Individual Differences in Commitment to Value‐Based Beliefs and the Amplification of Perceived Belief Dissimilarity Effects

The commitment to beliefs (CTB) framework (Maxwell‐Smith & Esses, 2012) proposes that there are individual differences in the extent to which people generally follow beliefs that are a reflection of their values. The current research hypothesized that CTB would amplify the effects of perceived belief dissimilarity or incompatibility, such that individuals higher in CTB would display more pronounced reactions to belief‐relevant groups, events, or individuals seen as incompatible with their value‐based beliefs. We tested our hypothesis in three studies that assessed participants' CTB and their perceptions of belief dissimilarity or incompatibility with regard to other religious groups (Study 1), political parties during a national election (Study 2), and their romantic partner (Study 3). CTB amplified the effects of perceived belief dissimilarity or incompatibility on people's biases toward other religious groups, voting intentions and behavior in a national election, and their evaluative and behavioral responses toward their romantic partner. These results collectively suggest that perceptions of belief dissimilarity or incompatibility are particularly important cues for individuals with higher levels of CTB as they encounter other people or events that are relevant to their beliefs.     

Initial Validation of the U.S. Army Global Assessment Tool

The U.S. Army developed the Global Assessment Tool (GAT) to monitor psychosocial fitness and well-being among soldiers and provide a means to objectively gauge the success of newly implemented resilience training programs. Despite its widespread use (taken over 5.2 million times) and stated utility for program evaluation, there is relatively little published evidence regarding the GAT’s reliability and validity. We used exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) with 4 random samples of soldiers (n = 10,000 each) to examine the factorial validity and reliability of the GAT. An 11-factor solution (Self-Management, Positive Affect, Meaning, Work Engagement, Organizational Trust, Loneliness, Negative Cognitions, Hostility, Negative Emotions, Depressive Symptoms, and Emotion-Focused Coping), with 4 additional factors assessing character strengths (Intellect, Warmth, Civic Strengths, and Temperance), fit well and replicated in a second random sample. A higher order, 2-factor model using composites scores and positing positive and negative psychosocial competencies also fit well. Tests of measurement invariance using a third random sample reinforced consistent measurement properties across gender, age, and rank, with the exception of character strengths, which produced different factor structures for males and females. Further validity tests using a fourth random sample underscored a modicum of divergence among the resilience factors and convergence among the character strengths factors. We conclude with recommendations for enhancing and refining the GAT and discuss the GAT’s utility as a reliable, multidimensional psychosocial assessment that can be used to evaluate the efficacy of military resilience training programs.     

Anxiety and Depression in Children and Adolescents: A Factor-Analytic Examination of the Tripartite Model

The tripartite model of Clark and Watson (1981) suggests that the oft-observed covariation between anxiety and depression can best be understood by examining three related yet distinct constructs: negative affectivity, positive affectivity, and elevated physiological arousal. In the present study, 510 boys and girls in the 4th, 7th, and 10th grades completed the Children's Depression Inventory and the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to determine the goodness of fit of single-factor (i.e., negative affectivity), two-factor (i.e., anxiety and depression), and three-factor models (i.e., negative affectivity, positive affectivity, and physiological arousal). Analyses were conducted by examining each of the models in the whole sample first and then separately for boys and girls and for fourth, seventh, and tenth grade youths. Results failed to support the tripartite theory; rather, the findings supported a two-factor model in all cases. These factors represented the general constructs of anxiety and depression, and these factors remained significantly interrelated. Consistent with previous findings, the strength of these relations was stronger for boys than girls and for children than adolescents.     

“亚当·斯密问题”的逻辑张力

“亚当·斯密问题”是指斯密的《国富论》与《道德情操论》之间存在着对立或不一致的问题,最初由十九世纪中叶的德国历史学派所提出。此后,随着现实与理论的发展,出现了不同的看法。学者们普遍认为,斯密的两大著作之间、经济学与伦理学之间存在着对立或者不存在对立,而是相互一致的。这些看法都具有各自的积极合理的内容,但缺乏辩证的观点,而没有看到“斯密问题”自身的逻辑张力,也就是说,“斯密问题”所指涉的是现实的经济与伦理之间及作为其理论表现的经济学与伦理学之间的关系。“斯密问题”所含的这些关系呈现出了一个动态的、由肯定到否定再到否定之否定的辩证过程。