Development of the Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt scale (WEB-SG) in a nonclinical sample of obese individuals

In this article, we present the evaluation of the psychometric properties of a new self-report measure of Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt (WEB-SG). The main purpose of the study was to measure shame and guilt feelings separately in obese individuals and investigate differing behavioral and emotional correlates of these emotions. Altogether, 331 obese participants completed the WEB-SG and other established self-report measures. A subset of the participants completed a 6-month follow-up. The WEB-SG proved to be internally consistent and temporally stable over a 6-month period. Regarding the factorial structure, a two-factor conceptualization was supported. The construct validity of the WEB-SG subscales was evidenced by a substantial overlap of common variance with related measures. The subscales Shame and Guilt showed differential correlation patterns to other scales. The WEB-SG is a brief, psychometrically sound measure for assessing body shame and guilt concerning weight control in obese individuals.     

Visual and phonological codes in letter and word recognition: Evidence from incremental priming

Critical issues in letter and word priming were investigated using the novel incremental priming technique . This technique adds a parametric manipulation of prime duration (or prime intensity) to the traditional design of a fast masked priming study. By doing so, additional information on the time course and nature of priming effects can be obtained. In Experiment 1, cross-case letter priming (a-A) was investigated in both alphabetic decision (letter/non-letter classification) and letter naming. In Experiment 2, cross-case word priming was investigated in lexical decision and naming. Whereas letter priming in alphabetic decision was most strongly determined by visual overlap between prime and target, word priming in lexical decision was facilitated by both orthographic and phonological information. Orthographic activation was stronger and occurred earlier than phonological activation. In letter and word naming, in contrast, priming effects were most strongly determined by phonological/articulatory information. Differences and similarities between letter and word recognition are discussed in the light of the incremental priming data.     

Werden Psychotherapeuten,Psychiater oder die Psychotherapie stigmatisiert?

Background

In the last decades much has been found out about the stigmatization of persons with mental illnesses. Recently, a potential stigmatization of psychologists, psychiatrists and psychotherapy has been debated.

Aim

The question should be answered whether there is any scientific evidence for stigmatization of psychologists, psychiatrists and psychotherapy by using the conceptualization of stigma as brought forward by Link and Phelan (Ann Rev Sociol 2001; 27:363–385).

Material and methods

For the systematic literature search in 2013 a databank search was carried out in Web of Science using the search terms stigma or discrimination or stereotypes or prejudice AND psychiatrist or psychotherapist or psychotherapy or mental health professional. A total of 2013 publications were identified which were systematically arranged according to the title and abstract with respect to the relevance for the question whether psychotherapy or associated professional groups are stigmatized. Only four of the articles were considered to be relevant. After advice from experts six further relevant articles could be found which did not appear in the databank search.

Results

The review found evidence for both positive and negative stereotypes but not for other components of the stigmatization process.

Conclusion

At present there is no evidence for a stigma related to psychotherapy or to the professions of psychotherapists and psychiatrists.     

Why Do Members of Disadvantaged Groups Strike Back at Perceived Negativity Towards the In‐group?

Against the background of riots in communities across London in 2011, this paper examines the implications of negative meta‐stereotypes on stigmatized group members' reactions towards members of privileged out‐groups within their communities. We hypothesized that concerns over negative opinions that the dominant out‐group is expected to hold of the in‐group (i.e. meta‐stereotypes) would be negatively associated with group members' perceptions of societal fairness and that this relationship would be mediated by members' recall of personal experiences with discrimination. We further hypothesized that views about societal fairness that are challenged in this way would lower an inclination to express discontent with the status quo via normative means while at the same time, increase nonnormative expressions. Results from two surveys (study 1, N = 50; study 2, N = 132) provided support for these hypotheses and are discussed in terms of their meaning for community relations. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The subjective experience of object recognition: comparing metacognition for object detection and object categorization

Perceptual decisions seem to be made automatically and almost instantly. Constructing a unitary subjective conscious experience takes more time. For example, when trying to avoid a collision with a car on a foggy road you brake or steer away in a reflex, before realizing you were in a near accident. This subjective aspect of object recognition has been given little attention. We used metacognition (assessed with confidence ratings) to measure subjective experience during object detection and object categorization for degraded and masked objects, while objective performance was matched. Metacognition was equal for degraded and masked objects, but categorization led to higher metacognition than did detection. This effect turned out to be driven by a difference in metacognition for correct rejection trials, which seemed to be caused by an asymmetry of the distractor stimulus: It does not contain object-related information in the detection task, whereas it does contain such information in the categorization task. Strikingly, this asymmetry selectively impacted metacognitive ability when objective performance was matched. This finding reveals a fundamental difference in how humans reflect versus act on information: When matching the amount of information required to perform two tasks at some objective level of accuracy (acting), metacognitive ability (reflecting) is still better in tasks that rely on positive evidence (categorization) than in tasks that rely more strongly on an absence of evidence (detection).