Testing the Effectiveness of Brief Behavioral Activation Treatment for Depression—Revised: Changes in Depression,Anxiety, Dysfunctional Attitudes,and Mindfulness

We tested the effectiveness of Brief Behavioral Activation Treatment for Depression-Revised (BATD-R), and its impact on secondary outcomes: anxiety, dysfunctional attitudes, and mindfulness. It was expected that individuals who completed BATD-R would exhibit decreased depression, anxiety, and dysfunctional attitudes, as well as increased mindfulness. A sample of adults with depression (n?=?42) was recruited to complete the 10-week treatment. A healthy control group (n?=?38) was included for comparison. Outcomes (depression, anxiety, dysfunctional attitudes, and mindfulness) were assessed at pre-treatment, post-treatment or 10 weeks for the healthy control group, and three-month follow-up. At pre-treatment, the clinical group reported greater depression, anxiety, and dysfunctional attitudes, and less mindfulness than the healthy control group. At post-treatment, the clinical group reported decreased depressive symptoms, trait anxiety, and dysfunctional attitudes, and increased mindfulness, compared to pre-treatment. The control group did not exhibit changes across the 10 weeks. Clinical and healthy control group post-treatment scores did not differ. At three-month follow-up, the clinical group reported a slight increase in depressive symptoms from post-treatment, but still maintained lower depressive symptoms than pre-treatment. The clinical group maintained treatment gains in dysfunctional attitudes, and mindfulness. Results support the effectiveness of BATD-R and suggest BATD-R may influence dysfunctional attitudes and mindfulness.

     

In Their Footsteps or Shadow? Gender Differences in Choosing a STEM Major as a Function of Sibling Configuration and Older Sibling’s Gender and Math Ability

Although the association between siblings’ compositional characteristics and educational performance has been extensively studied, the question of whether the features of a sibling group are related to substantive gendered educational preferences has not been examined. Our analysis of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 cohort (NLSY-79) Mothers and Children Files (N?=?1545; 57% young women; 22% STEM major) showed that siblings’ compositional characteristics matter for STEM major preferences in college, but only for young women. Our findings indicated that women were more likely to prefer a STEM major if they were raised in smaller sibling groups, in male sibling group dominance, and if they had an older sister with high math achievement. These results are in line with the resource dilution approach; they shed light on the effects of being in a normative male-role sibling group climate; and they suggest that gendered outcomes are shaped by the interplay of role modeling and same-gender competitive stimulation. We also found that for young men, their preference for majoring in a STEM field was mostly driven by their own math ability. These findings suggest that socialization experiences that operate on the sibling level play a crucial role in whether girls become interested in and pursue “gender-atypical” educational choices. Our findings also underscore the need to differentiate these theoretical approaches by gender, particularly when applied to gendered outcomes such as STEM career trajectories.

     

Presence of PTSD is Associated with Clinical and Functional Impact in Veterans with Depression Treated in Community-Based Clinics

Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings - Providers in non-traditional mental health settings (e.g., primary care, community medical clinics) face challenges involving patients who often...     

Becoming a Caregiver: Experiences of Young Adults Moving into Family Caregiving Roles

Journal of Adult Development - While the vast majority of family caregivers struggle to find balance between different roles in their lives, young adult caregivers are faced with the atypical...     

Emotion and the new epistemic challenge from cognitive penetrability

Experiences—visual, emotional, or otherwise—play a role in providing us with justification to believe claims about the world. Some accounts of how experiences provide justification emphasize the role of the experiences’ distinctive phenomenology, i.e. ‘what it is like’ to have the experience. Other accounts emphasize the justificatory role to the experiences’ etiology. A number of authors have used cases of cognitively penetrated visual experience to raise an epistemic challenge for theories of perceptual justification that emphasize the justificatory role of phenomenology rather than etiology. Proponents of the challenge argue that cognitively penetrated visual experiences can fail to provide the usual justification because they have improper etiologies. However, extant arguments for the challenge’s key claims are subject to formidable objections. In this paper, I present the challenge’s key claims, raise objections to previous attempts to establish them, and then offer a novel argument in support of the challenge. My argument relies on an analogy between cognitively penetrated visual and emotional experiences. I argue that some emotional experiences fail to provide the relevant justification because of their improper etiologies and conclude that analogous cognitively penetrated visual experiences fail to provide the relevant justification because of their etiologies, as well.     

Historical Legacies,Social Capital,and Women’s Decision-Making Power: Religion and Child Nutrition in Mozambique

Journal of Religion and Health - In sub-Saharan settings, parental religion may have important implications for children’s health and well-being. Using survey data from rural Mozambique, we...     

Nature,nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic–environment interaction,future dangerousness,and deliberation affect sentencing decisions

Research has shown that the low‐activity MAOA genotype in conjunction with a history of childhood maltreatment increases the likelihood of violent behaviors. This genetic–environment (G × E) interaction has been introduced as mitigation during the sentencing phase of capital trials, yet there is scant data on its effectiveness. This study addressed that issue. In a factorial design that varied mitigating evidence offered by the defense [environmental (i.e., childhood maltreatment), genetic, G × E, or none] and the likelihood of the defendant's future dangerousness (low or high), 600 mock jurors read sentencing phase evidence in a capital murder trial, rendered individual verdicts, and half deliberated as members of a jury to decide a sentence of death or life imprisonment. The G × E evidence had little mitigating effect on sentencing preferences: participants who received the G × E evidence were no less likely to sentence the defendant to death than those who received evidence of childhood maltreatment or a control group that received neither genetic nor maltreatment evidence. Participants with evidence of a G × E interaction were more likely to sentence the defendant to death when there was a high risk of future dangerousness than when there was a low risk. Sentencing preferences were more lenient after deliberation than before. We discuss limitations and future directions.     

Measurement and Predictive Invariance of a Work–Life Boundary Measure Across Gender

Pervasive gender norms influence the way in which men and women create and experience work–life boundaries and work–life conflict, which may lead to differing conceptions of work–life boundary management. Measurement equivalence/invariance (ME/I) and predictive invariance analyses were conducted on the WorkLife Indicator^TM (WLI), a measure of work–life boundary management, to determine if men and women maintain similar conceptualizations of work–life boundary constructs and if work–life outcomes are predicted equally well by WLI scales across gender. Three of the five WLI scales exhibited ME/I; however, half of the WLI scale–criterion pairings failed to demonstrate predictive invariance. These results indicate that measurement and/or predictive invariance cannot be assumed when using work–life boundary assessments across gender.     

Joint action: bodies and minds moving together

The ability to coordinate our actions with those of others is crucial for our success as individuals and as a species. Progress in understanding the cognitive and neural processes involved in joint action has been slow and sparse, because cognitive neuroscientists have predominantly studied individual minds and brains in isolation. However, in recent years, major advances have been made by investigating perception and action in social context. In this article we outline how studies on joint attention, action observation, task sharing, action coordination and agency contribute to the understanding of the cognitive and neural processes supporting joint action. Several mechanisms are proposed that allow individuals to share representations, to predict actions, and to integrate predicted effects of own and others' actions.