Eurocommunist recognition of fundamental rights and its limits

Studies in East European Thought -     

Untersuchungen zur psychischen Wirkung eines zentralen Stimulans nach verschiedenen Graden psychischer Beanspruchung

Zusammenfassung Ziel der Arbeit war die Untersuchung der Frage, ob die Wirkungsintensität eines zentralen Stimulans (2-Äthyl-amino-3-phenyl-norcamphan) abhängig ist vom Grad vorgegangener psychischer Beanspruchung.Nach einem Meßwiederholungsplan mit systematischer Permutation der Bedingungen nahm jeder von 16 Probanden an vier Versuchen teil. An einem Versuch wurde Placebo verabreicht, an drei Versuchen 2-Äthyl-amino-3-phenyl-norcamphan. Dabei wurde das Präparat entweder 1 Stunde, 3 oder 5 Stunden nach Beginn des Versuches (Beanspruchung) verabreicht.In mehreren psychologischen Leistungsvariablen und zwei Methoden zur Erfassung von subjektiven Veränderungen wurde untersucht, inwieweit die Hypothese einer Proportionalität zwischen Wirkungsintensität und Grad der Ausgangsermüdung verifiziert ist.Die Ergebnisse zeigen, daß in leistungsmäßiger Hinsicht diese Hypothese als falsifiziert anzusehen ist. Lediglich in subjektiv-erlebnismäßiger Hinsicht besteht eine gewisse Proportionalität.     

When East meets West: a longitudinal examination of the relationship between group relative deprivation and intergroup contact in reunified Germany

Intergroup contact and group relative deprivation have both been shown to play a key role in the understanding of intergroup relations. Nevertheless, we know little about their causal relationship. In order to shed some light on the directionality and causality of the relationship between intergroup contact and group relative deprivation, we analysed responses by East and West Germans from k= 97 different cities, collected 6 (N(T)(1) = 1,001), 8 (N(T)(2) = 747), and 10 years (N(T)(3) = 565) after reunification. Multi-level cross-lagged analyses showed that group relative deprivation at T1 led to more (rather than less) intergroup contact between East and West Germans 2 years as well as 4 years later. We found no evidence for the reverse causal relationship, or moderation by group membership. Furthermore, admiration mediated the positive effect of relative deprivation on intergroup contact for both East and West Germans. This intriguing finding suggests that intergroup contact may be used as a proactive identity management strategy by members of both minority and majority groups.     

Resilience predicts well-being in teachers, but not in non-teaching employees

The resilience concept has often been criticized as simply reflecting the absence of neuroticism (i.e. vulnerability to stress and negative affectivity). Challenging this point of view, the aim of this study was to show that resilience could predict well-being in teachers above and beyond neuroticism. By contrast, we expected that resilience would not play the same role for non-teaching employees. Here, neuroticism should outperform resilience in predicting well-being, as resilience is supposed to be a special prerequisite for teachers, but not for non-teaching employees. One hundred seventy teachers and 183 non-teaching employees provided measures of resilience, neuroticism, and well-being. The aspects of well-being studied were general health perception, job satisfaction, exhaustion, and physical illness. Results revealed that among teachers, resilience contributed more to the prediction of general health perception than did neuroticism. Variance in job satisfaction was explained equally well by resilience and neuroticism. Physical illness and exhaustion were better predicted by neuroticism. In non-teachers, neuroticism predicted all outcomes better than did resilience. The results emphasize that resilience might be particularly important for the well-being of teachers, whereas for non-teachers, low neuroticism can be enough to maintain well-being. Specific occupational stress patterns experienced by teachers may explain these findings.     

Empirically based dimensions of externalizing symptoms in children and adolescents: a multitrait-multisource approach

The present study sought to refine knowledge about the structure underlying externalizing dimensions. From a “top-down” ICD/DSM-based perspective, externalizing symptoms can be categorized into attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and conduct disorder (CD). From a “bottom-up” developmental theory-based perspective, disruptive behaviors can be meaningfully described as aggressive (AGG) and rule-breaking (RB) behaviors. We analyzed five large data sets comprising externalizing symptom ratings obtained with a screening instrument using different sources (parents, teachers, self-ratings) from different samples. Using confirmatory factor analyses, we evaluated several factor models (unidimensional; correlated factors; bifactor (S-1) models) derived from an ICD/DSM- and theory-based perspective. Our optimally fitting models were assessed for measurement invariance across all sources, sample settings, and sex. Following several model-based criteria (model fit indices; factor loadings; omega statistics; model parsimony), we discarded our models stepwise and concluded that both the ICD/DSM-based model with three correlated factors (ADHD, ODD, CD) and the developmental theory-based model with three correlated factors (ADHD, AGG, RB) displayed a statistically sound factor structure and allowed for straightforward interpretability. Furthermore, these two models demonstrated metric invariance across all five samples and across sample settings (community, clinical), as well as scalar invariance across sources and sex. While the dimensions AGG and RB may depict a more empirically coherent view than the categorical perspective of ODD and CD, at this point we cannot clearly determine whether one perspective really outperforms the other. Implications for model selection according to our model-based criteria and clinical research are discussed.

     

Measuring Four Perspectives of Justice Sensitivity With Two Items Each

People differ systematically in their vulnerability to injustice. We present two-item scales for the efficient measurement of justice sensitivity from 4 perspectives (victim, observer, beneficiary, perpetrator). In Study 1 using a quota-based sample of German adults, a latent state–trait analysis revealed the factorial validity and high reliabilities of the scales. In Study 2 employing a large random sample, we tested for measurement invariance of the items within the context of our short 2-item scales compared to the original 10-item scales. Multigroup confirmatory factor analyses confirmed that the validity of the indicators and the internal structure of the assessed constructs did not change across item contexts. In both studies, correlations with personality dimensions and life satisfaction provide evidence for the validity of our scales. With the presented instrument, future research can extend scientific knowledge regarding the role of individual differences in reactions to injustice for the explanation of well-being and physical health.