Alcohol and tobacco cessation in alcohol-dependent smokers: analysis of real-time reports.

Alcohol-tobacco interactions and relapse precipitants were examined among alcohol-dependent smokers in a trial of concurrent alcohol and tobacco treatment. After discharge from treatment, participants completed 14 days of electronic diary (ED) assessments of mood, self-efficacy, urges to drink or smoke, and drinking and smoking behavior. ED data revealed an increase in frequency of alcohol urges after smoking episodes. Drinking relapse episodes were predicted by prior ED ratings of low self-efficacy to resist drinking and high urge to smoke. Smoking relapse episodes were predicted by high urge to smoke and high negative, high arousal mood. Results support a cross-substance cue reactivity model of multiple substance use and a limited-strength model, but not a cross-substance coping model.     

Longitudinal effects of hope on depression and anxiety: a latent variable analysis

This study tested the prospective effects of hope on depression and anxiety using a longitudinal design. A sample of 522 college students completed self-report measures of hope, depression, and anxiety at three time points, with 1-month delays between administrations. Structural equation modeling was employed to test two cross-lagged panel models of the reciprocal effects of the Agency and Pathways components of hope on depression and anxiety. Results indicated statistically significant negative effects for the Agency component of hope on later depression but no unique effect of the Pathways component of hope on depression. Likewise, Agency showed a statistically significant negative effect on later anxiety, but again Pathways had no significant influence on anxiety. In both cases, neither depression nor anxiety demonstrated any longitudinal effects on either the Agency or Pathways components of hope. Implications of these findings are discussed, along with potential directions for future research.     

The Right Stuff

This paper argues for including stuff in one's ontology. The distinction between things and stuff is first clarified, and then three different ontologies of the physical universe are spelled out: a pure thing ontology, a pure stuff ontology, and a mixed ontology of both things and stuff. (The paper defends the latter.) Eleven different reasons for including stuff (in addition to things) in one's ontology are given (seven of which the author endorses and four of which would be sensible reasons for philosophers with certain metaphysical positions that the author does not happen to hold). Then five objections to positing stuff are considered and rejected.     

When lending an ear turns into mistreatment: An episodic examination of leader mistreatment in response to venting at work

Venting—an emotion‐focused form of coping involving the discharge of negative feelings to others—is common in organizational settings. Venting may benefit the self via the release of negative emotion, or by acting as a catalyst for changes to problematic work situations. Nonetheless, venting might have unintended consequences via its influence on those who are the recipients of venting from others. In light of this idea, we provide a theoretical explanation for how leaders in particular are affected by venting receipt at work. Drawing from the transactional model of stress, we theorize that venting tends to be appraised as a threat, which triggers negative emotion that, in turn, potentiates deviant action tendencies (i.e., interpersonal mistreatment). Yet, our theory suggests that not all leaders necessarily experience venting in the same way. Specifically, leaders with higher need for cognition are less influenced by surface‐level cues associated with others’ emotional expressions and find challenging interpersonal situations to be less aversive, thereby attenuating the deleterious effects of receipt of venting. In an experience sampling study of 112 managers across 10 consecutive workdays, we find support for our theoretical model. Altogether, our findings provide insight into the costs incurred when leaders lend an ear to those who vent, which can result in negative downstream consequences.