There is more to anger coping than "in" or "out"

There is growing dissatisfaction with a dichotomized "anger-in" versus "anger-out" view of anger coping. Three studies using student and community adultsamples revealed a broader understanding of the nature of anger coping styles and led to the development of the new Behavioral Anger Response Questionnaire (BARQ). The BARQ is empirically derived and factorially validated and has good psychometrics. Results suggest that dichotomizing anger responses as "in" versus "out" is too coarse and that a 6-factor model may be more appropriate. The 6 factors identified here are Direct Anger-Out, Assertion, Support-Seeking, Diffusion, Avoidance, and Rumination. Women reported use of a wider range of anger coping styles, especially more social support-seeking and more use of anger diffusion strategies than men.     

Computerizing reading training: Evaluation of a latent semantic analysis space for science text

The effectiveness of a domain-specific latent semantic analysis (LSA) in assessing reading strategies was examined. Students were given self-explanation reading training (SERT) and asked to think aloud after each sentence in a science text. Novice and expert human raters and two LSA spaces (general reading, science) rated the similarity of each think-aloud protocol to benchmarks representing three different reading strategies (minimal, local, and global). The science LSA space correlated highly with human judgments, and more highly than did the general reading space. Also, cosines from the science LSA spaces can distinguish between different levels of semantic similarity, but may have trouble in distinguishing local processing protocols. Thus, a domain-specific LSA space is advantageous regardless of the size of the space. The results are discussedin the context of applying the science LSA to a computer-based version of SERT that gives online feedback based on LSA cosines.     

The Stranger as Sacrament: Karl Barth and the Ethics of Ecclesial Practice>

Recent theology has devoted attention to ecclesial practices as a matrix for ethical reflection. Barth stands in ambivalent relation to these developments. On the one hand, Barth urges consideration of the relation of church practice to the gospel of divine action; on the other, Barth's christocentric account of ethics might be corrected by an ethics of ecclesial practice. The ambivalence is explored in an interpretation of Barth's account of the ministry of the Christian community in Church Dogmatics IV/3 and of his treatment of love of one's neighbour in I/2.     

Explaining Normativity: On Rationality and the Justification of Reason

Aspects of the world are normative in as much as they or their existence constitute reasons for persons, i.e. grounds which make certain beliefs, moods, emotions, intentions or actions appropriate or inappropriate. Our capacities to perceive and understand how things are, and what response is appropriate to them, and our ability to respond appropriately, make us into persons, i.e. creatures with the ability to direct their own life in accordance with their appreciation of themselves and their environment, and of the reasons with which, given how they are, the world presents them.
An explanation of normativity would explain the various puzzling aspects of this complex phenomenon. In particular it would explain how it is that aspects of the world can constitute reasons for cognitive, emotive, and volitional responses; how it is that we can come to realise that certain cognitive, emotional or volitional responses are appropriate in various circumstances, and inappropriate in others; and how it is that we can respond appropriately. This paper explores an aspect of the last of these questions.