Perceived in‐group threat as a factor moderating the influence of in‐group norms on discrimination against foreigners

Within the framework of an intergroup relations paradigm, three studies analysed the role of in‐group threat in intergroup discrimination and the influence of in‐group norms on intergroup discrimination. The first study showed that perceived socio‐economic threat underlies Swiss nationals' prejudice and discrimination toward foreigners in Switzerland. The second and third studies experimentally tested the hypotheses, first, that variations in perception of in‐group threat will produce change in initial discrimination, and, second, that the influence of an in‐group norm (pro‐ vs. anti‐ discriminatory) is moderated by the perception of in‐group threat. In support of these predictions, results of both studies indicated that discrimination was reduced when perceived in‐group threat was low. However, the anti‐discriminatory in‐group norm reduced discrimination only when perceived in‐group threat was low. No influence was observed for the pro‐discriminatory in‐group norm. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY HAZARD REDUCTION THROUGH PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK

A “feedback package” system, designed to prevent occupational accidents and to fit directly into the normal operations of an industrial organization, was analyzed. Eighteen hazardous conditions in six production departments were assessed during seven observation sessions over a 12-week period, plus four follow-up observations over 4 months. The “feedback package” was presented in multiple baseline fashion, across subjects (department supervisors). It consisted of presenting the supervisor with copies of observational data, accompanied by a note which congratulated good practices and suggested ways for improving safety conditions, along with occasional comments from a senior executive. The results indicated that during the feedback phase, hazard rates were lower and less variable than during the baseline phase. Baseline data were highly variable with peaks ranging from 20 to 55 hazards per department. Following intervention, hazard frequencies dropped by 60%, averaged across departments, with decreases ranging from 29% to 88%. During treatment, data stabilized, with the highest frequency reaching 33. A modified feedback system was implemented by the organization following termination of the study, validating the assumption that such a system would tend to maintain.     

An Examination of Concurrent and Incremental Validity of Four Mindfulness Scales

General consensus among psychologists supports the beneficial effects of mindfulness in the treatment of a wide range of clinical conditions such as personality, mood, and anxiety disorders. Several scales used to assess this psychological construct, mainly rooted in Eastern traditions, are currently available to researchers and clinicians. However, the conceptualization and measurement of mindfulness has been considerably diverse. The present study examines the concurrent and incremental validity of four scales: the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS), the Toronto Mindfulness Scale (TMS), the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), and the Langer Mindfulness Scale (LMS). Two independent samples of 176 adults and 397 students, respectively, were recruited. With few exceptions, results were consistent across the two samples and indicated that measures based on an Eastern conceptualization of mindfulness (TMS, PHLMS, and FFMQ) show a different pattern of association with the chosen outcomes compared to the LMS, which is based on a Western conceptualization. Overall, the PHLMS showed the strongest predictive effects and the LMS the weakest in terms of both number of predicted criteria and average effect size. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Normalization of Racism and Moral Responsibility: Against the Exculpatory Stance

In this article, we take the case of racism in contemporary Italy as a starting point for a discussion about moral responsibility for racism in cases where ignorance is involved. We focus on the issue of the normalization of racism and its contribution to different forms of ignorance to assess the extent to which these might potentially mitigate judgments of responsibility for racism, thereby grounding an Exculpatory Stance. After illustrating the phenomenon of the normalization of racism and offering an outline of how the normalization of racism contributes to ignorance, we argue against the Exculpatory Stance by appealing to a socially situated variety of capacitarian approach to the epistemic condition of moral responsibility. This approach provides us with the tools to claim that the moral ignorance favored by the normalization of racism does not mitigate judgments of individual responsibility. Finally, we point out that the interdependence of individual responsibility and the social environment is such that, in addition to backward-looking individual responsibilities for racism, there are also forward-looking, both individual and shared, responsibilities to counter racism in its various manifestations and the increased risk of moral ignorance connected to its normalization.     

An antidote to illusory inferences

The mental model theory predicts that reasoners normally represent what is true, but not what is false. One consequence is that reasoners should make “illusory” inferences, which are compelling but invalid. Three experiments confirmed the existence of such illusions based on disjunctions of disjunctions. They also established a successful antidote to them: Reasoners are much less likely to succumb to illusions if the inferences concern disjunctions of physical objects (alternative newspaper advertisements) rather disjunctions of the truth values of assertions. The results shed light both on the cause of the illusions and on the current controversy among different theories of reasoning.     

Mechanisms and the Evidence Hierarchy

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) makes use of explicit procedures for grading evidence for causal claims. Normally, these procedures categorise evidence of correlation produced by statistical trials as better evidence for a causal claim than evidence of mechanisms produced by other methods. We argue, in contrast, that evidence of mechanisms needs to be viewed as complementary to, rather than inferior to, evidence of correlation. In this paper we first set out the case for treating evidence of mechanisms alongside evidence of correlation in explicit protocols for evaluating evidence. Next we provide case studies which exemplify the ways in which evidence of mechanisms complements evidence of correlation in practice. Finally, we put forward some general considerations as to how the two sorts of evidence can be more closely integrated by EBM.