National Norms and Correlates of the PHQ-8 and GAD-7 in Parents of School-age Children

Anxiety and depressive disorders are global public health concerns, and research suggests that these disorders are common in parents and can adversely influence family functioning. However, little is known about normative levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms in parents of school-age children. The present study reports on generalized anxiety and depressive symptoms in 1570 parents and guardians of a nationally representative sample of children ages five to twelve years using two widely used and validated questionnaires: the eight-item variant of the Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale (PHQ-8) and the seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7). Moderate to severe levels of generalized anxiety symptoms were reported in 12.7% of the total sample and moderate to severe levels of depressive symptoms were reported in 14.1% of the sample; 17.7% of the sample reported moderate to severe levels of either generalized anxiety or depressive symptoms. This percentage was higher for females, younger parents and guardians, and parents and guardians reporting lower household incomes. These data, collected online in early 2018, may be useful for researchers and clinicians studying and treating anxiety and depression in parents. Further, these data provide a baseline for researchers currently studying the impact of changes related to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic (e.g., school closures) on the mental health of parents of school-age children.

     

Similarity Within (Ultimate) Dissimilarity: Burrell and Milbank on the Interplay of Positive and Negative Theology

This article examines the influential analogical schemas of David Burrell and John Milbank. While Milbank emphasises that analogy must be understood as primarily an ontological doctrine, much of Burrell’s work focuses on semantic rather than ontological issues. Milbank has strongly criticised one of Burrell’s early books for construing Aquinas too much in terms of the agnosticism of Kant. It is demonstrated, however, that Burrell is increasingly led in his reading of Aquinas to acknowledge the necessity of a similitude of participation between creatures and God. Analysis of the disagreement between Burrell and Milbank shows one of the reasons why the via analogia matters. We need not privilege the apophatic over the cataphatic, nor the cataphatic over the apophatic. The way of analogy transcends this unpalatable either/or. As relying on the proper exercises, on practical know-how, analogy allows theology a powerful pedagogical tool to govern God-talk, while yet affirming the continual revelation and discovery of something ever-greater.     

Standing up for whom? Targets’ different goals in the confrontation of discrimination

We challenge the common interpretation of targets’ immediate confrontation in reaction to discrimination as self-serving behavior and propose different underlying motivations for this phenomenon. In five online scenario studies (N_overall = 1,447), we demonstrate across different samples and contexts that targets indicate a distinct pursuit of the following self-reported confrontation goals: individual-benefit (e.g., perpetrator apologizes); group-benefit (e.g., prejudice reduction); and distancing (e.g., demonstrating that one is different from typical group members). Furthermore, meaningful associations of the pursuits of individual-benefitting goals and group-benefitting goals with group identification, disidentification, and further collective action intentions indicate that they represent different confrontation motivations: Individual-benefitting confrontation serves to cope with the individual mistreatment of discrimination, whereas group-benefitting confrontation represents a form of collective action. Distancing goals were associated with disidentification and—unexpectedly—group identification. Our results show that the phenomenon of confrontation in reaction to discrimination can be the result of different underlying psychological processes.     

The accuracy of abstracts in psychology journals

This article provides an empirically supported reminder of the importance of accuracy in scientific communication. The authors identify common types of inaccuracies in research abstracts and offer suggestions to improve abstract-article agreement. Abstracts accompanying 13% of a random sample of 400 research articles published in 8 American Psychological Association journals during 1997 and 1998 contained data or claims inconsistent with or missing from the body of the article. Error rates ranged from 8% to 18%, although between-journal differences were not significant. Many errors (63%) were unlikely to cause substantive misinterpretations. Unfortunately, 37% of errors found could be seriously misleading with respect to the data or claims presented in the associated article. Although deficient abstracts may be less common in psychology journals than in major medical journals (R. M. Pitkin, M. A. Branagan, & L. F. Burmeister, 1999), there is still cause for concern and need for improvement.     

Action-based and vision-based selection of input: Two sources of control

In the first part of this paper we review evidence suggesting that there exists a mechanism that selects input on the basis of its similarity to the required action. This response-based input selection differs from the more established space- and object-based input selection in that it is not constrained by the structure of the input. Our evidence suggests that the two-choice Stroop effect is caused by this response-based selection mechanism. By contrast, it is known that the flanker effect is determined by the space- and object- based selection mechanisms. We explore whether the conflict resolution of the Stroop and flanker tasks is different as well by embedding these two tasks in a PRP (Psychological Refractory Period) paradigm. We show that the Stroop and the PRP effects are additive whereas the flanker and the PRP effects are underadditive, suggesting that the processes in charge of the conflict resolution in the Stroop and the flanker tasks are indeed different. We discuss possible reasons for this difference, and discuss possible ways in which the response-based mechanism can be implemented in information processing models.     

Win-shift and win-stay learning in the short-beaked echidna (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Tachyglossus aculeatus</Emphasis>)

Numerous previous investigators have explained species differences in spatial memory performance in terms of differences in foraging ecology. In three experiments we attempted to extend these findings by examining the extent to which the spatial memory performance of echidnas (or "spiny anteaters") can be understood in terms of the spatio-temporal distribution of their prey (ants and termites). This is a species and a foraging situation that have not been examined in this way before. Echidnas were better able to learn to avoid a previously rewarding location (to "win-shift") than to learn to return to a previously rewarding location (to "win-stay"), at short retention intervals, but were unable to learn either of these strategies at retention intervals of 90 min. The short retention interval results support the ecological hypothesis, but the long retention interval results do not. Electronic Publication     

Prenatal diagnosis, personal identity, and disability

A fascinating criticism of abortion occasioned by prenatal diagnosis of potentially disabling traits is that the complex test-and-abortion sends a morally disparaging message to people living with disabilities. I have argued that available versions of this "expressivist" argument are inadequate on two grounds. The most fundamental is that, considered as a practice, abortions prompted by prenatal testing are not semantically well-behaved enough to send any particular message; they do not function as signs in a rule-governed symbol system. Further, even granting, for the sake of argument, the expressive power of testing and aborting, it would not be possible, contra the argument's proponents, to distinguish between abortions undertaken because of beliefs about the disabling conditions the fetus might face as a child and abortions undertaken for many other possible reasons -- e.g., because of the poverty the fetus would face or the increase in family size that the birth of a new child would occasion. Here, I respond to criticisms of those arguments, and propose and defend another: the expressivist argument cannot, in general, distinguish successfully between abortion and therapy as modalities for responding to disabilities.