The Convergent Validity of Four Burnout Measures in a Chinese Sample: A Confirmatory Factor‐Analytic Approach

The purpose of this paper is to study the convergent validity of the four most widely used burnout measures in a sample of Chinese nurses (N= 717). First, Structural Equation Modeling was used to investigate the factor structure of scores produced by the Maslach Burnout Inventory‐General Survey (MBI‐GS), the Burnout Measure (BM), the Shirom‐Melamed Burnout Measure (SMBM), and the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI). Next, several competing models were tested to investigate the convergent validity of these four burnout instruments. The final results suggest that burnout is best conceived of as a multidimensional construct consisting of exhaustion and withdrawal, which are two related but conceptually distinct aspects. In addition, positively phrased items should be dropped from burnout measures for they constitute a separate factor that is considered to be an artifact.     

Perceptual learning in maze discriminations

In Experiment 1, rats were trained on a discrimination between rubber- and sandpaper-covered arms of a maze after one group had been pre-exposed to these intra-maze cues. Pre-exposure facilitated subsequent discrimination learning, unless the discrimination was made easier by adding further discriminative stimuli, when it now significantly retarded learning. In Experiment 2, rats were trained on an extra-maze spatial discrimination, again after one group, but not another, had been pre-exposed to the extra-maze landmarks. Here too, pre-exposure facilitated subsequent discrimination learning, unless the discrimination was made substantially easier by arranging that the two arms between which rats had to choose were always separated by 135°. The results of both experiments can be explained by supposing that perceptual learning depends on the presence of features common to S+ and S-.     

Book Review: Cultural Psychotherapy: Working with Culture in the Clinical Encounter. By Karen M. Seeley. New Jersey: Jason Aronson,Inc, 2000, 266 pp., ISBN 0-7657-0224-X

Pastoral Psychology -     

Normative Practical Reasoning: Christian Pillar

In the first part I discuss the thesis, advanced by John Broome, that intentions are normatively required by all-things-considered judgments about what one ought to do. I endorse this thesis, but remain sceptical about Broome's programme of grounding the correctness of reasoning in formal relations between contents of mental states. After discussing objections to the thesis, I concentrate in the second part on the relation between rational action and rational intention. I distinguish between content-related and attitude-related reasons for propositional attitudes like believing, wanting, and intending something. The former appeal to features of the content of the propositional attitude they are reasons for, the latter would be reasons for a propositional attitude because of features of the propositional attitude as a whole, for example the feature of its being beneficial to believe or to want that p . I try to show that the common philosophical reaction to attitude-related reasons, namely to claim that they are merely content-related reasons in disguise, is mistaken. In its most extreme form such a reaction would fail to respect the first-person character of reasoning which manifests itself in, among other things, the fact that a Moore-sentence and its analogue for intentions cannot be a conclusion of reasoning. In the third part I argue that there are attitude-related reasons for intentions, and, in showing how they influence practical deliberation, I find that their existence can be rendered compatible with the thesis that it is rational to intend to do what one thinks one ought to do.