Stimulus control and associative learning.

Interest in operant research on stimulus control has declined at the same time that much interest has burgeoned in nonoperant areas. Several examples of this shift toward traditional learning theory are considered, all of which have sponsored theoretical approaches that attempt to characterize the underlying associative units. These theoretical approaches are defended on the grounds that they have generated a deeper understanding of a variety of often puzzling phenomena. My projection is that future research will be determined even more strongly by theories about the structure of associations. Particular issues for which such discussion will have major impact include (1) whether conditional stimulus control is qualitatively different than simpler forms of stimulus control, (2) whether stimulus control is organized hierarchically, and (3) the origin of categories of stimulus equivalence.     

Personal growth: Rogerian paradoxes

The rationale for personal development work in counsellor training stems directly from Rogers' claim of a selective constructive tendency. The basis for this belief and its implementation in experiential learning shows a number of paradoxes: the model of a growing flower—a rigid, rule-following system—is presented as evidence of the potential for positive change; self-actualisation is claimed to be the power force of life, yet is so fragile that it fails most of us; self-knowing involves finding meanings—a cognitive task—yet personal development programmes are based on non-cognitive knowing. The Rogerian rationale for personal development work is thus fatally flawed.     

Distress tolerance and experiential avoidance in compulsive acquisition behaviours

Compulsive buying (CB) is not only associated with impulse control disorders and specific domains of impulsivity, but is also highly comorbid with negative affect and depression, making it a candidate disorder to be characterised by poor emotion regulation. Despite emerging research supporting an association between distress tolerance and disorders of dysregulated behaviour, no study has investigated distress tolerance in the context of CB. The aim of the current study was to explore the relationship between CB and four specific domains of distress tolerance (appraisal, tolerance, absorption, regulation) and experiential avoidance. In a community‐recruited sample of compulsive buyers (n = 47) and healthy controls (n = 38), CB was significantly associated with each of the domains of distress tolerance (Distress Tolerance Scale). Furthermore, CB was associated with greater experiential avoidance (Acceptance and Action Questionnaire), which was in turn associated with each domain of distress tolerance. Analysis of variance demonstrated significant group differences in all measures. Nonparametric bootstrapping analysis revealed that general psychopathology, impulsivity, and experiential avoidance could not fully account for the relationship between distress tolerance and CB severity. Results suggest that distress tolerance and experiential avoidance may represent therapeutic targets in CB. Limitations and future directions are discussed.     

A review of professor mommy: finding work–family balance in academia

Rachel Connelly & Kristin Ghodsee. (2011). Professor Mommy: Finding Work–Family Balance in Academia. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group. 232 pages, $25.95 List. ISBN: 978‐1442208582.     

Exclusion,intergroup hostility,and religious fundamentalism

The goal of the present study was to examine whether exclusion leads to increased intergroup hostility and stronger fundamentalist religious beliefs. Using Cyberball, we examined how adolescents from different ethnic groups in the Netherlands (of Moroccan, Turkish, and Dutch descent with either Muslim, Christian, or secular beliefs) responded to being included or excluded by ethnic in- and outgroup members. We expected that exclusion by ethnic outgroup members would represent a categorization threat and would result in greater hostility. We hypothesized that exclusion by ethnic ingroup members would represent an acceptance threat and would result in responses that reduce uncertainty and increase one's chances of being accepted by others (e.g., a stronger endorsement of fundamentalist religious beliefs). The results revealed that among all ethnic groups, exclusion by ethnic outgroup members led to more hostility toward the co-players and the co-players' ethnic group than exclusion by ethnic ingroup members. This was mediated by the extent to which people attributed their exclusion to the racist attitudes of their co-players. Among Muslims and Christians, exclusion by ethnic ingroup members led to more support for fundamentalist beliefs. We discuss the theoretical extension that these results provide, and practical issues raised regarding the consequences that may occur through the marginalization of religious and ethnic groups.