Measuring Social Peer Rejection during Childhood: Development and Validation

This article defines the construct of social peer rejection and describes the development of the Social Peer Rejection Measure. Social peer rejection entails being rejected, excluded, ostracized, or criticized by one's peers; lack of active sympathy and active dislike on the part of one's peers; ignoring; preventing access to friends, playtime activities, toys, or important information; verbal aggression; commands; and blaming the rejected child. Evidence for the validity and reliability of the scale is presented. Results indicated strong content validity, construct validity, and criterion-referenced validity. Differences were found between females and males in terms of insult, accusation, and reported levels of physical attack.     

Male and Female Observers’ Evaluations of a Bullying Case as a Function of Degree of Harm,Type of Bullying,and Academic Level

Acting as disciplinary committee members, participants listened to a school bullying case that varied in terms of type (relational or verbal), degree of harm (low or high), and academic level of the victim and defendant (high school or university). Participants’ judgments (e.g., verdict, recommended sentence, seriousness, perceptions of both students) generally favored the victim when he experienced more rather than less harm, regardless of bullying type, and when the incident took place in a high school rather than a university. Additionally, women’s judgments supported the victim more than men’s. We propose that previous results suggesting that observers downgrade relational bullying occurred because no harm was specified. Moreover, we contend that observers relied on a “bullying schema” that includes the component that bullying occurs in primary and secondary schools, which led them to make less punitive judgments in the university case.     

Dichotomous perception of animal categories in infancy

ABSTRACT

Although there is a wealth of knowledge on categorization early in life, there are still many unanswered questions about the nature of category representation in infancy. For example, it is unclear whether infants are sensitive to boundaries between complex categories, such as types of animals, or whether young infants exhibit such sensitivity without explicit experience in the lab. Using a morphing technique, we linearly altered the category composition of images and measured 6.5-month-olds’ attention to pairs of animal faces that either did or did not cross the categorical boundary, with the stimuli in each pair being equally dissimilar from one another across the two types of image pairs. Results indicated that infants dichotomize the continua between cats and dogs and between cows and otters, but only when the images are presented in their canonical, upright orientations. These findings demonstrate a propensity to dichotomize early in life that could have implications for social categorizations, such as race and gender.     

Reaching a verdict

Two experiments, using a mock legal case, confirmed the causal role of arguments in verdict decisions and explored the process involved. Experiment 1 showed that verdicts varied with the strength of counter-arguments and Experiment 2 showed that the use of background information that undermined such arguments determined the verdict reached. Such results confirm the causal role of arguments but do not speak to the representations constructed. In both experiments we analysed the reasons proposed for verdicts. Participants generally represented the state of affairs, and conjectured state of affairs, to which the arguments referred. Experiment 2 also asked participants about the number of causal possibilities they envisaged. Confidence in the verdict was moderated by the strength of counter-arguments but in different ways for those who envisaged a single causal account as opposed to two causal accounts. In the former case, confidence decreased with the rated strength of counter-arguments. In the latter case, confidence increased. We suggest that verdicts are abductive explanations of the events generated through a process of mental simulation.     

Is speech alignment to talkers or tasks?

Speech alignment, or the tendency of individuals to subtly imitate each other’s speaking styles, is often assessed by comparing a subject’s baseline and shadowed utterances to a model’s utterances, often through perceptual ratings. These types of comparisons provide information about the occurrence of a change in subject’s speech, but they do not indicate that this change is toward the specific shadowed model. In three experiments, we investigated whether alignment is specific to a shadowed model. Experiment 1 involved the classic baseline-to-shadowed comparison, to confirm that subjects did, in fact, sound more like their model when they shadowed, relative to any preexisting similarities between a subject and a model. Experiment 2 tested whether subjects’ utterances sounded more similar to the model whom they had shadowed or to another, unshadowed model. In Experiment 3, we examined whether subjects’ utterances sounded more similar to the model whom they had shadowed or to another subject who had shadowed a different model. The results of all experiments revealed that subjects sounded more similar to the model whom they had shadowed. This suggests that shadowing-based speech alignment is not just a change, but a change in the direction of the shadowed model, specifically.     

A comparison of adults’ and children's metacognition for yes/no recognition decisions

Basic metacognitive development research suggests that metacognitive abilities develop before adolescence. However, this research has not used tasks that require the discrimination of seen from unseen stimuli, an important element of real-world recognition tasks such as eyewitness identification. We tested the idea that children would be less able to monitor and control the accuracy of their memories in such a task. We used a word-pair recognition task to compare children's (109 8–12 year olds) and adult's (102 first-year psychology students) ability to adaptively make, monitor, and control the reporting of yes/no recognition decisions about familiar stimuli in a task with no demand effects. We found that adults were substantially better at discriminating old from new stimuli, but no evidence of an age difference in metacognitive ability. Although these results do not explain children's poor metacognition in eyewitness identification, they suggest potential steps to improve children's identification performance.     

BodiMojo: Effective Internet-based promotion of positive body image in adolescent girls

This study tested the efficacy of an Internet-based health promotion program, BodiMojo, designed to promote positive body image in adolescents. Participants were 178 students (mean age 15.2 years, 67.6% ethnic minority) in three public high schools. Intervention groups used BodiMojo for four weekly health class periods, while controls participated in their usual health curriculum. Body image measures were given at baseline, post-intervention, and 3 months. Girls reported decreased body dissatisfaction (p < .05), decreased physical appearance comparison (p < .05), and increased appearance satisfaction (p < .05), relative to controls. Effects were not maintained at 3-month follow-up. No significant differences were found between the intervention and control groups with boys. Moderation analyses suggested positive effects for diverse adolescents as well as those who were overweight or indicated baseline high body dissatisfaction. BodiMojo appears to be modestly effective in decreasing body image concerns among adolescent girls in the short term.     

Bulimia Nervosa: Professional and Lay People's Beliefs About the Causes

This study examined the explanatory models of bulimia nervosa (BN) held by members of professionals in the medical, psychological, and allied health fields; the general public; and female university students. The participants (N = 787) were presented with 44 potential causal explanations for BN and were asked to rate the importance of each in the development of this condition on a 5‐point rating scale (“unimportant” to “extremely important”). Principal component analysis identified four causal components. These were interpreted as corresponding to (1) socio‐cultural pressure, (2) eating and dieting practices, (3) family dynamics, and (4) psychological vulnerability. A high degree of consistency in the mean ratings for the four causal components was observed among the professional groups. However, important differences were found between the professional and the lay respondents in their beliefs about the role of socio‐cultural pressure, eating and dieting practices, and family dynamics in the development of BN. The congruence in beliefs among the professionals groups would contribute to the ease of interdisciplinary collaboration required in the multi‐modal treatment approach to BN. However, the differences observed between the professional and lay groups may have implications for educational and preventative strategies for BN.     

An Analysis of Factors Related to Educational Achievement

Piaget treats compensatory answers to the water jar problem by assuming that the child multiplies proportions in two dimensions (e.g., half the width by twice the height). Since the problem is three dimensional, a two dimensional analysis will not work to produce conservation. In an empirical test of related hypotheses using a prediction of height of water as an independent index of compensatory ability (N = 118 boys and girls from kindergarten through fifth grade), it was shown that many children compensate who do not conserve, a few children conserve who do not compensate, and conserving children who compensate incorrectly (as almost all do) will reject their compensation-based prediction in favor of the conservation judgment. It is concluded that while a loosely construed theory of compensation might help explain the development of conservation ability in the water jar problem, Piaget's tightly organized theory is at best questionable.