Do normative transgressions affect punitive judgments? An empirical test of the psychoanalytic scapegoat hypothesis

According to psychoanalytic theory, punitiveness is based on a projection of one's own immoral desires and the moral conflict they cause (scapegoat hypothesis). This hypothesis implies that transgressors impose harsher punishment onto comparable wrongdoers. This effect should be amplified by strength of decision conflict. An alternative hypothesis based on blameavoidance motivation is derived. Participants (N = 291) were asked to indicate whether they would commit an unlawful act in a moral temptation situation and how conflicted they felt in making their decision. Later, they had to judge convicts in criminal cases that were similar to the previous temptation situations. Authoritarianism was assessed as covariate. In contrast to the scapegoat but consistent with the blame-avoidance interpretation, transgressors were more lenient than nontransgressors. Authoritarianism had main effects on punitiveness. Decision conflict was neither directly nor indirectly related to punitiveness. The findings challenge the validity of the scapegoat hypothesis.     

‘Who owns my pain?’ An aspect of the complexity of working with looked after children

This paper underlines the difficulties of working with looked after children and their carers. The author discusses a particular approach to respond to the complexity of looked after children's emotional difficulties, and their impact on the network of professionals making decisions about their life in care. As their own parents are no longer in a position to take responsibility for them, their trauma and past abuse make for a lack of clarity amongst this network when establishing the responsible role in loco parentis. In order to provide effective therapeutic work with these children, it is crucial to consider their disturbance as affecting the network around them. Enabling the network to understand and process powerful feelings around the child enhances its self-reflective function, so crucial for thinking about the child's needs and emotional development.     

Why is test-restudy practice beneficial for memory? An evaluation of the mediator shift hypothesis

Although the memorial benefits of testing are well established empirically, the mechanisms underlying this benefit are not well understood. The authors evaluated the mediator shift hypothesis, which states that test-restudy practice is beneficial for memory because retrieval failures during practice allow individuals to evaluate the effectiveness of mediators and to shift from less effective to more effective mediators. Across a series of experiments, participants used a keyword encoding strategy to learn word pairs with test-restudy practice or restudy only. Robust testing effects were obtained in all experiments, and results supported predictions of the mediator shift hypothesis. First, a greater proportion of keyword shifts occurred during test-restudy practice versus restudy practice. Second, a greater proportion of keyword shifts occurred after retrieval failure trials versus retrieval success trials during test-restudy practice. Third, a greater proportion of keywords were recalled on a final keyword recall test after test-restudy versus restudy practice.     

Who gets a mentor? A longitudinal assessment of the rising star hypothesis

This study assessed the rising star hypothesis, which proposes that individuals who are on the fast track to career success are more likely to gain mentors than others. The study used a sample of employees who had never been mentored and examined the relationship between rising star attributes measured at Time 1 and the attainment of a mentor a year later. In support of the hypothesis, individuals who were on the fast-track for promotion, had higher advancement expectations, and engaged in more proactive career behaviors were more likely to gain a mentor than individuals lacking these attributes. Implications of these results for the theory, research and practice of mentoring are discussed.     

Keep or trade? An experimental study of the exchange paradox

The “exchange paradox”—also referred to in the literature by a variety of other names, notably the “two-envelopes problem”—is notoriously difficult, and experts are not all agreed as to its resolution. Some of the various expressions of the problem are open to more than one interpretation; some are stated in such a way that assumptions are required in order to fill in missing information that is essential to any resolution. In three experiments several versions of the problem were used, in each of which the information given was sufficient to determine an optimal choice strategy when it exists or to justify indifference regarding keeping or trading when such a strategy does not exist. College students who were presented with the various versions of the problem tended to base their choices on simple heuristics and to give little evidence of understanding the probabilistic implications of the differences in the problem statements.     

Are people changed by the experience of having an episode of depression? A further test of the scar hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to identify characteristics of individuals before and after their first depressive episode. Subjects were 49 older persons assessed before and after their first depressive episode on depression-related psychosocial variables. The control group consisted of 351 never-depressed individuals. Consistent with previous findings, patients were more likely to be younger, female, and mildly depressed both before and after the episode. In addition, they were more likely to be employed. Following an episode of depression, the recovered patients described their social skills and health as poorer and their interpersonal dependency as greater than the controls. However, on an experiment-wise basis, the number of significant differences were no greater than expected by chance. The stress activation model was examined but did not appreciably enhance the results. Results suggest that most of the psychosocial variables associated with depression are state dependent.     

Are seductive details seductive only when you think they are relevant? An experimental test of the moderating role of perceived relevance

We investigated whether seductive details (i.e., interesting but irrelevant adjuncts) are harmful to learning only when students (mistakenly) think that they are relevant. We therefore conducted a study in which participants (N = 86) learned either without seductive details (control condition) or with seductive details—in the latter case with or without being informed about the seductive details' irrelevance. In line with our hypotheses, only participants who were not informed about the irrelevance of seductive details revealed worse learning outcomes than those in the control condition, thereby revealing a seductive details effect. Extraneous cognitive load, but not perceived time pressure, mediated the negative effects of being uninformed about the irrelevance of seductive details on learning outcomes. Taken together, our results suggest that the perceived relevance of seductive details is a boundary condition of the seductive details effect.     

Are effect sizes and confidence levels problems for or solutions to the null hypothesis test?

Some have proposed that the null hypothesis significance test, as usually conducted using the t test of the difference between means, is an impediment to progress in psychology. To improve its prospects, using Neyman-Pearson confidence intervals and Cohen's standardized effect sizes, d, is recommended. The purpose of these approaches is to enable us to understand what can appropriately be said about the distances between the means and their reliability. Others have written extensively that these recommended strategies are highly interrelated and use identical information. This essay was written to remind us that the t test, based on the sample--not the true--standard deviation, does not apply solely to distance between means. The t test pertains to a much more ambiguous specification: the difference between samples, including sampling variations of the standard deviation.     

The self: Your own worst enemy? A test of the self-invoking trigger hypothesis

The self-invoking trigger hypothesis was proposed by Wulf and Lewthwaite [Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2010). Effortless motor learning? An external focus of attention enhances movement effectiveness and efficiency. In B. Bruya (Ed.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in attention and action (pp. 75–101). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press] as a mechanism underlying the robust effect of attentional focus on motor learning and performance. One component of this hypothesis, relevant beyond the attentional focus effect, suggests that causing individuals to access their self-schema will negatively impact their learning and performance of a motor skill. The purpose of the present two studies was to provide an initial test of the performance and learning aspects of the self-invoking trigger hypothesis by asking participants in one group to think about themselves between trial blocks—presumably activating their self-schema—to compare their performance and learning to that of a control group. In Experiment 1, participants performed 2 blocks of 10 trials on a throwing task. In one condition, participants were asked between blocks to think about their past throwing experience. While a control group maintained their performance across blocks, the self group's performance was degraded on the second block. In Experiment 2, participants were asked to practice a wiffleball hitting task on two separate days. Participants returned on a third day to perform retention and transfer tests without the self-activating manipulation. Results indicated that the self group learned the hitting task less effectively than the control group. The findings reported here provide initial support for the self-invoking trigger hypothesis.     

Who is my neighbor? A communitarian analysis of access to health care for immigrants

Immigrants lacking health insurance access the health care system through the emergency departments of non-profit hospitals. Because these persons lack health insurance, continued care can pose challenges to those institutions. I analyze the values of our health care institutions, utilizing a Walzerian approach that describes its appropriate sphere of justice. This particular sphere is dominated by a caring response to need. I suggest that the logic of this sphere would be best preserved by providing increased access to health insurance to this population. This access would marry the rights of these members of our community to access care to our responsibility to contribute to financing of the system. I close with some considerations on what it means to be a member of the community.     

Who Fights,Who Flees? An Integration of the LC4MP and Psychological Reactance Theory

ABSTRACT

This study tests the hypothesis that defensive message processing, like defensive behaviors in the real world, has two directions, fight-and-flight. The Limited Capacity Model of Motivated Mediated Message Processing (LC4MP) characterizes defensive message processing by increases in unpleasantness and arousal reports, and accelerated heart rate indicating either a focus on internal processing (internal thoughts) or the active withdrawal of cognitive resources from processing highly arousing and unpleasant media messages. However, the LC4MP has not included direct measures that allow discrimination between fight-and-flight responses. Psychological reactance theory (PRT) predicts defensive responses including anger and counterarguments (reactance) when media messages threaten viewers’ freedom and autonomy. We hypothesized that PRT provides the LC4MP with the appropriate measures (anger and counterarguments) needed to discriminate fight-or-flight responses. Results supported this prediction. Participants (N = 49 adult-smokers) high in defensive and low in appetitive reactivity (risk-avoiders) withdrew from the message (fled: characterized by low anger and counterarguments) while those high in appetitive and low in defensive reactivity (risk-takers) experienced reactance (fought: characterized by high anger and counterarguments) in response to freedom threatening antitobacco messages that are highly arousing and unpleasant. Moreover, both reactance and message withdrawal yielded the same cognitive, emotional, and physiological responses predicted by the LC4MP as indicators of defensive message processing. Theoretical and message design recommendations are discussed.     

Do extraverts get more bang for the buck? Refining the affective-reactivity hypothesis of extraversion

One of the most robust observations in personality and emotion research is the finding that extraverts are happier than introverts. Some theorists have attributed this to differential reactivity of the brain reward system, which is central to many biologically inspired models of extraversion. This affective-reactivity hypothesis, which suggests that extraverts should be more susceptible to the induction of positive affect, has so far received very mixed empirical support. In this article, we consider a more biologically plausible account of extraverts' affective-reactivity. Over 5 experiments, we demonstrate that extraverts show greater affective-reactivity only in response to clearly appetitive stimuli and situations (e.g., where rewards are being pursued). Conversely, after merely pleasant stimuli and situations (without any reward-approach element), extraverts and introverts respond similarly. We also show that it is specifically activated affect (e.g., feelings of alertness), rather than pleasantly valenced affect (e.g., feelings of contentment), that characterizes the affective-reactivity of extraverts. Such reactions may potentially facilitate the reward-seeking behavior associated with extraversion, but they seem unlikely to explain the broadly happy disposition of extraverts.     

An empirical test of five prominent explanations for the black–white academic performance gap

The viability of five prominent explanations for the black–white performance gap (“academic engagement,” “cultural capital,” “social capital,” “school quality” and “biased treatment”) is examined using NELS data and a LISREL model that adjusts for clustering of students within schools. Empirical models have typically assessed these factors individually—a practice that probably fosters overestimation of their explanatory power. School quality and biased treatment emerge as the primary explanations for black–white high school test performance differentials. Access to better-quality schools and receipt of more stimulating interpersonal “signals” from gatekeepers ensue from racial (and socioeconomic) privilege. Enhanced test performance in turn ensues from these resources. In essence, the explanations for the racial gap that place more emphasis on what black and white students “bring to” high school (i.e., specific levels of engagement, cultural and social capital), seem less consequential to performance differentials than “what happens to” them when they get there (i.e., quality of education provided, and race-contingent treatment received).     

Who Uses the Cost-Benefit Rules of Choice? Implications for the Normative Status of Microeconomic Theory

We find three factors to be associated with use of cost-benefit rules in everyday decisions. These are effectiveness in achieving desirable life outcomes, intelligence, and training in economics. We argue that these empirical findings support the claim that cost-benefit reasoning is normative.     

Individual risk factors or group dynamics? An investigation of the scapegoat hypothesis of victimization in school classes

Three studies are reported, which attempt operational and constructive replications of a report by Schuster (1999 Schuster, B. 1999. Outsiders at school: The prevalence of bullying and its relation with social status. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2: 175–190. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]), supporting a scapegoating model of victimization. Peer nominations of victims, and bullies, were obtained from pupils aged 8 to 13 years in 67 classes. In only 27 classes (40%) were one or two victims identified by Schuster's original criterion, and fewer when using a criterion of approximately one standard deviation above the mean. The distribution of victims over classes approached that expected by a chance model of individual risk factors, possibly moderated (or exacerbated) by the number of bullies in a class, as well as the broader social context within which such risk factors operate. The findings do not support Schuster's scapegoating theory of victimization; the implications for school-based intervention are considered.     

Who shall lead? An integrative personality approach to the study of the antecedents of status in informal social organizations

The effects of personality traits, motives, and leadership identity claims on the attainment of status in informal, social organizations were assessed in several organizations using multiple indices of status. The power motive Hope for Power was predictive of holding executive offices. Extraversion and Conscientiousness predicted peer-ratings of social influence. Extraversion, Emotional Stability, and Dominance were related to subjective beliefs of personal power and influence. Seeing oneself as a leader mediated the effects of personality traits and motives on subjective sense of power and attaining social influence, but not achieving formal office. Together, these findings offer an integrated look at the unique relationships between personality and status attainment.