Self-compassion and Students' Well-Being Among Vietnamese Students: Chain Mediation Effect of Narcissism and Anxiety

Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy - The positive psychology that increases mental health is referred to "health assets." Among those assets, self-compassion...     

Studying Ideological Groups Online: Identification and Assessment of Risk Factors for Violence

Recent acts of violence have demonstrated the impact of violent ideological groups worldwide. However, the systematic study of these groups is somewhat limited. The Internet is a valuable tool for investigating ideological group behavior because it is easily accessible and commonly used by these groups. This study attempted to extend previous research by examining online message boards to assess processes particular to ideological group membership. A content analysis was conducted on several group process variables using 29 groups with message boards. A Kruskal‐Wallis test with follow‐up pairwise comparisons was used to find that violent ideological groups differed from nonviolent ideological and nonviolent nonideological groups on 7 group process variables and 3 content variables. Implications are discussed.     

Strength of Discourse Context as a Determinant of the Subordinate Bias Effect

Two experiments examined the influence of strength of discourse bias on lexical ambiguity resolution. Short passages were constructed to bias polarized ambiguous words (homonyms) strongly or weakly toward the dominant or subordinate meanings. Using a self-paced reading task in Experiment 1, it was demonstrated that in strongly biased discourse, reading times for homonyms in dominant discourse did not differ from those in subordinate discourse. However, when the discourse was weakly biased, homonyms were read faster in dominant discourse than in subordinate discourse. Experiment 2 combined the reading paradigm with a naming task in order to provide an assessment of specific word-meaning activation. Reading times on ambiguous words replicated the results of Experiment 1. In addition, naming latencies for probe words revealed that only the contextually appropriate sense of a homonym was activated in strongly biased discourse. In contrast, both contextually appropriate and inappropriate senses were activated following a weakly biased subordinate discourse, whereas only the dominant sense was activated following weakly biased dominant discourse. The results demonstrate (1) an immediate influence of prior discourse information on lexical processing; and (2) that the strength of discourse constraints can play a governing role in lexical ambiguity resolution. The results were interpreted within the framework of a context-sensitive model of lexical ambiguity resolution.