心理治疗效果评定量表(简式)在中、德应用的心理测量学研究(英文)

419名中国和德国被试参加了本研究,并回答了若干简式心理健康量表。所选的这套量表能对心理治疗不同阶段的效果(Howard’s阶段模型:重新认识期-转变期-康复期)进行测查。本研究目的在于考察这些简式量表能否用于认知-行为治疗跨文化培训项目中的质量管理。结果显示,这些量表在中德两种文化背景下都有很高的信度和效度(聚合效度和敏感性)。尽管项目间的高相关似乎提示心理健康模型只有一个维度,但探索性因素和理论分析则更支持心理健康是一个分为8个亚维度的模型,其中每个亚维度或者与基础情绪、或者与社会性情感相连关联。本文最后就研究结果及其对心理治疗质量控制的意义进行了详细讨论。     

The empowering potential of intergroup leadership: How intergroup leadership predicts psychological empowerment through intergroup relational identification and resources

As work increasingly transcends organizational boundaries, employee psychological empowerment benefits from resources provided by others outside of the employee's own team, department, or organization. These intergroup collaborations, however, may be inhibited by social identity and social categorization processes, so that the empowerment potential of these relations remains largely untapped. In this study (N = 213), we demonstrate that intergroup leadership is linked to employee psychological empowerment via intergroup relational identification and access to resources. In this way, this study demonstrates the empowering potential of intergroup leadership and intergroup relational identification for employees who collaborate across group barriers. We finish this paper by discussing the main implications for both empowerment and intergroup leadership theory, suggesting fruitful avenues for future research and highlighting the practical value for those who are motivated to increase psychological empowerment among boundary-spanning employees.     

Cut-free common knowledge

Starting off from the infinitary system for common knowledge over multi-modal epistemic logic presented in [L. Alberucci, G. Jäger, About cut elimination for logics of common knowledge, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 133 (2005) 73–99], we apply the finite model property to “finitize” this deductive system. The result is a cut-free, sound and complete sequent calculus for common knowledge.     

Zur Ontogenese aggressiven Verhaltens

The present article reviews current etiological approaches to the origin of violence. In a wide range of empirical research ample results have been found on the causes of violence in many different disciplines like social sciences, psychology, psychotherapy, and neurobiology/neurophysiology. However, an integrative view is still missing. Current knowledge suggests a complex interaction of genetic, physiological, developmental psychological, personality-related, familial and social factors in shaping an individuals’ disposition to engage in physical violence. Accordingly, interventions for reducing violence have to be multidimensional in nature.     

Non-Monotonic Reasoning from an Evolution-Theoretic Perspective: Ontic, Logical and Cognitive Foundations

In the first part I argue that normic laws are the phenomenological laws of evolutionary systems. If this is true, then intuitive human reasoning should be fit in reasoning from normic laws. In the second part I show that system P is a tool for reasoning with normic laws which satisfies two important evolutionary standards: it is probabilistically reliable, and it has rules of low complexity. In the third part I finally report results of an experimental study which demonstrate that intuitive human reasoning is in well accord with basic argument patterns of system P.     

Interaktionelle Methode und übertragungsfokussierte Psychotherapie

The psychoanalytic interactional therapy proposed by Heigl-Evers and the transference-focused psychotherapy (TFP) suggested by Kernberg are two established methods for the treatment of patients with personality disorders in general, and especially of Borderline patiens. These approaches are often compared with each other due to several important similarities we may consider as specific for those disorders. They include among others the active involvement of the therapist, the use of clarifications and confrontations, a greater attention to the setting of the treatment, and the working in the “here and now.” According to current literature, a more exact analysis of the two procedures and of their development as well as of their implicit metatheories reveal that in spite of the recent rapprochement of interactional therapy to psychoanalysis there are still important theoretical and technical differences between these two treatment methods. This observation is demonstrated here by some typical examples of the particular interventions though without discussing a possible differential effectivity of the two methods. Basically, the two treatments are not fully comparable, because the interactional therapy was developed for groups and TFP was designed for the individual setting. In the final analysis, the “answer” principle of the interpersonal, partly on the neo-psychoanalysis and ego-psychology oriented interactional therapy and the “interpretation” principle of the on object-psychology oriented TFP cannot be considered equivalent. Beside that interactional therapy may bear more risks for becoming pedagogical as TFP does.     

Some Outcomes of Pressure,Ingratiation, and Rational Persuasion Used With Peers in the Workplace1

In a cross‐sectional organizational field study, the effects of ingratiation, pressure, and rational persuasion on performance appraisal, compliance gaining, and reactance were investigated. Actors were asked to describe their lateral‐influence strategies, and peers were asked to assess actors’ impact. Actors and assessors from 140 German lateral‐influence dyads who were public officeholders and employees participated in the study. The data support the hypothesis that the more an actor uses rational persuasion and the longer the assessor has known the actor, the more positively the assessor will evaluate the actor's task performance. In addition, the results support the hypothesis that the more an actor uses ingratiation and the longer the assessor has known the actor, the more positively the assessor will evaluate actor's compliance‐gaining success.     

Ceteris Paribus Laws: Classification and Deconstruction

It has not been sufficiently considered in philosophical discussions of ceteris paribus (CP) laws that distinct kinds of CP-laws exist in science with rather different meanings. I distinguish between (1.) comparative CP-laws and (2.) exclusive CP-laws. There exist also mixed CP-laws, which contain a comparative and an exclusive CP-clause. Exclusive CP-laws may be either (2.1) definite, (2.2) indefinite or (2.3) normic. While CP-laws of kind (2.1) and (2.2) exhibit deductivistic behaviour, CP-laws of kind (2.3) require a probabilistic or non-monotonic reconstruction. CP-laws of kind (1) may be both deductivistic or probabilistic. All these kinds of CP-laws have empirical content by which they are testable, except CP-laws of kind (2.2) which are almost vacuous. Typically, CP-laws of kind (1) express invariant correlations, CP-laws of kind (2.1) express closed system laws of physical sciences, and CP-laws of kind (2.3) express normic laws of non-physical sciences based on evolution-theoretic stability properties. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.