Anticipation of interoceptive threat in highly anxiety sensitive persons

Anticipatory anxiety plays a major role in the etiology of panic disorder. Although anticipatory anxiety elicited by expectation of interoceptive cues is specifically relevant for panic patients, it has rarely been studied. Using a population analogue in high fear of such interoceptive arousal sensations (highly anxiety sensitive persons) we evaluated a new experimental paradigm to assess anticipatory anxiety during anticipation of interoceptive (somatic sensations evoked by hyperventilation) and exteroceptive (electric shock) threat. Symptom reports, autonomic arousal, and defensive response mobilization (startle eyeblink response) were monitored during threat and matched safe conditions in 26 highly anxiety sensitive persons and 22 controls. The anticipation of exteroceptive threat led to a defensive and autonomic mobilization as indexed by a potentiation of the startle response and an increase in skin conductance level in both experimental groups. During interoceptive threat, however, only highly anxiety sensitive persons but not the controls exhibited a startle response potentiation as well as autonomic activation. The anticipation of a hyperventilation procedure thus seems a valid paradigm to investigate anticipatory anxiety elicited by interoceptive cues in the clinical context.     

Russian Philosophers on Continuous Creation as the Basis for Social Change

Vladimir Solov’ëv, Sergej Bulgakov, Nikolaj Berdjaev, and Semën Frank shared the conviction that Creation is incomplete: humanity must arrive at organizing social life on an “eighth day.” Thus they prophesied the Universal Church, “social Christianity,” “personalist socialism,” and “spiritual democracy.” Their attempt to avoid any illegitimate confusion between independent rational thought and Christian faith prompted Bulgakov to become an ordained theologian, Berdjaev a “philosophical poet,” and Frank a “Christian realist.” Solov’ëv’s theosophical attempt to philosophically substantiate faith and consequently eschatological prophecy finds itself in the same tragic predicament as Christian faith in general when amalgamated on a one to one basis with the world. I am to show that this is not the case for any of the three other authors discussed, however, much they did adhere to some of Solov’ëv’s major lines of thought.     

A multicultural assessment of adolescent connectedness: testing measurement invariance across gender and ethnicity

Counselors, psychologists, and evaluators of intervention programs for youth increasingly view the promotion of connectedness as an important intervention outcome. When evaluating these programs, researchers frequently test whether the treatment effects differ across gender and ethnic or racial groups. Doing so necessitates the availability of culturally and gender-invariant measures. We used the Hemingway: Measure of Adolescent Connectedness to estimate the factor structure invariance and equality of means across gender and 3 racial/ethnic groups with a large sample of middle school adolescents. From a practical perspective, the 10-scale model suggested factor structure invariance across gender and racial or ethnic (i.e., African American, Caucasian, and Latina/o) groups of adolescents. However, tests for partial invariance revealed some group difference on the factor loadings and intercepts between gender and ethnic/racial groups. When testing for mean equivalence, girls reported higher connectedness to friends, siblings, school, peers, teachers, and reading but lower connectedness to their neighborhoods. Caucasians reported higher connectedness to their neighborhoods and friends but lower connectedness to siblings than African Americans and Latinos. African Americans reported the highest connectedness to self (present and future) but lowest connectedness to teachers. Latinos reported the lowest connectedness to reading, self-in-the-present, and self-in-the-future. Overall, this study reveals racial/ethnic and gender mean differences on several connectedness subscales and suggests the Hemingway subscales are, from a practical perspective, invariant across gender and ethnicity and therefore appropriate for most assessment and evaluation purposes.     

Selecting the “Best” Factor Structure and Moving Measurement Validation Forward: An Illustration

Despite the broad literature base on factor analysis best practices, research seeking to evaluate a measure's psychometric properties frequently fails to consider or follow these recommendations. This leads to incorrect factor structures, numerous and often overly complex competing factor models and, perhaps most harmful, biased model results. Our goal is to demonstrate a practical and actionable process for factor analysis through (a) an overview of six statistical and psychometric issues and approaches to be aware of, investigate, and report when engaging in factor structure validation, along with a flowchart for recommended procedures to understand latent factor structures; (b) demonstrating these issues to provide a summary of the updated Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL–5) factor models and a rationale for validation; and (c) conducting a comprehensive statistical and psychometric validation of the PCL–5 factor structure to demonstrate all the issues we described earlier. Considering previous research, the PCL–5 was evaluated using a sample of 1,403 U.S. Air Force remotely piloted aircraft operators with high levels of battlefield exposure. Previously proposed PCL–5 factor structures were not supported by the data, but instead a bifactor model is arguably more statistically appropriate.     

Case-to-Case Arguments

Arguers sometimes cite a decision made in an earlier situation as a reason for making the equivalent decision in a later situation. I argue that there are two kinds of “case-to-case arguments”. First, there are arguments by precedent, which cite the mere existence of the past decision as a reason to decide in the same way again now, independent of the past decision’s merits. Second, there are case-to-case arguments from parralel reasoning which presuppose that the past decision was justified and are used to show that an equivalent present decision would also be justified. Both arguments are a type of argument by analogy. They differ in their structures and conditions of cogency, even though they often look the same in presentation. Their similar appearance poses a risk of miss-evaluation and fallacious use. Therefore a clearly theorized distinction is important.