Reactionary Deconversion from Mormonism: Polarization of Ideological and Behavioral Religiosity Among Active and Former Mormons

In contrast to a growing body of literature examining the experiences and trends of those who leave their faith tradition—particularly among Christian denominations—relatively little is known about those who specifically disaffiliate from Mormonism, although some evidence suggests that former Mormons may be especially likely to embrace secularity or irreligion rather than other religious beliefs and practices. Pursuant to empirically investigating this reactionary dynamic, the current study compared the relative religiosity and secularity of an online sample of active Mormons (n?=?194) and former Mormons (n?=?109) using the Abbreviated Religiousness Measure (ARM), an updated questionnaire of multidimensional religiosity. Results supported the ARM’s improved psychometrics and its hypothesized three-factor structure with both subsamples. Additionally, multivariate and univariate results indicated that active and former Mormon participants from our sample, significantly polarized in their self-reported level of religious beliefs, rituals, and influence on daily behaviors, with active Mormon reporting high religiosity and former Mormons reporting low religiosity or high secularity. Although these results comport with reactionary deconversion dynamics found in other high cost religions, limits to generalizability are discussed. Reasons for and implications of this reactionary phenomenon are also posited.     

On an Observer’s Reaction to Hearing of Someone Harming Him or Herself

Anthropological studies in India inspired the idea of a distinct domain of moral purity, but a precise characterization of that domain has been elusive. One proposal based on current theorizing in psychology is that prototypical purity violations are self-harming actions, which are perceived as disgusting and immoral whether done accidentally or intentionally. In three studies (Ns?=?400, 80, 132), we examined judgments of self-harming actions in two cultural groups—American and Indian. There was little support for the proposed characterization of the purity domain: Self-harms were slightly to modestly immoral for Indians and Americans. Both Indians and Americans found self-harms to be sad, not disgusting. And intentionality influenced how immoral and how sad the action was judged. Instead, the findings supported a view that all immorality, including those concerning self-harm, depends on perceived harm.     

Does ‘Ought’ Imply ‘Might’? How (not) to Resolve the Conflict between Act and Motive Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism has often been understood as a theory that concerns itself first and foremost with the rightness of actions; but many other things (e.g., moral rules, motives, laws, etc.) are also properly subject to moral evaluation, and utilitarians have long understood that the theory must be able to provide an account of these as well. In a landmark article from 1976, Robert Adams argues that traditional act utilitarianism faces a particular problem in this regard. He argues that a on a sensible utilitarian account of the rightness of an agent’s motives, right motives will sometimes conflict with right actions, leaving the theory internally incoherent. The puzzle Adams raises has received a good deal of attention but few proposed solutions. Fred Feldman, however, has offered a solution that seems to be gaining adherents. In this paper I argue that Feldman’s approach cannot succeed. At bottom, it relies on a version of the principle that ‘ought’ implies ‘can’—and subsequently an account of an agent’s alternatives—that is far too restrictive to be plausible. Despite the failure of this solution, however, I argue that the conflict Adams develops is not as theoretically troubling as he suggests. While traditional act utilitarianism may fail for other reasons, it will not fail due to the conflict between acts and motives.     

Living under threat: Mutual threat perception drives anti‐Muslim and anti‐Western hostility in the age of terrorism

This research demonstrates a common psychology of outgroup hostility driven by perceived intergroup threat among three groups and seven cultural contexts: non‐Muslim Westerners, Muslims in Western societies, and Muslims in the Middle East. In Study 1, symbolic, but not realistic and terroristic threats, predicted non‐Muslim Norwegians' intentions to join anti‐Islamic movements. In Study 2, symbolic and realistic, but not terroristic threat, predicted non‐Muslim Americans' willingness to persecute Muslims. In Studies 3 and 4, symbolic threat predicted support and behavioral intentions against the West among Swedish and Turkish Muslims. Finally, in Study 5, a comparison demonstrated that symbolic and realistic threats had the same effects on violent intentions among non‐Muslim and Muslim Danes, and Muslims in Afghanistan. Meta‐analysis showed that symbolic threat was most strongly associated with intergroup hostility. Across studies, participants with high religious group identification experienced higher levels of threat. Implications for intergroup research and prejudice reduction are discussed.     

High self‐monitors modulate their responses as a function of relevant social roles

We reasoned that high self‐monitors' responses may be influenced by the characteristic traits and behaviors associated with social roles. Results across four studies confirmed expectations. The findings from Experiments 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated that exposure to a particular role (e.g., nurse) led high self‐monitors to respond in a manner consistent with the relevant role. Results from Experiment 4 showed that the effect found in the first three experiments was attenuated when the behavioral guidance of the particular role was reduced. Low self‐monitors' responses were not influenced by exposure to the role. Showing that high self‐monitors use information embedded in a social role to tailor their behavior provides a novel finding that has heretofore been absent from the literature.     

Children’s Reward and Punishment Sensitivity Moderates the Association of Negative and Positive Parenting Behaviors in Child ADHD Symptoms

Atypical reward processing, including abnormal reward responsivity and sensitivity to punishment, has long been implicated in the etiology of ADHD. However, little is known about how these facets of behavior interact with positive (e.g., warmth, praise) and negative (e.g., hostility, harsh discipline) parenting behavior in the early expression of ADHD symptoms in young children. Understanding the interplay between children’s reward processing and parenting may be crucial for identifying specific treatment targets in psychosocial interventions for ADHD, especially given that not all children benefit from contingency-based treatments (e.g., parent management training). The study consisted of a sample of kindergarten children (N?=?201, 55% male) and their parents, who completed questionnaires about their parenting practices, their child’s behaviors and participated in an observed parent-child play task in the laboratory. Children’s reward responsivity and sensitivity to punishment were positively associated with child ADHD symptoms. However, children with high reward responsivity had more symptoms of ADHD but only under conditions of low negative parenting (self-reported and observed) and high self-reported positive parenting, compared to children with low reward responsivity. Children with high sensitivity to punishment had more ADHD symptoms relative to children with low sensitivity to punishment, but only under conditions in which observed praise was infrequent. Results provide evidence that individual differences in sensitivity to reward/punishment may be an important of marker of risk for ADHD, but also highlights how children’s responses to positive and negative parenting behavior may vary by children’s sensitivities. Clinical and treatment implications are discussed.     

The Role of Character Strengths and Importance of Family on Mexican American College Students' Career Decision Self‐Efficacy

This study examined how character strengths and the importance of family influenced Mexican American college students' (N = 129) career decision self‐efficacy. Findings from a multiple regression analysis indicated that psychological grit and curiosity were significant predictors of career decision self‐efficacy. The authors discuss the importance of these findings and provide recommendations for future research.     

From Puddles to Potholes: The Role of Overvalued Beliefs in Emotional Problems

The bygone notion of a “fixed idea” has evolved into an appreciation for overvalued beliefs, automatic thoughts, irrational beliefs, and dysfunctional attitudes and the role they can play in the lives of many clients. Overvalued beliefs are common and can be destructive when they guide the client toward extreme emotional reactions, disruptive behavioral patterns or create negative views of self or others. Overvalued beliefs become problematic when they are not aligned with commonly accepted views of reality, they are rigidly maintained despite insufficient evidence, and they create maladaptive self-perpetuating patterns. A metaphor is used to explain how minor puddles can evolve into major potholes, creating lasting damage. The destructive power of puddles shares some similarities with the subtle influence of overvalued beliefs on a client’s emotional and interpersonal functioning. Psychotherapy can help clients to confront the misguided accuracy, limited utility, and exaggerated potency of their beliefs. Therapy can help clients to disengage from the directive power of their beliefs, learning to tolerate various thoughts without reacting at an emotional or behavioral level.     

Problem Clarity as a Moderator between Trait Affect and Self‐Perceived Creativity

Empirical studies on the relationship between affect and creativity often produce conflicting results. This inconsistency has led us to believe that the relationship between affect and creativity may be better understood by looking at potential moderators. Our study looked specifically at trait affect and self‐perceived creativity. Using the Affect Infusion Model (AIM) theory with problem clarity as the potential moderator, we hypothesized that when individuals are faced with problems that lack clarity, trait affect has greater sway over their self‐perceived creativity. Our results provided evidence that problem clarity moderated the relationship between positive trait affect and self‐perceived creativity; the positive relationship between positive trait affect and self‐perceived creativity is stronger when problem clarity is low and weaker when problem clarity is high. No moderating effect was found in the relationship between negative trait affect and self‐perceived creativity.