Sibling loss, guilt and reparation: A case study

Psychoanalysis has shown that the death of a sibling is likely to have a long-standing impact on the character development of a surviving child. Among common adult manifestations are the identifi cation with the deceased sibling, repetitive self-punitive behaviors, and the development of masochistic trends. In treatment, these patients can become entrenched in a negative therapeutic reaction that compromises the outcome of their analysis. In this paper, the author discusses the analysis of a woman with a history of losses that included the loss of a sibling at an early age. A critical part of the treatment focused on helping this patient overcome a negative therapeutic reaction that emerged as she became aware of hostile and vengeful fantasies, not only as they related to her deceased brother but, more importantly, as they related to her parents.     

“I know you're kidding”: Relationship closeness enhances positive perceptions of teasing

Feeling close in a relationship may enhance perceptions of teasing within that relationship. In Study 1, participants recalled instances of teasing—as both teaser and target—in close and nonclose relationships. Participants perceived teases in close relationships more positively and better intentioned than those in nonclose relationships, as both teaser and target. The discrepancy between teasers and targets in perceptions of intent was also reduced by felt closeness. In Study 2, interaction partner closeness was manipulated and a tease was staged. Teases delivered by a close (vs. nonclose) partner were perceived as more positive and better intentioned. Each study has limitations but their methods complement each other. Together they provide convergent evidence that relationship closeness increases positive perceptions of teasing.     

Preference and similarity: affective and cognitive judgement?

This study is a test of some implications of the distinction between cognitive and affective processes proposed by Zajonc (1980), applied to preference and similarity judgements. Preference and similarity data were obtained for male and female subjects judging male and female cinema actors. Preference judgements were assumed to be an example of primarily affective judgement, similarity was assumed to be mainly cognitive. It was furthermore assumed that men when judging women and women judging men should be more affectively involved than the opposite cases. It was predicted (a) that making preference judgements would be more confident, (b) that such judgements would be more stable, (c) that preference judgements would show a more simple structure than similarity judgements, and (d) that the difference between similarities and preferences with regard to the level of complexity indicated by the ratings should be especially large with large affective involvement. In support of Zajonc's model, preference judgements were given with more confidence by the subjects and they were more stable over time. There was a tendency for similarity spaces to be more complex for affectively involved subjects while the opposite occurred for preference ratings. Women seemed to react more negatively to the similarity task than men did.     

Mapping and/or Discovering Meaning in Family Therapy: An E-Mail Conversation

Editor's Note: Because of the provocative and stimulating nature of the study reported on by Steven Kogan and Jerry Gale in their article "Decentering Therapy," I have invited one of our Advisory Editors, Chris Beels, to provide some comments about the study and its implications. However, rather than use the standard for mat of a formal "Commentary," followed by an "Authors' Response," Beels, Kogan, and Gale have instead carried out a series of e-mail exchanges, with reactions and responses going back and forth in the form of a dialogue. What follows is a slightly edited version of their conversation. As you will see, this exchange has afforded Beels, Kogan, and Gale the opportunity not only to critique each other's ideas, but also to raise questions and to puzzle together about the linkages that might be forged between the Kogan and Gale study and earlier therapy process research carried out by Beels using Scheflen's context analysis techniques. The use of a conversation format seemed more consonant with the research being discussed, research that urges a stance of openness and curiosity rather than formal hypothesis testing and closure. Hence my decision to endorse this experiment in "commentary as conversation," rather than "commentary as debate." What follows is the first three rounds of this "conversation," with the "roughess" of ordinary e-mail communications retained, but with some minor editing in order to facilitate clarity and narrative flow .     

WORK ENGAGEMENT: A QUANTITATIVE REVIEW AND TEST OF ITS RELATIONS WITH TASK AND CONTEXTUAL PERFORMANCE

Many researchers have concerns about work engagement's distinction from other constructs and its theoretical merit. The goals of this study were to identify an agreed‐upon definition of engagement, to investigate its uniqueness, and to clarify its nomological network of constructs. Using a conceptual framework based on Macey and Schneider (2008; Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3–30), we found that engagement exhibits discriminant validity from, and criterion related validity over, job attitudes. We also found that engagement is related to several key antecedents and consequences. Finally, we used meta‐analytic path modeling to test the role of engagement as a mediator of the relation between distal antecedents and job performance, finding support for our conceptual framework. In sum, our results suggest that work engagement is a useful construct that deserves further attention.     

Social Biases and Solutions for Procedural Objectivity

An empirically sensitive formulation of the norms of transformative criticism must recognize that even public and shared standards of evaluation can be implemented in ways that unintentionally perpetuate and reproduce forms of social bias that are epistemically detrimental. Helen Longino's theory can explain and redress such social bias by treating peer evaluations as hypotheses based on data and by requiring a kind of perspectival diversity that bears, not on the content of the community's knowledge claims, but on the beliefs and norms of the culture of the knowledge community itself. To illustrate how socializing cognition can bias evaluations, we focus on peer‐review practices, with some discussion of peer‐review practices in philosophy. Data include responses to surveys by editors from general philosophy journals, as well as analyses of reviews and editorial decisions for the 2007 Cognitive Science Society Conference.