Acculturation Attitudes in Plural Societies

Dans les sociétés culturellement diversifiés, les individus peuvent présenter des attitudes relatives à leurs relations avec les autres et les groupes. Ces attitudes (dites "attitudes d'acculturation") sont liées à des prises de position sur deux problèmes généraux posés à toute personne en acculturation: la préservation culturelle de son propre groupe et le contact avec les autres groupes. On définit les attitudes d'assimilation, d'intégration, de séparation et de marginalisation, puis on les mesure dans plusieurs groupes en acculturation d'Australie et du Canada (les indigènes, les immigrants et les groupes ethniques implantés). On donne la validité et la fidélité des échelles d'attitude, puis on analyse les relations des échelles entre elles par rapport aux deux problèmes sous-jacents que sont la préservation et le contact. Enfin, quelques-unes des applications pratiques des attitudes d'acculturation sont envisagées.     

Toward quality criteria for collective judgments

While most organizational and social decision making is done in a group or collective mode, there are few guides or evaluative criteria for judging when a high-quality outcome has been reached. Most past studies of group decision making have been conducted in laboratories using student subjects and factual problems with correct answers as means for judging outcome quality. Such proxies are rough approximations at best of real-world conditions where value differences can be intense and problems have no correct or best answer. Drawing upon the existing literature, evaluative criteria are proposed including process, content, and outcome concerns. An instrument based upon these criteria is then applied retrospectively to six cases of ad hoc collective decision making. Using dimensional analyses, a set of more detailed evaluative factors is derived from actual participant responses. The results provide some insights into the nature of high-quality collective judgments as well as the most effective procedures for their achievement.     

Lives of women who became autonomous

We examine the lives and growth processes of women who have achieved considerable development of personality. Subjects of study are seven women in a longitudinal sample who, at ages 42-45, are classified by the Loevinger Sentence Completion Test at the highest ego-levels. As a way of describing their lives, all seven are analyzed in terms of Levinson's model of male development, one case is presented in terms of Gilligan's model of female development, another in terms of Loevinger's general model, and linkages among theories are observed. Characteristics of Loevinger's autonomous stage are illustrated and the extent to which they are gender-related is discussed. Findings show that women with very different personalities, problems, and ways of life can attain a high level of ego-development; that their lives tend not to have been orthodox or easy; and that theories of adult development are useful but uneven in application.     

Ethnicity,Life Satisfaction,Stress, Familiarity,and Stigma Toward Mental Health Treatment

The authors examined the relative contribution of ethnicity, life satisfaction, level of stress, familiarity with mental health treatment, and self- and public stigma on attitudes toward mental health treatment among a diverse sample (N = 632) of adults. Results indicated that ethnicity, stress, familiarity, and self-stigma of mental illness were significant predictors of attitudes. Additionally, familiarity with mental health treatment moderated the relationship between public stigma and attitude.     

Individual and group advice taking in judgmental forecasting: Is group forecasting superior to individual forecasting?

We examined how individuals and groups behave in making judgmental forecasts when they are given external forecast advice. We compare individual and group advice-taking behavior under different conditions: (a) when advice quality is fixed, (b) when advice quality is randomly varied, and (c) when there is feedback on advice quality or not. Participants in Study 1 received fixed advice of either reasonable or unreasonable quality while making their decisions. Participants in Study 2 randomly received both reasonable and unreasonable advice. We found in both studies that groups feel more confident than individuals. This greater confidence decreased the groups' reliance on advice. We also found that groups are better than individuals at discerning the quality of advice. In the group treatment, the group's reliance on advice increased according to the degree of disagreement with the initial decisions of the group members. In Study 3, participants randomly received both reasonable and unreasonable advice, and in addition, they received feedback on actual realizations that enabled them to learn about the quality of advice. In the presence of feedback on random advice quality, groups are no longer less receptive to advice than individuals; with feedback, both individuals and groups discount advice more than they do without feedback. Nevertheless, groups are still better than individuals at discerning the quality of advice. We conclude that group forecasting is better than individual forecasting across various conditions that we investigate except when advice quality is known to be consistently reliable.