Integrated learning communities as a peer support initiative for first year university students

Peer Mentoring schemes tend to be developed as retention strategies, however, they can also serve other purposes (psychosocial or career-related). However, evidence of the effectiveness of these presents mixed results and less is known about the horizontal peer support schemes which may help students capitalize on existing peer relationships. We developed an integrated learning communities (ILC) peer support scheme, building on the theoretical principles of social identity theory, which we embedded within our existing teaching framework and designed functional activities. Collective activities were undertaken to promote the processes of social identity with the intention that these may foster social and academic integration experiences. This intervention was undertaken with an entire cohort of first year undergraduate psychology students. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a self-selected sample of these students (N = 17). Thematic analysis revealed two main themes, each with two sub-themes. These were: “Divergent Experiences” with the sub-themes of “dependent on people” and “types of support”, and “Good idea in principle” with the sub-themes of “Theory ≠ Practice” and “Dependent on student engagement”. Although identifying with a peer group was not transparent in the interviews, the existence of a peer support scheme was perceived positively by students which might explain the success of the newly developed student-led Psychology Society. Indeed, this Psychology Society can provide a lasting framework for further amplification of the student voice. We conclude that our embedded ILC was both feasible and potentially valuable, but it is crucial for the peer support approach to have transactional significance.     

Bilateral Transcranial Direct Stimulation Over the Primary Motor Cortex Alters Motor Modularity of Multiple Muscles

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) has been demonstrated to modulate the motor performance of both healthy individuals and patients with neuromuscular disorders. However, the effect of tDCS on motor control of multiple muscles, which is a prerequisite to change in motor performance, is currently unknown. Using dimensionality reduction analysis, we investigated whether bilateral tDCS over M1 modulates the coordinated activity of 12 muscles. Fifteen healthy men participated in this randomized, double-blind crossover study. Each participant received a 20-min sham and 2-mA stimulation bilaterally over M1 (anode on the right M1 and cathode on the left M1), with a minimum washout period of 4?days. Muscle activation and end-point kinematics were evaluated during a task where participants reached out to a marked target with non-dominant hand as fast as possible, before and immediately after tDCS application. We found decreased similarity in motor modularity and significant changes in muscle activation in a specific motor module, particularly when reaching out to a target placed within arm’s length and improved smoothness index of movement only following 2-mA stimulation. These findings indicate that clinicians and researchers need to consider the simultaneous effect of bilateral tDCS over M1 on multiple muscles when they establish tDCS protocol to change in motor performance of patients with neuromuscular deficits.     

Seeing the World in Pink and Blue: Developing and Exploring a New Measure of Essentialistic Thinking about Gender

Sex Roles - Essentialism, or the belief that certain categories have fundamental, intrinsic, and stable essences, pervasively influences social judgments. Among the many groupings that describe...     

How do we judge our confidence? Differential effects of meta-memory feedback on eyewitness accuracy and confidence

According to the cue–belief model, we assess confidence in our memories using self-credibility cues that reflect beliefs about our memory faculties. We tested the influence of meta-memory feedback on self-credibility cues in the context of eyewitness testimony, when feedback was provided prior to “testifying” via a memory questionnaire (Experiment 1) and after an initial memory questionnaire but before participants had to retake it (Experiment 2). Participants received feedback (good score, bad score, or none) on a fictitious scale purported to predict eyewitness memory ability. Those given good score feedback before testifying were more confident (but no more accurate) than those given bad score feedback. Feedback also affected confidence (good increased and bad decreased) and accuracy (good increased) after testifying but only on leading questions. These differential effects of meta-memory feedback on confidence for normal and leading questions are not explained by the cue–belief model. Implications for our confidence judgments are discussed.     

Shivering for Status: When Cold Temperatures Increase Product Evaluation

While anecdotal evidence suggests that consumers maintain an association between high‐status products and cold temperature, no research has empirically examined this linkage. We propose and demonstrate that physical cold can indeed increase consumers’ perceptions of a product's status signaling and luxuriousness. We demonstrate this consequence can stem from tactile or visually induced temperatures and ultimately increase consumers’ overall evaluations of products. Finally, we highlight boundary conditions for when the effect is likely to manifest. Our findings offer theoretical contributions along with several practical implications for retailing, product design, brand management, and marketing communications.     

Solutions to the problems of incremental validity testing in relationship science

Incremental validity testing (i.e., testing whether a focal predictor is associated with an outcome above and beyond a covariate) is common (e.g., 57% of Personal Relationships articles in 2017), yet it is fraught with conceptual and statistical problems. First, researchers often use it to overemphasize the novelty or counterintuitiveness of findings, which hinders cumulative understanding. Second, incremental validity testing requires that the focal predictor and the covariate represent separate constructs; researchers risk committing the “jangle fallacy” without such evidence. Third, the most common approach to incremental validity testing (i.e., standard multiple regression, 88% of articles) inflates Type I error and can produce invalid conclusions. This article also discusses the relevance of these issues to dyadic/longitudinal designs and offers concrete solutions.