刻板印象威胁来源对防御反应的影响

以多重威胁框架为理论基础,探讨了刻板印象威胁来源对防御反应的影响。实验一和实验二选取了性别-数学刻板印象威胁,分别考察了自我概念威胁和群体概念威胁对女性防御反应的影响。结果发现,不管是自我概念威胁还是群体概念威胁,女性尝试数学题目数量都显著小于语文题目数量,表明产生了领域回避。两项研究共同说明,以自我为刻板印象威胁来源对防御反应产生影响。     

The Effects of Subject-and Experimenter-Induced Defensive Response Sets on Picture-Frustration Test Reactions

Thirty male college students, half scoring high and half low on the MMPI K-scale, were administered a multiple-choice (M-C) modification of the Rosenzweig P-F Study under three instructional sets. Two of these sets were induced by E and compared with the third which represented S's normal test-taking set. The two induced sets included (1) a “should” set in which concern for the social consequences of behavior was accentuated, and (2) a “wish” set in which concern for social consequences was minimized, and freedom of self-expression was accentuated.

It was hypothesized that Ss making extremely high or low scores on the K-scale would likewise score differently on the M-C, P-F test. High K, defined by its authors as a measure of test defensiveness, and low K, as test-taking candidness, would be associated with P-F score patterns reflecting these test-taking attitudes: High K Ss showing Impunitive (M) dominant reaction patterns and low K showing Extrapunitive (E) or Intropunitive (I) dominant patterns. These hypothèses were confirmed except that intropunitive responses were extremely rare in the entire subject sample.

It was further hypothesized that the typical high K pattern would be induced in low K Ss under the “should” instructional set and the low K pattern would be elicited from high K Ss under “wish” instructions. This expectation was confirmed. It was suggested that the technique of manipulating responses via test taking instructions can generate correction factors useful in projective as well as structured personality tests.     

Defensive pessimism: harnessing anxiety as motivation

In this article we discuss the strategies that people may use to cope with situations that are risky in that they present the possibility for failure and potential threats to self-esteem. Previous research has indicated that anxiety (Sarason, 1980) and explicitly set low expectations (Sherman, Skov, Hervitz, & Stock, 1981) may lead to performance deficits in these situations. Experiment 1 indicates, in contrast, that with a strategy called defensive pessimism (Norem & Cantor, 1986), individuals may sometimes use low expectations to cope with their anxiety so that it does not become debilitating. A second experiment further supports the contention that low expectations may help individuals negotiate risky situations by showing that interference with the defensive-pessimism strategy impairs performance. Subjects whose strategic construction of the situation was not interfered with do not show impaired performance. These data are interpreted as evidence that the effects of low expectations and high anxiety on performance may be mediated by the strategies individuals use when approaching risky situations.     

Scientific Research and Human Rights: A Response to Kitcher on the Limitations of Inquiry

In his recent work exploring the role of science in democratic societies Kitcher (Science in a democratic society. Prometheus Books, New York, 2011) claims that scientists ought to have a prominent role in setting the agenda for and limits to research. Against the backdrop of the claim that the proper limits of scientific inquiry is John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle (Kitcher in Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford University Press, New York, 2001), he identifies the limits of inquiry as the point where the outcomes of research could cause harm to already vulnerable populations. Nonetheless, Kitcher argues against explicit limitations on unscrupulous research on the grounds that restrictions would exacerbate underlying social problems. I show that Kitcher’s argument in favor of dissuading inquiry through conventional standards is problematic and falls prey to the same critique he offers in opposition to official bans. I expand the conversation of limiting scientific research by recognizing that the actions that count as ‘science’ are located in the space between ‘thinking’ and ‘doing’. In this space, we often attempt to balance freedom of research, as scientific speech, against the disparate impact citizens might experience in light of such research. I end by exploring if such disparate impact justifies limiting research, within the context of the United States, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or under international human rights standards more generally.     

Singapore's Cultural Experimentation: Gay Rights,Stem Cells,Casinos and the Evangelical Response

Abstract

Since the early 1990s the Singapore government has been taking a more liberal stance on controversial issues such as gay rights, embryonic stem cell research and the gaming industry. My paper analyses the Singapore state's utilitarian justification and its authoritarian enactment of these liberal policies. The first part looks at the underlying motivation for the cultural makeover. I frame my analysis around the reaction of the Singapore Christian community to these developments. I focus on the criticisms of the state's ‘liberal’ agenda made by Evangelicals, and describe how the People's Action Party (PAP) regime has defended these policies on utilitarian grounds. The first part ends with a comparative analysis of how the ‘cultural war’ debate was played out in Singapore and the USA. In the second part I examine the procedural aspects of this cultural experimentation. I start with a review of Singapore's political reform. I show that civil society in Singapore has attained a new openness. Yet there remain constraints, leading critics to label the PAP-led government as a ‘soft-authoritarian’ democracy. Singapore's cultural policies, I explain, are essentially an ‘elitist’ state-engineered top-down development. This is in contrast to the experience in the USA, where grassroots activists exercise tangible bottom-up influence on how cultural contests are resolved. My main thesis is to argue that Singapore's recent cultural liberalisation is guided by social–economic expediency notwithstanding the alleged moral risks, and that these are state-commanded liberal experimentations, imposed by the ruling elite upon a constituency that is still largely conservative in moral outlook.     

Defensive Sexualization: A Neurobiologically Informed Explanatory Model

Sexualization is a defense mechanism frequently referred to in clinical psychoanalytic literature. Despite this, there is no research linking the theoretical nature of this observed phenomenon to social or neurobiological theory. This discussion paper proposes an interaction between social learning and neural maturation in the development of sexualized tendencies. When anxiety within peer interactions is alleviated repeatedly through sexualized behavior, learned associations develop. This explanation allows understanding and empathy for individuals demonstrating a broad spectrum of sexualized responses since such learning is argued to be functional within their historic social climate.     

Compartmentalization: A Window on the Defensive Self

Most people hold both positive and negative beliefs about themselves. The way individuals organize, or structure, these beliefs in their self‐concepts can facilitate realistic acceptance and confrontation of negative self‐beliefs (integration), or defensive avoidance and denial of negative self‐beliefs (compartmentalization). This article focuses on the distinction between individuals with a realistic, secure self and a defensive, fragile self. We present evidence that compartmentalization is associated with several indicators of a defensive, fragile self, such as contingent self‐esteem and unstable self‐evaluations. In addition, individuals with this structure are likely to engage in defensive processes that enhance or protect the self. This model of self‐organization can provide a window on the defensive self, allowing researchers to observe the process by which individuals think about and defensively avoid negative self‐beliefs.     

Defensive pride and consensus: strength in imaginary numbers

Failure (Study 1) and attachment separation thoughts (Study 2) caused exaggerated consensus estimates for personal beliefs about unrelated social issues. This compensatory consensus effect was most pronounced among defensively proud individuals, that is, among those with the combination of high explicit and low implicit self-esteem (Study 1) and the combination of high attachment avoidance and low attachment anxiety (Study 2). In Study 3, another form of defensive pride, narcissism, was associated with exaggerated consensual worldview defense after a system-injustice threat. In Study 4, imagined consensus reduced subjective salience of proud individuals' troubling thoughts. Compensatory consensus is seen as a kind of defensive self-affirmation that defensively proud people turn to for insulation from distressing thoughts.     

Limiting logical pluralism

In this paper I argue that pluralism at the level of logical systems requires a certain monism at the meta-logical level, and so, in a sense, there cannot be pluralism all the way down. The adequate alternative logical systems bottom out in a shared basic meta-logic, and as such, logical pluralism is limited. I argue that the content of this basic meta-logic must include the analogue of logical rules Modus Ponens (MP) and Universal Instantiation (UI). I show this through a detailed analysis of the ‘adoption problem’, which manifests something special about MP and UI. It appears that MP and UI underwrite the very nature of a logical rule of inference, due to all rules of inference being conditional and universal in their structure. As such, all logical rules presuppose MP and UI, making MP and UI self-governing, basic, unadoptable, and (most relevantly to logical pluralism) required in the meta-logic for the adequacy of any logical system.