压力认知评价理论在管理心理学中的应用：场景、方式与迷思

工作场所中, 压力源无处不在; 面对压力源, 个体会如何反应?压力认知评价理论从认知评价和应对角度为这一问题提供了系统解释。在过去的40年里, 该理论已成为阐释个体压力反应的主流框架。然而, 由于提出时间较早, 该理论没有提供各理论要素间的精确关系, 这使得后续实证研究从各自研究问题出发, 对该理论的应用五花八门, 甚至因曲解理论观点而造成不当应用, 不利于对该理论的持续应用和深入发展。在系统回顾理论观点的基础上, 重点梳理了125篇以该理论作为核心理论基础的管理心理学实证研究。总体发现：在应用场景方面, 压力认知评价理论可以用来解释6种压力源对员工工作态度、行为、身心健康和工作-家庭关系的影响; 其应用形式可以从初级评价、次级评价和应对3个方面分别考虑; 一些研究在应用该理论时存在误区。未来研究需要优化理论要素的测量方式, 进一步拓展该理论的应用场景, 同时丰富认知评价过程的影响因素研究。     

Research in education: What influence on policy and practice?

This paper is set in a context where increased emphasis is being placed on the “consumer’s” role in research. It discusses the limitations of “knowledge base” approaches, which aim to deliver the findings of educational research to practitioners and policymakers. The tensions between what these consumers expect of research and what it can, in fact, offer are explored, and the conditions under which effective communication can be established are outlined and exemplified. It is argued, however, that the processes of such communication, if they are to establish the necessary engagement of consumers with researchers, will have to take account of the ways in which consumers are motivated and able to acquire new knowledge. In conclusion, it is argued that if the engagement is unsuccessful and the consumers are unconvinced of the value and validity of research findings for policy and practice, then researchers’ ideas will take a back seat in the debate about what is to count as high-quality work that should be funded. The function of research as the critical extension of knowledge may then be replaced by enquiry that comes up with the results the customer wants. Her current research interests are in the relationships among policy, practice and research, teachers’ thinking, provision for children with special educational needs and gender in education. Her best known recent book, with Donald McIntyre, isMaking Sense of Teaching (Open University Press).     

家庭抗逆力理论在风险应对领域的应用：演变、价值及挑战

家庭抗逆力理论是近年来风险应对研究领域中被引最高的理论之一。该理论的提出源自McCubbin等人对军人家庭应对战争危机的观察与思考,得益于早期学者对家庭压力和家庭系统理论的探究。经数次修订后,该理论经历了由静态特征到动态变化的发展过程,形成了一个具有较广泛内涵与外延的理论体系。其早期应用集中于创伤修复、家庭压力应对等主题,之后涉及复原力等更丰富的研究议题,已成为临床干预工作的实践导引和COVID-19大流行以来国家和社会、家庭和个体层面“危机事件—适应能力”关系的重要解释机制。其应用面临来自元理论研究、方法学及跨文化与社会变迁观点的挑战。未来研究应明晰概念与整合模型、使用混合方法与制定评估指标体系、强化家庭抗逆力理论的本土化研究与构建中国特色家庭抗逆力理论体系。     

The appraisal process: Exploring the role of meaning,importance, control and coping in work stress

Recent reviews on occupational stress research suggests that if progress is to be made towards a better understanding of stress at work then researchers need to consider alternative methodologies and establish new frameworks. This paper takes up that challenge and using both quantitative and qualitative techniques attempts to explore the appraisal process individuals go through in determining stressful experiences. The meanings individuals give to events, their importance and individual levels of control all provide fruitful avenues for further research. Such variables provide new approaches to research and offer a potential for explanation far greater than the more traditional interactional models.     

Analysis and meta-analysis of single-case designs: An introduction

The last 10 years have seen great progress in the analysis and meta-analysis of single-case designs (SCDs). This special issue includes five articles that provide an overview of current work on that topic, including standardized mean difference statistics, multilevel models, Bayesian statistics, and generalized additive models. Each article analyzes a common example across articles and presents syntax or macros for how to do them. These articles are followed by commentaries from single-case design researchers and journal editors. This introduction briefly describes each article and then discusses several issues that must be addressed before we can know what analyses will eventually be best to use in SCD research. These issues include modeling trend, modeling error covariances, computing standardized effect size estimates, assessing statistical power, incorporating more accurate models of outcome distributions, exploring whether Bayesian statistics can improve estimation given the small samples common in SCDs, and the need for annotated syntax and graphical user interfaces that make complex statistics accessible to SCD researchers. The article then discusses reasons why SCD researchers are likely to incorporate statistical analyses into their research more often in the future, including changing expectations and contingencies regarding SCD research from outside SCD communities, changes and diversity within SCD communities, corrections of erroneous beliefs about the relationship between SCD research and statistics, and demonstrations of how statistics can help SCD researchers better meet their goals.     

Distancing from a stigmatized social identity: State of the art and future research agenda on self-group distancing

Despite equal rights, minority groups such as ethnic minorities, LGBTQ + people, and people with mental or physical disabilities face discrimination on a day-to-day basis in subtle and hard-to-recognize forms. As discrimination slips beneath the surface, it becomes difficult to fight the stigma using collective social identity coping mechanisms. Instead, individual mobility responses such as distancing the self from the stigmatized identity (“self-group distancing”) become more viable as a way to improve one's individual standing. In this overview of the state of the art, we take a social identity lens to reflect on the current empirical knowledge base on self-group distancing as a coping mechanism and provide a framework on what self-group distancing is; when, where and why self-group distancing likely occurs; and what its consequences are at the individual and the collective level. The contributions in this special issue provide novel insights into how these processes unfold, and serve as a basis to set a future research agenda, for example on what can be done to prevent self-group distancing (i.e., interventions). Together, the insights highlight that while self-group distancing may seem effective to (strategically and temporarily) alleviate discomfort or to improve one's own position, on a broader collective level and over time self-group distancing tends to keep the current unequal social hierarchy in place.     

Evidence, Explanation, and the Empirical Status of Scientific Realism

There is good reason to believe that, if it can be decided at all, the realism debate must be decided on a posteriori grounds. But at least prima facie the prospects for an a posteriori resolution of the debate seem bleak, given that realists and antirealists disagree over two of the most fundamental questions pertaining to any kind of empirical research, to wit, what the range of accessible evidence is and what the methodological status of explanatory considerations is. The present paper aims to show that, while the difficulties that face an empirical approach to the realism debate are not to be discounted, they are not insurmountable either. Specifically, it presents a broadly Bayesian strategy for resolving the debate that is capable of solving those difficulties. The strategy crucially involves answers to the aforementioned questions that diverge from both the standard realist and the standard antirealist answers, but that should appear more natural and plausible than those to realists and antirealists alike.     

Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked

In this paper we argue that there is little need for more of the traditional deception detection research in which observers assess short video clips in which there are few (if any) cues to deception and truth. We argue that a change in direction is needed and that researchers should focus on the questions the interviewer needs to ask in order to elicit and enhance cues to deception. We discuss three strands of research into this new ‘interviewing to detect deception’ approach. We encourage practitioners to use the proposed techniques and encourage other researchers to join us in conducting more research in this area. We offer some guidelines for what researchers need to keep in mind when carrying out research in this new paradigm.     

Mapping the Hierarchical Structure of Coping: Unifying Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives

Consumer researchers have become increasingly interested in the study of coping. This research contributes to this emerging paradigm by investigating structural theories of coping using a hierarchical modeling approach to better understand the basic dimensional properties of this multifaceted construct. This research makes gains along several fronts. First, the authors empirically examine a new lower order theory of coping based on a comprehensive synthesis of the literature, reconciling nomenclatural and conceptual redundancies found in the structure of coping literature. Analyses across 2 studies using different methods offer support for a 2‐dimensional higher order model of coping. Finally, a third study using an experimental approach validates these findings by showing unique effects relating an approach‐avoidance based higher order model to theoretically predicted emotional antecedents. By examining the mapping of lower order coping strategies onto several higher order coping theories, this research addresses the extant disjuncture between coping theory and measurement found in the literature and offers reconciliation between these 2 perspectives. The findings suggest the need for future coping research to focus on other 2‐dimensional theories beyond problem‐focused versus emotion‐focused coping. The findings build on the synergies among the many coping perspectives, and the implications of a better understanding of coping's hierarchical structure for consumer researchers is discussed.     

Melioration and self-experimentation

Operant researchers rarely use the arena of applied psychology to motivate or to judge their research. Absence of tests by application weakens the field of basic operant research. Early in their development, the physical and biological sciences emphasized meliorative aspects of research. Improvement of human life was a major goal of these young sciences. This paper argues that if basic operant researchers analogously invoked a melioration criterion, the operant field might avoid its tendency toward ingrowth and instead generate a broadly influential science. Operant researchers could incorporate melioration by (a) creating animal models to study applied problems; (b) confronting questions raised by applied analysts and testing hypotheses in applied settings; or (c) performing self-experiments—that is, using experimental methods and behavioral techniques to study and change the experimenter's behavior.     

Assessing Conversational Cognition Levels of Cognitive Theory and Associated Methodological Requirements

Despite the prominence of cognitively oriented research in interpersonal communication, relatively little is known about the interplay of cognitive and communicative processes during conversation. For interpersonal communication scholars or at least those interested in interaction, the study of cognition is most useful if it reveals how interactants produce, monitor, modify, and process messages while engaged in conversation. The failure to collect data about in-process conversational cognition is partially due to excessive reliance on what have been identified as “implementation level” cognitive theories and models. Such theories are primarily concerned with specifying cognitive “architectures” and provide little guidance about how cognition is adapted to conversational tasks. However, a dearth of methodological creativity is also partially to blame for the lack of data about in-process conversational cognition. On encountering the admittedly formidable methodological difficulties of collecting data about conversational cognition, researchers have tended to rely on traditional but inadequate methods, or worse, have simply ignored theoretical questions pertinent to cognition in-process. This article suggests that claims about cognition can be made at four levels—biological, implementation, algorithmic, and rational—but that theoretical claims about conversational cognition can most usefully be pursued at the rational and algorithmic levels. In an effort to promote more research at these levels, criteria for studying conversational cognition are proposed, and promising methods are reviewed.     

Interpersonal influences on goals: Current and future directions for goal contagion research

A growing body of research documents goal contagion, a phenomenon whereby people are likely to catch—to adopt and pursue for themselves—the goals they see others pursuing. Here, I situate goal contagion relative to other ideas about where goals come from and then review existing scholarship on the phenomenon itself and the processes that underlie it. I then point to four larger questions that goal contagion researchers must answer in the years to come. The first two of these questions (what levels of the self‐regulatory hierarchy are subject to contagion and what role goal contagion affords for consciousness and intention) delve deeper into the process of the phenomenon, while the second two (how goal contagion affects social relationships and how it plays into goal pursuit more broadly) highlight how researchers have largely ignored the question of how goal contagion might influence people's broader lives.     

Broadening the application of mixed methods in sales research

Mixed method research designs can be extremely useful in extending knowledge in the sales domain. A bevy of mixed method designs are at the disposal of sales researchers seeking to reap the benefits of this combination of research approaches. However, application of mixed methods in sales research has been rather limited, focusing primarily on exploratory sequential designs. The purpose of this article is to provide an exposition of mixed method research in the sales domain and offer avenues of extension that employ underutilized mixed methodological approaches. Accordingly, a definition of mixed methods along with its benefits and drawbacks is espoused followed by guidance in conducting mixed method research. A review of sales-related mixed method studies is then provided and articles containing both quantitative and qualitative methods are analyzed to glean insight on the state of mixed methods research in sales. Future avenues for mixed method research are then provided focusing on best practices and techniques that have yet to be embraced by sales researchers. This article aims to be a resource for sales scholars in expanding the mixed method research paradigm.     

The Dizzying Turn of Epistemic Contextualism

The debate concerning epistemic contextualism represents a kind of linguistic turn in epistemology, where the focus has shifted from theorising about knowledge to theorising about knowledge attributions. Such a shift may well prove valuable, but only if we are clear on what the relationship is between a semantic analysis of knowledge attributions and a philosophical analysis of knowledge. One plausible approach is to claim that the semantic analysis entails and is entailed by the philosophical analysis. Yet this view—referred to here as the default view—has been explicitly adopted by few in the contextualism debate. This paper considers a form of argument in favour of the default view, and then considers the challenges that arise from either accepting or rejecting the default view.     

An exploration of the role of leisure in coping with work related stress using sequential tree analysis

The past three decades have seen an explosion of interest into the nature, causes and consequences of stress in both work and non-work settings. Given that leisure is of growing importance in most people's lives and that the impact of stress influences the way in which leisure is used, then the role that leisure plays as a means of coping with stress represents an important research agenda. In order to explore leisure's role in coping with work stress this research explored, using a sample of secondary school principals and deputy principals, three issues: (1) why an involvement in leisure was important, (2) what reasons were given as to why leisure was important to cope with stress, and (3) what coping strategies were actually used to cope with stress in relation to whether or not leisure had always been regarded as an important part of life. Each of these issues was explored using a technique called sequential tree analysis. This technique identifies patterns of data and arranges them in hierarchical order to provide a visual display that captures the richness of relationships not always present when more traditional methods are used. The different patterns that emerged point to the complex role that leisure plays. The results also point to the need to better understand combinations and patterns before it is possible to determine the exact nature of the presumed emotion-focused role that leisure may play in coping with work stress. These findings have implications for stress management interventions and the role of leisure in them and the need to distinguish between the meanings people give to the importance of leisure as distinct from the actual use of leisure as a coping strategy     

Formalization and the Objects of Logic

There is a long-standing debate whether propositions, sentences, statements or utterances provide an answer to the question of what objects logical formulas stand for. Based on the traditional understanding of logic as a science of valid arguments, this question is firstly framed more exactly, making explicit that it calls not only for identifying some class of objects, but also for explaining their relationship to ordinary language utterances. It is then argued that there are strong arguments against the proposals commonly put forward in the debate. The core of the problem is that an informative account of the objects formulas stand for presupposes a theory of formalization; that is, a theory that explains what formulas may adequately substitute for an inference in proofs of validity. Although such theories are still subject to research, some consequences can be drawn from an analysis of the reasons why the common accounts featuring sentences, propositions or utterances fail. Theories of formalization cannot refer to utterances qua expressions of propositions; instead they may refer to sentences and rely on additional information about linguistic structure and pragmatic context.