Measures of Mentoring,Department Climate,and Graduate Student Preparedness in the Responsible Conduct of Psychological Research

Drawing upon two independent national samples of 201 and 241 psychology graduate students, this article describes the development and psychometric evaluation of 4 Web-based student self-report scales tapping student socialization in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) with human participants. The Mentoring the Responsible Conduct of Research Scale (MRCR) is composed of 2 subscales assessing RCR instruction and modeling by research mentors. The 2 subscales of the RCR Department Climate Scale (RCR-DC) assess RCR department policies and faculty and student RCR practices. The RCR Preparedness scale (RCR-P) and the RCR Field Integrity scale (RCR-FI) measure respectively students' confidence in their ability to conduct research responsibly and their belief in the RCR integrity of psychology as a discipline. Factor analysis, coefficient alphas, correlations, and multiple regression analyses demonstrated each of the scales had good internal consistency and concurrent and construct validity.     

Existential Beliefs,Social Satisfaction,and Well-Being Among Catholic,Jewish, and Protestant Older Adults

Religiousness, spirituality, and existential beliefs are important sources of well-being yet neither their specific effects nor group variation in them is well understood. In a sample of more than 1,000 older adults, we found that certain existential beliefs or concerns (fear of God, death anxiety, belief in life after death, concerns about being mourned) are correlates of well-being in older adults and differed across religious groups. Protestants reported better well-being than Catholics and Jews. Differences in social satisfaction and existential concerns partially explained these differences, which were not explained by demographics. These results suggest the importance of studying well-being and religion in a way that appreciates the differences among religious groups and further of looking at the specific beliefs of different groups.     

Comparing Delay Discounting Rates When Using the Fill-in-the-Blank and Multiple-Choice Methods

Several methods have been devised to measure delay discounting. The present study recruited university students to complete a delay-discounting task involving five different outcomes (finding a dating partner, free cigarettes, winning $100,000, being owed $100,000, and obtaining one's ideal body image) that was administered using either the fill-in-the blank (FITB) or multiple-choice (MC) method. Results showed that the different administration methods sometimes produced significantly different rates of discounting, the direction of which differed by outcome. Hyperbolic discounting and the area under the discounting curve were nearly always significantly correlated when the FITB method was used but were never significantly correlated when the MC method was used. Discounting across the five outcomes produced a two-factor solution when the FITB data were factor analyzed. The MC data were described by a one-factor solution. The present results illustrate that procedural variables have a potentially profound impact on delay-discounting data, and generalizing from studies on delay discounting should be done with caution until those variables are fully understood.     

Sequential Aiming with Two Limbs and the One-Target Advantage

Movement times to the first target in a 2-target sequence are typically slower than in 1-target aiming tasks. The 1-target movement time advantage has been shown to emerge regardless of hand preference, the hand used, the amount of practice, and the availability of visual feedback. The authors tested central and peripheral explanations of the 1-target advantage, as postulated by the movement integration hypothesis, by asking participants to perform single-target movements, 2-target movements with 1 limb, and 2-target movements in which they switched limbs at the first target. Reaction time and movement time data showed a 1-target advantage that was similar for both 1- and 2-limb sequential aiming movements. This outcome demonstrates that the processes underlying the increase in movement time to the 1st target in 2-target sequences are not specific to the limb, suggesting that the 1-target advantage originates at a central rather than a peripheral level.     

Factorial validity of the Mental Toughness Questionnaire-48

The purpose of this study was to assess the factorial validity of the Mental Toughness Questionnaire-48 (Clough, Earle, & Sewell, 2002). In total, 8207 participants (male n = 4019, female n = 3922, unspecified = 266) aged between 16 and 68 years (M = 37.00, SD = 12.09) completed the MTQ48. Model fit was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory structural equation modeling, in addition to the robust maximum likelihood estimator. Overall, our results support the factorial validity of the MTQ48 and indicate that the MTQ48 is a robust psychometric measure of mental toughness. Along with previous data, which supports the internal validity of the MTQ48 in addition to results of this study, it would appear that the MTQ48 is an acceptable method of assessing mental toughness.     

Evaluating the effect of educational media exposure on aggression in early childhood

Preschool-aged children (M = 42.44 months-old, SD = 8.02) participated in a short-term longitudinal study investigating the effect of educational media exposure on social development (i.e., aggression and prosocial behavior) using multiple informants and methods. As predicted, educational media exposure significantly predicted increases in both observed and teacher reported relational aggression across time. Follow-up analyses showed that educational media exposure also significantly predicted increases in parent reported relational aggression across more than a two year period. Results replicate and extend prior research that has demonstrated links between educational media exposure and relational aggression, but not physical aggression, during early childhood.     

On the relative effectiveness of affect regulation strategies: A meta-analysis

To examine the effectiveness of various affect regulation strategies and categories of affect regulation strategies, a meta-analysis was conducted. Results generally indicate that reappraisal (d=0.65) and distraction (d=0.46 for all studies; d=0.95 for studies with a negative or no affect induction) are the most effective regulation/repair strategies, producing the largest hedonic shift in affect. The effectiveness of different categories of regulation/repair strategies depended on the valence of the preceding affect induction. Results also indicate that stronger affect inductions and the use of bivariate affect measures will provide a richer understanding of affect regulation. Additionally, not all specific strategies or categories of strategies have been researched and the impact of individual differences on affect regulation has received relatively little attention. Finally, results indicate that control conditions in affect regulation research may not provide a valid point for comparison, as they facilitate effective affect repair.     

Threat ≠ prevention,challenge ≠ promotion: The impact of threat,challenge and regulatory focus on attention to negative stimuli

The purpose of the current experiment was to distinguish between the impact of strategic and affective forms of gain- and loss-related motivational states on the attention to negative stimuli. On the basis of the counter-regulation principle and regulatory focus theory, we predicted that individuals would attend more to negative than to neutral stimuli in a prevention focus and when experiencing challenge, but not in a promotion focus and under threat. In one experiment (N = 88) promotion, prevention, threat, or challenge states were activated through a memory task, and a subsequent dot probe task was administered. As predicted, those in the prevention focus and challenge conditions had an attentional bias towards negative words, but those in promotion and threat conditions did not. These findings provide support for the idea that strategic mindsets (e.g., regulatory focus) and hot emotional states (e.g., threat vs. challenge) differently affect the processing of affective stimuli.