A needs-based model of reconciliation: satisfying the differential emotional needs of victim and perpetrator as a key to promoting reconciliation

The authors propose that conflict threatens different psychological resources of victims and perpetrators and that these threats contribute to the maintenance of conflict (A. Nadler, 2002; A. Nadler & I. Liviatan, 2004; A. Nadler & N. Shnabel, in press). On the basis of this general proposition, the authors developed a needs-based model of reconciliation that posits that being a victim is associated with a threat to one's status and power, whereas being a perpetrator threatens one's image as moral and socially acceptable. To counter these threats, victims must restore their sense of power, whereas perpetrators must restore their public moral image. A social exchange interaction in which these threats are removed should enhance the parties' willingness to reconcile. The results of 4 studies on interpersonal reconciliation support these hypotheses. Applied and theoretical implications of this model are discussed.     

The Trail Making Test and Canter Background Interference Procedure in screening for organicity in chronic schizophrenia: a preliminary report

For 10 male organic chronic schizophrenics scores on the Trail Making Test and Canter Background Interference Procedure were compared. These patients had severe hyponatremia, a condition that results in brain damage. The hit rate for correctly classifying the oranicity was 100% on the basis of sequence binding on Trial Making B and 50% on Canter's procedure. The findings suggested that the Trial Making Test may prove useful in discriminating organic from nonorganic schizophrenics. Implications for research were discussed.     

The Donor's Dilemma: Recipient's Reactions to Aid from Friend or Foe1

Subjects participating as decision-makers in the Tactical and Negotiations Game experimental simulation encountered a programed emergency and then received an offer of aid from either an ally or an enemy donor. Findings indicate that recipients of aid from an ally donor perceived the donor to be more positively motivated and perceived the aid to reflect greater effort and to be of greater value than recipients of an equal amount of aid from an enemy donor. In addition, aid from an ally precipitated a positive shift in recipient perceptions of the donor and a negative shift in recipient perceptions of the enemy nondonor, while aid from an enemy had essentially no effects. The applied implications of these findings are discussed.     

Does remembering past ingroup harmdoing promote postwar cross‐group contact? Insights from a field‐experiment in Liberia

In the aftermath of the Liberian civil wars, we investigated whether it is possible to systematically influence how people construe their group's role during the conflict and how this affects intergroup emotions and behavioral intentions. In a field experiment, 146 participants were randomly assigned to think about incidents of violence during the war that were either committed by fellow ingroup members (perpetrator‐focus) or against fellow ingroup members (victim‐focus). Adopting a perpetrator‐focus led to greater willingness to engage in cross‐group contact, greater need for acceptance, and greater intergroup empathy. The focus manipulation did not affect participants' need for empowerment. Key message: Appraising the ingroup as “victim” or “perpetrator” after conflicts with reciprocal harmdoing is largely a matter of psychological construction. A promising avenue for promoting positive cross‐group contact consists in widening the ingroup's victim role by also remembering the harm that the ingroup inflicted upon others. This amplifies the need of acceptance, which leads to greater intergroup empathy and greater willingness to engage in cross‐group contact. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Parent-Collected Behavioral Observations: An Empirical Comparison of Methods

Treatments for disruptive behaviors are often guided by parent reports on questionnaires, rather than by multiple methods of assessment. Professional observations and clinic analogs exist to complement questionnaires, but parents can also collect useful behavioral observations to inform and guide treatment. Two parent observation methods of child aggression and noncompliance were compared: the Parent Daily Report (PDR) and Behavior Record Cards (BRC). Parents tracked misbehavior for 2 weeks using the PDR or BRC. BRC data proved to be more accurate, though both systems yielded strong reliability and moderate validity. The BRC is recommended to clinicians on empirical and conceptual grounds.     

Stuck in the Middle: The Use and Interpretation of Mid-Points in Items on Questionnaires

Likert-type scales are commonly used when assessing attitudes, personality characteristics, and other psychological variables. This study examined the effect of varying the number of response options on the same set of 28 attitudinal items. Participants answered items using either a 4-point scale (forced choice), a 5-point scale that included a “neither” mid-point, or a 4-point scale with an option of “no opinion” presented after the item. The questionnaire also included an item asking participants what they believe the midpoint in a scale indicated. As predicted, participants’ interpretations of the midpoint varied widely with the most common responses being: “no opinion,” “don't care,” “unsure,” “neutral,” “equal/both,” and “neither.” The quantitative results showed that participants’ levels of item endorsement varied based on the response options offered. For example, “neither” was chosen more often than “no opinion” on all of the items.