Self-Presentational Issues in Competition and Sport

This paper critically reviews self-presentational behavior, cognition, and affect in competition and sport. It is subdivided into three main sections. The first section focuses on self-handicapping behavior, describing what it is and why it occurs. Self-handicapping research is reviewed followed by suggestions for future study. In section two, cognitions related to stereotypes about individuals who play certain sports are discussed. The third and final section examines demographic, environmental, and physical self-perception correlates of social physique anxiety as well as the tenability of Leary's (1992) Leary, M. R. 1992. Self-presentation processes in exercise and sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 14: 339–351. [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] conceptualization of competitive anxiety.     

ROY SCHAFER: A NARRATIVE

The author provides a brief overview of the papers given at the Schafer Symposium in October 2012 by the following six presenters: Henry Schwartz, Richard Fritsch, Rosemary Balsam, Lucy LaFarge, Michael Feldman, and Jay Greenberg. He also highlights some important ongoing themes in Schafer's writing, including theory—about which Schafer takes a unique position—history, and ideas from other disciplines. Schafer prefers continuing explorations over arriving at conclusions, the author notes, and believes that students should remain faithful to their mentors' thinking—until it is time for them to move beyond it.     

Everyday emotion word and personal pronoun use reflects dyadic adjustment among couples coping with breast cancer

Dyadic adjustment is integral for couples facing breast cancer; therefore, it is important to identify its everyday indicators. A total of 52 couples coping with breast cancer wore the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR) for one weekend and completed the Dyadic Adjustment Scale to investigate how dyadic adjustment manifests in noncancer‐related word use. Multilevel models revealed that partners', rather than one's own, positive emotion words positively related to dyadic adjustment. Conversely, spouses' negative emotion words and patients' anger words were negatively related to dyadic adjustment. Furthermore, focus on spouses rather than patients (spouses “I” and patients “you”) positively related to dyadic adjustment. Results revealed that dyadic adjustment can be reflected in couples' everyday word use, serving as an objective indicator of marital quality.     

TEAMS' FEMALE REPRESENTATION AND PERCEIVED POTENCY AS INPUTS TO TEAM OUTCOMES IN A PREDOMINANTLY MALE FIELD SETTING

We developed a team-level temporal model and tested it with data from 92 newly formed teams in a naturalistic military setting where females were a distinct minority in all teams. Contrary to what is posited by theory on customary perceptions of females' capabilities and gender-role congruence, a higher female proportion within teams did not adversely influence teams' early perceived potency, later social cohesion, or observers' assessments of teamwork. Consistent with theory regarding gender and abilities, however, a higher female proportion within teams contributed to better team problem solving but led to slightly worse team results on physically demanding tasks. In addition, teams' early perceived potency contributed positively to early task proficiency and later social cohesion. Furthermore, teams' social cohesion contributed positively to externally observed teamwork while controlling for task proficiency. We discuss implications of these findings for theory and practice.     

The Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale: Is it a valid measure?

The Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale (PIRS) was introduced as part of the Workcover legislation in NSW and has since been adopted in other States. There has been significant criticism of its validity and structure, but no supporting research. This study was undertaken to examine the validity of the use of the PIRS to assess psychiatric impairment. This study assesses the concurrent validity of the PIRS by comparing it with the Comcare and Social Security scales and the Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, together with two self‐report measures. It also examines the relationship between the PIRS subscales. A high level of ordinal concordance was demonstrated between all scales although the ratings obtained had major systematic variations between scales in both level and distribution. The scoring technique in the PIRS transforms normally distributed scores to a skewed distribution with a preponderance of low scores. The PIRS is a valid scale for ordering the severity of psychological disability but it measures disability rather than impairment. The form of scoring does not provide a proportionate or statistically meaningful measure.     

Review of refugee mental health and wellbeing: Australian perspectives

This review covers refugee mental health and wellbeing within the Australian context to assist psychologists who provide services for, or who conduct research with, refugees. It provides a brief overview of the refugee movement, prior to examining evidence relating to the impacts of pre‐displacement, displacement and resettlement factors on psychological adjustment in the resettlement phase, and the systemic and sociopolitical factors that influence the process of adaptation during resettlement. Australian findings suggest that mental health and wellbeing outcomes are influenced by a complexity of pre‐displacement, displacement, resettlement and systemic factors; the detention or award of temporary residence to refugees who are already experiencing psychological distress on arrival are cases in point. Limitations of the findings are considered. More research into the combined, pathwise relations between the psychosocial pre‐determinants and psychological sequelae of the refugee experience is required. Finally, suggestions for the development of practice, training and ethical guidelines are offered.     

Behavior expectations in cross‐sex friendships,same‐sex friendships,and romantic relationships

Abstract In 2 studies, university students from the United States rated the importance of 43 behavior expectations about their cross‐sex friends, same‐sex friends and romantic partners. In Study 1, all 399 participants had a current romantic partner, whereas in Study 2, romantic partner status varied across the 165 participants. Participants always rated their expectations for romantic partners higher than for either type of friend, and expectations for behaviors promoting emotional closeness were always rated higher than expectations about behaviors promoting social companionship or relationship positivity. In Study 2, expectations for cross‐sex friends were rated lower and more similar to same‐sex friends when participants had a current romantic partner than when they did not.