THE USE OF A VERBAL REPRIMAND TO DECREASE RUMINATION IN A CHILD WITH AUTISM

After a pre‐treatment screening analysis suggested that rumination exhibited by a boy with autism occurred in the absence of social consequences, we evaluated the effect of a verbal reprimand contingent on the target behavior via a reversal design. The reprimand reduced rumination to near‐zero levels; we then thinned the reprimand schedule and rumination remained infrequent. Follow‐up data collected 6, 12, and 18 months after initial treatment suggested that intervention effects were maintained. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Sexually Explicit Media and Sexual Risk Behavior in a Sample of Men Who Have Sex with Men in Norway

The aim of this study was to explore the association between the consumption of sexually explicit media (SEM) depicting condom and non-condom use and HIV/STI-related sexual risk behavior among men who have sex with men (MSM) in Norway. We also explored whether the association between SEM consumption and STI-related sexual risk behavior is mediated by men’s sexual self-esteem and/or condom use self-efficacy. A cross-sectional online survey study was carried out in Norway in 2012. The final sample comprised 529 MSM in Norway. There was a bivariate association between the use of SEM picturing condom use and less STI-related sexual risk behavior. Further, the association between SEM consumption and sexual risk behavior was mediated by condom use self-efficacy. However, SEM did not influence sexual risk behavior via sexual self-esteem. The results offer important cross-cultural validation of recent comparative data from the US and may be used to promote HIV/STI prevention, in the sense that the actors in SEM may serve as role models in managing condom use in sexual contexts.     

Whose idea is it anyway? The importance of reputation in acknowledgement

Six‐year‐old children negatively evaluate plagiarizers just as adults do (Olson & Shaw, 2011), but why do they dislike plagiarizers? Children may think plagiarism is wrong because plagiarizing negatively impacts other people's reputations. We investigated this possibility by having 6‐ to 9‐year‐old children evaluate people who shared their own or other people's ideas (stories). In Experiment 1, we found that children consider it acceptable to retell someone else's story if the source is given credit for their story (improving the source's reputation), but not if the reteller claims credit for the story (steals credit away from someone else). Experiments 2 and 3 showed that children do not consider it bad to lie by giving someone else credit for one's own good story (improving someone else's reputation), but do consider it bad to give someone else credit for one's own bad story (improving one's own reputation at the expense of someone else's). Experiment 4 demonstrated that children think it is equally bad to take credit for someone else's idea for oneself as it is to take someone else's idea and give credit to someone else, suggesting that children dislike when others take credit away from someone else, regardless of whether or not it improves the plagiarizer's reputation. Our results suggest that children dislike plagiarism because it negatively affects others' reputations by taking credit away from them.     

When do women respond against discrimination? Exploring factors of subtlety,form, and focus

We examined the personal‐group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD), the tendency for women to recognize that others encounter sexism while simultaneously minimizing their own personal experiences with sexism, and the degree to which it (a) applies to all manifestations of discrimination, and (b) extends beyond perceptions of discrimination to taking action against it. Our findings replicated the PGDD when it comes to perceptions of discrimination, but this effect was reversed for behavioral action such that women were more likely to take action against discrimination when it was directed at them personally. We also disentangled the factors of subtlety (subtle vs. overt) and form (formal vs. interpersonal) by showing that women can reliably distinguish between these factors when determining their reactions to discrimination.     

How to Be an Ethical Expressivist

Expressivism promises an illuminating account of the nature of normative judgment. But worries about the details of expressivist semantics have led many to doubt whether expressivism's putative advantages can be secured. Drawing on insights from linguistic semantics and decision theory, I develop a novel framework for implementing an expressivist semantics that I call ordering expressivism. I argue that by systematically interpreting the orderings that figure in analyses of normative terms in terms of the basic practical attitude of conditional weak preference, the expressivist can explain the semantic properties of normative sentences in terms of the logical properties of that attitude. Expressivism's problems with capturing the logical relations among normative sentences can be reduced to the familiar, more tractable problem of explaining certain coherence constraints on preferences. Particular attention is given to the interpretation of wide‐scope negation. The proposed solution is also extended to other types of embedded contexts—most notably, disjunctions.     

Exploring Lawyer Misconduct: An Examination of the Self-Regulation Process

Although white-collar professionals are often held in high esteem, sometimes persons in privileged positions engage in misconduct. Unfortunately, very little is known about the correlates associated with professional misconduct and even less is known about the sanctioning process among lawyers who are licensed by state bar associations and therefore subject to the bar rules regulating their professional conduct. We examine 213 complaints filed in one fiscal year with the Florida Bar, alleging attorney misconduct and evaluate the factors that influence whether the complaint continued through, or was discarded at, each stage of the self-regulated grievance process. Using selection models that examine both the staff’s decision to send a case forward to the grievance committee as well as the grievance committee’s recommendation about sanctioning the lawyer, results show that both legal and extra-legal variables are related to these two processes.