Long Working Hours and Well-being: What We Know,What We Do Not Know,and What We Need to Know

Despite a widespread belief in both the academic and public policy literatures that working long hours is deleterious to health and well-being, our critical review of this large and complex literature fails to support a robust direct causal effect of work hours on either physical or mental well-being outcomes. Large-scale epidemiological studies, many of which are prospective and include objective health outcome measures, support a statistically significant association between long work hours and coronary heart disease and depression, but the effect sizes are very small. Moreover, there is an absence of true longitudinal studies that assess the consistency of working long hours over time and its relationship to well-being. Our review suggests that the effects of working long hours are nuanced in that they may vary considerably for different working populations based on gender, age, working conditions, and other factors. Primary and meta-analytic studies suggest that such moderator effects are plausible, yet rigorous testing of these remains to be done. We conclude with suggestions for specific moderator effects that seem worth investigating in future research.     

Living Danger: On Not Knowing What We Know

This paper contextualizes the struggle around the American Psychological Association's ethical standards regarding psychologists' participation in abusive interrogations of detainees by examining the psychological and political meanings of living in a society in which the state assumes the right to torture. To highlight the implications of authoritarian trends in America's post-9/11 political culture, I offer an interdisciplinary psychoanalytic analysis of the extreme social situation of the Argentine Dirty War, in which torture was used by the military government not as a tactic to make detainees talk but as a strategy to silence an entire population. I explore the defense mechanism of disavowal and its use by both perpetrators and victims in ways that contributed to sustaining authoritarian rule in Argentina. I suggest that it is within the legitimate arena of psychoanalysis to consider the psychological meanings of patients' experience in the larger social order. I argue for a psychoanalytic project that does not disavow the centrality of social reality in the formation of subjectivity and for a clinical model that provides a potential space in which the subject can develop a critical psyche able to co-construct a more democratic political as well as personal life.     

Two- and 3-Year-Olds Know What Others Have and Have Not Heard

Recent studies have established that even infants can determine what others know based on previous visual experience. In the current study, we investigated whether 2- and 3-year-olds know what others know based on previous auditory experience. A child and an adult heard the sound of one object together, but only the child heard the sound of another (target) object. When later the sounds of both objects were played simultaneously, the adult reacted with surprise and excitement (“Oh, listen, what is that?”). In response, both 24- and 36-month-olds directed the adult's attention to the target more often than chance and more often than in a control condition in which the adult had heard neither sound. These results indicate that by 24 months of age, children's understanding of others' knowledge and ignorance is not limited to the visual domain but extends across perceptual domains.     

What Peeping Tom Did Wrong

Voyeurism seems creepy. This paper considers whether these feelings are well-founded. It identifies a variety of ethically troubling features, including harmful consequences, deceit, and the violation of various religious, legal, and conventional norms. Voyeurism is something of a moral misdemeanor that seems worrisome when associated with these other failings. However, because voyeurism remains troubling even in the absence of harm or deceit, we must pay special attention to the ways complex social conventions can be used to show disrespect for others. The discussion centers on the famous case of Lady Godiva and Peeping Tom, but much of the analysis applies to voyeurism more generally.     

What is Working,What is Not,and What We Need to Know: a Meta-Analytic Review of Business Ethics Instruction

Requirements for business ethics education and organizational ethics trainings mark an important step in encouraging ethical behavior among business students and professionals. However, the lack of specificity in these guidelines as to how, what, and where business ethics should be taught has led to stark differences in approaches and content. The present effort uses meta-analytic procedures to examine the effectiveness of current approaches across organizational ethics trainings and business school courses. to provide practical suggestions for business ethics interventions and research. Thus, the primary questions driving this research are as follows: (1) what course characteristics moderate the effectiveness of ethics instruction?, and (2) have ethics education and training efforts improved? Findings suggest that professional, focused, and workshop-based training programs are especially effective for improving business ethics. However, results also reveal considerable problems with many of the criteria used to evaluate the effectiveness of business ethics interventions. Practical suggestions for course design and evaluation in business ethics efforts are discussed along with future research needs.     

Psychotherapy With African American Men: What We Know and What We Need to Know

African American men are at an increasingly high risk of experiencing psychological disturbances. Strategies for establishing effective therapeutic relationships with these clients are provided in the literature. Notably absent are empirical data pertaining to the effectiveness of psychotherapy with African American men. This article reviews the literature on psychotherapy and proposes an agenda for the next decade of research with African American male clients.     

What You Know When You Know an Answer to a Question

A significant argument for the claim that knowing‐wh is knowing‐that, implicit in much of the literature, including Stanley and Williamson (2001), is spelt out and challenged. The argument includes the assumption that a subject's state of knowing‐wh is constituted by their involvement in a relation with an answer to a question. And it involves the assumption that answers to questions are propositions or facts. One of Lawrence Powers’ counterexamples to the conjunction of these two assumptions is developed, responses to it are rebutted, and the possibility of rejecting the second rather than the first of these assumptions is explored briefly.     

Postmodernism: What One Needs to Know

This essay is an introduction to postmodernism and deconstruction as they relate to the special challenges of scholarship and teaching in the science and religion multidiscipline.     

Thermodynamics: What One Needs to Know

Thermodynamics is the foundation of many of the topics of interest in the religion-science dialogue. Here a nonmathematical outline of the principles of thermodynamics is presented, providing a historical and conceptually understandable development that can serve teachers from disciplines other than physics. The contributions of Gibbs to both classical and rational thermodynamics, emphasizing the importance of the ensemble in statistical mechanics, are discussed. The seminal ideas of Boltzmann on statistical mechanics are contrasted to those of Gibbs in a discussion of the microscopic interpretation of the second law. The role of information theory is discussed, and the modern ideas of Prigogine and nonequilibrium are outlined in some detail with further reference to the second law. Implications for our interaction with God are considered.     

What Mary Did Yesterday: Reflections on Knowledge-wh

Reductionists about knowledge- wh hold that " s knows- wh " (e.g. "John knows who stole his car") is reducible to "there is a proposition p such that s knows that p , and p answers the indirect question of the wh -clause." Anti-reductionists hold that " s knows- wh " is reducible to " s knows that p , as the true answer to the indirect question of the wh -clause." I argue that both of these positions are defective. I then offer a new analysis of knowledge- wh as a special kind of de re knowledge.