A study of minorities as victims

This article presents the idea that during the 1990s an important change took place in relation between minorities and majorities: the emergence of minorities as victims alongside the formerly predominant active, militant minorities. A hypothesis is raised that these two types of minorities differ in their agenda as well as in the nature of the influence they exert. Active minorities trigger an external conflict with majority and induce conversion (latent rather than overt influence); minorities as victims create an internal conflict, a sense of guilt, within the majority, while they exert an exclusively overt influence. We report two experiments confirming our hypothesis. We discuss the novelty of this phenomenon and its relevance. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How to fit and interpret multilevel models using SPSS

Hierarchic or multilevel models are used to analyse data when cases belong to known groups and sample units are selected both from the individual level and from the group level. In this work, the multilevel models most commonly discussed in the statistic literature are described, explaining how to fit these models using the SPSS program (any version as of the 11 th ) and how to interpret the outcomes of the analysis. Five particular models are described, fitted, and interpreted: (1) one-way analysis of variance with random effects, (2) regression analysis with means-as-outcomes, (3) one-way analysis of covariance with random effects, (4) regression analysis with random coefficients, and (5) regression analysis with means- and slopes-as-outcomes. All models are explained, trying to make them understandable to researchers in health and behaviour sciences.     

Interaction in ANOVA: misconceptions

Although interaction in analysis of variance has an unequivocal theoretical meaning (and so it appears in the statistic literature), frequent misconceptions are found in empirical research, which, in many cases, lead to wrong conclusions. In this paper, 150 articles are reviewed: in 12.7% of them, no attention is paid to the interaction (either because it is not analysed or because it is analysed but not discussed); in 79.1%, interaction is studied through simple effects analysis; and only in 8.2% of the cases, interaction is correctly discussed. It could be that psychology researchers tend to analyse and interpret the interaction between factors incorrectly because the most widespread statistic packages (with SPSS in the lead) do not allow performing the comparisons needed to analyse a significant interaction in factorial designs with randomized groups. In order to contribute to eradicating this problem, we herein show how to design some of the linear comparisons that allow isolating the interaction effect, and we explain how to use SPSS to compute these comparisons.     

The adaptive value of personality differences revealed by small island population dynamics

Whether differences in personality among populations really exist and, if so, whether they are only due to cultural and linguistic differences or have a genetically selected adaptive value, is a controversial issue. In this research, we compared three Italian populations living on three small archipelagos in the Tyrrhenian Sea (n = 993), with their corresponding neighbouring mainlanders (n = 598), i.e. sharing the same geographical origin, culture and language. We used an adjective‐based Big Five questionnaire in order to measure personality traits in four categories of individuals for each archipelago/mainland population: (1) original islanders; (2) non‐original islanders; (3) mainlanders and (4) immigrants to the islands. We further analysed original and non‐original islanders who had or had not emigrated from the islands. We found that islanders had different personality traits from mainlanders, the former being more conscientious and emotionally stable and less extraverted and open to experience. We also found that the subgroup of islanders whose ancestors had inhabited their island for about 20 generations in isolation (original islanders, n = 624) were less extraverted and open to experience than immigrants (n = 193). In contrast, immigrants retained the typical personality profile of the mainland populations. Lastly, emigrants from the islands (n = 209) were significantly more extraverted and open to experience than original and non‐original islanders who had never left their island (n = 741). We hypothesise that population differences in extraversion and openness to experience are more probably related to genetic differences which evolved rapidly, presumably through an active gene flow produced by selective emigration from the islands. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On the validity of culture‐level personality and stereotype scores

In response to comments by Perugini and Richetin and by Ashton, we discuss the reference‐group effect as a potential source of distortion in cross‐cultural comparisons and suggest some research designs to test its nature and importance. We argue that laboratory studies of personality are of limited utility in understanding personality questionnaire responses in real life. We summarise evidence in favour of the validity of aggregate personality traits and suggest that more scepticism is needed with regard to the accuracy of national character stereotypes. Published in 2007 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

特征概率影响多维和少维类别的分类学习和特征学习

探讨了特征概率对多维和少维类别的分类学习和特征学习的效果及策略的影响。结果表明高特征概率条件下,多维比少维类别的分类学习更容易,而且学到更多的特征知识,多维条件下人们更倾向于整体性加工策略,而少维条件下人们倾向于分析性加工策略。低特征概率条件下,多维比少维类别的分类学习和特征学习都困难,且两种条件下人们都倾向于采取分析性加工策略。     

The role of mechanism and covariation information in causal belief updating

The present study is aimed at identifying how prior causal beliefs and covariation information contribute to belief updating when evidence, either compatible or contradictory with those beliefs, is provided. Participants were presented with a cover story with which it was intended to activate or generate a causal belief. Variables related to the prior belief (the type of information, the strength of the cause-effect causal link, and how confident the participant was that the link existed) were assessed. Subsequently, participants were presented with covariational information and were asked to update their beliefs in light of the new evidence. Information reliability, prior belief's causal influence magnitude, and the cause-effect level of contingency portrayed by the new information--but not the type of the prior belief--are shown to directly determine belief updating.     

Can research influence clinical practice?1

After briefly reviewing the unfavourable reception accorded empirical research by parts of the psychoanalytic community, as well as some of the benefits to clinical practice of analysts being involved in research activities, the author examines whether the findings of process and outcome research in psychotherapy and psychoanalysis can help identify the most appropriate forms of intervention for producing therapeutic change, given the specific condition of the patient and the relationship that the individual establishes with the analyst. He argues that research findings can influence clinical practice on various levels and in different areas, and goes on to examine a number of related issues: the specificity of therapeutic interventions versus the relevance of common curative factors; the dyadic conception of technique and ways of understanding the therapeutic action of the treatment alliance; and the strategic or heuristic conception in psychoanalytic therapy. Finally, the author presents clinical material with the aim of illustrating how the knowledge acquired through research can be applied to psychoanalytic treatment.