Several studies were conducted to fill in this gap. Study 1 examined the impact of lacking factor loading invariance on regression slope comparisons. When factor loadings of a predictor are higher in the reference group (e.g., United States), for which the scale was developed, than in the focal group (e.g., China), into which the scale was imported, the predictive relationship (e.g., self-esteem predicting life satisfaction) is artificially stronger in the reference group but weaker in the focal group, creating a bogus interaction effect of predictor by group (e.g., self-esteem by culture); the opposite pattern is found when the reference group has higher loadings in an outcome variable. Studies 2 and 3 examined the impact of lacking loading and intercept (i.e., point of origin) invariance on factor means, respectively. When the reference group has higher loadings or intercepts, the mean is overestimated in that group but underestimated in the focal group, resulting in a pseudo group difference.     

The silent voices of research: What can we do to help them speak?1

The authors challenge the legitimacy of making commissioning decisions based solely upon the current outcome research for the psychological treatments. They argue that this outcome data does not represent the treatment needs of the patient who fails to complete a therapy. They call for a shift in the focus of research in order to right this oversight.     

What if we fake emotional intelligence? A test of criterion validity attenuation

We evaluate the extent to which established self-report measures of emotional intelligence (EI) are susceptible to socially desirable responding. A study was conducted to assess the relationship between EI and multiple outcomes across 3 experimental faking conditions. Using structural equation modeling, we found that the criterion validities of self-report EI measures in the prediction of life satisfaction, psychological distress, rational coping, and detachment coping are not attenuated in moderate social desirability settings, but are somewhat attenuated when faking is maximized. Moreover, partialing out social desirability does not yield any improvement of the predictive validity of self-report EI.     

Getting to the Core of Close Reading: What do we Really Know and What Remains to be Seen?

Due to the Common Core State Standards, close reading is becoming a common practice in today’s elementary and middle school classrooms. Qualitative content analysis of journal publications was used to determine the (a) prevalence of close reading in the existing literature, (b) knowledge about close reading from the research literature, (c) themes about close reading in practitioner-oriented articles and (d) questions about close reading in the elementary and middle grade language arts classroom. Results reveal that the majority of articles on close reading are situated in the practitioner literature, with a notable lack of research on close reading.     

Do we need a concept of disease?

The terms “health”, “disease” and “illness” are frequently used in clinical medicine. This has misled philosophers into believing that these concepts are important for clinical thinking and decision making. For instance, it is held that decisions about whether or not to treat someone or whether to relieve someone of moral responsibility depend on whether the person has a disease. In this paper it is argued that the crucial role of the ‘disease’ concept is illusory. The health/disease distinction is irrelevant for most decisions and represents a conceptual straightjacket. Sophisticated and mature clinical decision making requires that we free ourselves from the concept of disease.     

Can we get sick if we want to? Children's and adults' recognition of intentionality in the origins of illness and injuries

The present set of studies examined the impact of intentionality (wanting/not wanting to get sick) on the transmission of contagious illness and injuries. Study 1 examined whether preschoolers and adults thought that a recipient of an illness is more likely to get sick if he/she wanted to. Studies 2, 2a, and 3 examined if the intentions of the transmitter would influence the transmission of illness to the recipient. Study 4 examined the influence of germs on intentionality. Both preschoolers and adults reasoned that the intentions of the recipient would play a significant role in the probability of contracting an illness but only adults reasoned that the recipient having knowledge of the transmitter's intentions would have an impact on illness. Moreover, preschoolers (but not adults) judged that biological contaminants such as germs would interact with the intentionality of the recipient to increase the chances of contracting an illness whereas adults reasoned that psychological states can have a direct influence on the manifestation of illness. These results suggest that preschoolers and adults entertain a highly sophisticated and selective process when assessing, the impact of psychological factors such as intentionality on biological processes such as the origins of illness.     

What are we frightened of?

I am concerned to understand that relation to a situation which we call fearing it. Some say this cannot be done: it is a brute fact about us that we fear certain things and we understand another's fear when we see that he confronts a situation of this sort (a basic fear object) or one which he understandably associates with this sort. In Section I, I argue that being associated with a basic fear object will not usefully explain a current fear. In Section II, I argue that the obvious candidates for being basic fears will not do the required work. The notion should be rejected. I then argue that to fear an object is to take it as exhibiting one's lack of control and I proceed to describe the nature and content of this notion.     

Why do we take drugs? From the drug-reinforcement theory to a novel concept of drug instrumentalization

The drug-reinforcement theory explains why humans get engaged in drug taking behavior. This theory posits that drugs of abuse serve as biological rewards by activating the reinforcement system. Although from a psychological and neurobiological perspective this theory is extremely helpful, it does not tell us about the drug-taking motives and motivation of an individual. The definition of drug instrumentalization goals will improve our understanding of individual drug-taking profiles.     

A decade of infant neuroimaging research: What have we learned and where are we going?

The past decade has seen the emergence of neuroimaging studies of infant populations. Incorporating imaging has resulted in invaluable insights about neurodevelopment at the start of life. However, little has been enquired of the experimental specifications and study characteristics of typical findings. This review systematically screened empirical studies that used electroencephalography (EEG), magnetoencephalography (MEG), functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) on infants (max. age of 24 months). From more than 21,000 publications, a total of 710 records were included for analyses. With the exception of EEG studies, infant studies with MEG, fNIRS, and fMRI were most often conducted around birth and at 12 months. The vast majority of infant studies came from North America, with very few studies conducted in Africa, certain parts of South America, and Southeast Asia. Finally, longitudinal neuroimaging studies were inclined to adopt EEG, followed by fMRI, fNIRS, and MEG. These results show that there is compelling need for studies with larger sample sizes, studies investigating a broader range of infant developmental periods, and studies from under- and less-developed regions in the world. Addressing these shortcomings in the future will provide a more representative and accurate understanding of neurodevelopment in infancy.     

What are we doing to the earth's climate and what are we going to do about it?

Climatic considerations are critical if our planet is to survive. The environment, and in particular the atmosphere, is particularly sensitive to man. The time has come to act in favor of that which gives us life. This is why, in a field which knows no boundaries, only an international strategy can be effective.     

What is to be done? future research on the assessment and behavioral treatment of sex offenders

Much progress has been made in the assessment and treatment of sexually aggressive men. There remains, however, a great deal of work to be done. Future research should move on three fronts simultaneously: the extension and refinement of assessment methods which will serve to discriminate sex offenders from other persons and different sorts of sex offenders from each other, the further development of, and comparison among, treatment techniques designed to change sex offenders on relevant dimensions, and long-term followups of sex offenders who have been treated with different methods. Basic research concerning not only sex offenders but also the development of human sexuality is also required for the formulation of a theory which will guide future research.     

What matters most? The relative role of mentoring and career capital in career success

This study used a career capital framework to compare the relative role of mentoring and three other forms of career capital (human, agentic, and developmental network capital) in predicting career success. Using a three-wave longitudinal design we found that mentoring added value, above and beyond the other forms of career capital, in predicting promotions and advancement expectations. However, although mentoring mattered for career success, it represented just a part of a constellation of career resources that are embedded within individuals and their relationships. Implications for future research are discussed.     

What are we doing to waiting list controls?

For ethical reasons waiting list controls have been preferred to no treatment controls, provided the wait is still shorter than that for routine services. However, could significant differences arise from the wait being detrimental rather than the intervention being beneficial? Despite the number of studies employing this design, few have analysed intervention trials from the perspective of the waiting list controls rather than the experimental group. A Full Day Stress Management Workshop programme which had run successfully in Birmingham, was repeated in three areas in the South East of England. The data from the four areas were reanalysed to assess progress within the control group and to compare the final assessment points for the two groups. The control group did not show any significant deterioration during the three month wait for their workshop. Three months after their respective workshops, scores in the control groups did not differ significantly from those of the experimental group.