Superiority in Humor Theory

In this article, I consider the standard interpretation of the superiority theory of humor attributed to Plato, Aristotle, and Hobbes, according to which the theory allegedly places feelings of superiority at the center of humor and comic amusement. The view that feelings of superiority are at the heart of all comic amusement is wildly implausible. Therefore textual evidence for the interpretation of Plato, Aristotle, or Hobbes as offering the superiority theory as an essentialist theory of humor is worth careful consideration. Through textual analysis I argue that not one of these three philosophers defends an essentialist theory of comic amusement. I also discuss the way various theories of humor relate to one another and the proper place of a superiority theory in humor theory in light of my analysis.     

EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY AND THE RATIONALITY OF FAITH

This paper evaluates the role that evolutionary psychology can play in examining the rationality of faith in the Christian sense. It is argued that because evolutionary psychology enables us to understand human nature, it can help us understand what faith is. I argue that faith is not a universal human instinct that all religions tap into. Rather, we must understand how the early Christian community used the basic building blocks provided by human nature in a particular way. It is argued that it is a misunderstanding of the nature of faith to assert that faith is intrinsically irrational. However, evolutionary psychology cannot tell us whether or not faith is rational.     

THE CONTROVERSY OVER SCORE BANDING IN PERSONNEL SELECTION: ANSWERS TO 10 KEY QUESTIONS

A particular form of test score banding, in which bands are based on the reliability of the test and in which selection within bands takes into account criteria that are likely to enhance workforce diversity, has been proposed as an alternative to the traditional top-down (rank-order) hiring systems, but it has been hotly debated among both scientists and practitioners. In a question-and-answer format, this article presents three different viewpoints (proponents, critics, and neutral observers) on the scientific, legal, and practical issues. The article also attempts to seek some consensus among experts on this controversial procedure.     

The mediating influence of interpersonal problems on the intergenerational transmission of relationship aggression

Intergenerational patterns of relationship aggression have received considerable theoretical attention and empirical support. A developmental account of such effects suggests that childhood exposure to family violence leads to interpersonal problems that are subsequently manifested in aggressive dating relationships. The current study tested this hypothesis using structural equation modeling with data from a sample of female college students (N= 207). The theoretical model of interest, in which interpersonal problems with dominance, intrusiveness, and vindictiveness fully mediate the link between violence in the family of origin and participation in physically aggressive dating relationships, provided a very good fit to the data. This mediational model was preferable to alternative models that (a) included both direct and indirect influences of family‐of‐origin violence, (b) reversed the direction of effects by modeling interpersonal problems with dominance as a result of intimate partner aggression; and (c) modeled interpersonal problems with submissiveness as mediating intergenerational violence patterns. The findings implicate interpersonal problems with dominance as an important mediating factor in the developmental pathway linking family‐of‐origin violence to intimate partner violence in adulthood for young adult women.     

TOWARD NARROWING THE RESEARCH-PRACTICE GAP IN PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Recently, performance appraisal researchers have adopted a cognitive approach to analyzing judgment processes in performance appraisal. While this approach allows researchers to tap a wealth of knowledge applicable to the appraisal context, this line of research is likely to widen the already existing gap between research and practice. We argue that coordination of the talents of researchers and practitioners is essential for narrowing the gap. Specifically, we suggest researchers focus their research on the best methods of ensuring use of relevant and valid data in appraisal, given organizational constraints. We also suggest practitioners focus on determining observable and measurable aspects of performance, and thus, specify appropriate appraisal content. We also note that cognitive process research has promise for increasing raters' ability to judge accurately, but that this approach does not necessarily address the rater's willingness to provide accurate ratings.