Medical Students’ Decisions About Authorship in Disputable Situations: Intervention Study

In medicine, professional behavior and ethics are often rule-based. We assessed whether instruction on formal criteria of authorship affected the decision of students about authorship dilemmas and whether they perceive authorship as a conventional or moral concept. A prospective non-randomized intervention study involved 203s year medical students who did (n = 107) or did not (n = 96) received a lecture on International Committee of Medical Journal editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria. Both groups had to read 3 vignettes and answer 4 questions related to the distinction between conventional and moral domains. Written justification of student’ choices whether the authorship in a vignette was right or wrong was rated by 4 independent raters as based on justice or a rule. Formal instruction had no effect on students’ decisions on authorship in the vignettes (44, 34 and 39% ICMJE-consistent answers for 3 vignettes, respectively, by students receiving instruction vs. 38, 42 and 30% for those without instruction; P > 0.161 for all vignettes). For all dilemmas, more students decided contrary to ICMJE criteria and considered their decisions to be a matter of obligation and not a choice and to be general across situations and sciences. They were willing to change their decision if a rule was different only for peer situations but not for mentor–mentee situations. The number of students who used rule-based justification of their ICMJE criteria-consistent decisions was significantly higher in the instructed than in the uninstructed group. Instruction about formal authorship criteria had no effect on student’s decisions about authorship dilemmas and their decisions were related to the moral rather than a conventional domain. Teaching about authorship and other professionalism and integrity issues may benefit from interventions that bring intuitive processes into awareness instead of those fostering rule-based reasoning.     

The Distribution of the Product Explains Normal Theory Mediation Confidence Interval Estimation

The distribution of the product has several useful applications. One of these applications is its use to form confidence intervals for the indirect effect as the product of 2 regression coefficients. The purpose of this article is to investigate how the moments of the distribution of the product explain normal theory mediation confidence interval coverage and imbalance. Values of the critical ratio for each random variable are used to demonstrate how the moments of the distribution of the product change across values of the critical ratio observed in research studies. Results of the simulation study showed that as skewness in absolute value increases, coverage decreases. And as skewness in absolute value and kurtosis increases, imbalance increases. The difference between testing the significance of the indirect effect using the normal theory versus the asymmetric distribution of the product is further illustrated with a real data example. This article is the first study to show the direct link between the distribution of the product and indirect effect confidence intervals and clarifies the results of previous simulation studies by showing why normal theory confidence intervals for indirect effects are often less accurate than those obtained from the asymmetric distribution of the product or from resampling methods.     

Objective consequentialism and the licensing dilemma

Frank Jackson has put forward a famous thought experiment of a physician who has to decide on the correct treatment for her patient. Subjective consequentialism tells the physician to do what intuitively seems to be the right action, whereas objective consequentialism fails to guide the physician’s action. I suppose that objective consequentialists want to supplement their theory so that it guides the physician’s action towards what intuitively seems to be the right treatment. Since this treatment is wrong according to objective consequentialism, objective consequentialists have to license it without calling it right. I consider eight strategies to spell out the idea of licensing the intuitively right treatment and argue that objective consequentialism is on the horns of what I call the licensing dilemma: Either the physician’s action is not guided towards the intuitively right treatment. Or the guidance towards the intuitively right treatment is ad hoc in some respect or the other.     

Differential influence of basic psychological needs on burnout and academic achievement in three southeast European countries

Several studies show the importance of basic psychological needs (BPN) for decreasing burnout and increasing grade point average (GPA), but, to our knowledge, no prior study has explored the potential contextual differences in Southeastern European countries. Moreover, even less is known about how this relationship may differ during stressful (exam) and less stressful (beginning of the semester) periods. Measures of the Maslach Burnout Inventory—Student Survey and BPN Satisfaction and Frustration Scale were translated and adapted. The study included a cross-sectional sample of students from Croatia, Serbia and Slovenia during beginning of the semester and exam period. Across all countries and both contexts, students with high autonomy need satisfaction showed the strongest decrease in burnout, followed by those with high competence need satisfaction. Students with high academic achievement showed an increase due to competence need satisfaction. Competence and autonomy need satisfaction were higher beginning of a semester, while burnout was higher during the exam period. BPN play an important role in educational settings—satisfaction of the need for autonomy and competence protects students from burnout, and the need for competence predicts greater academic achievement regardless of culture or time of the semester.     

Personality Resemblance Between Parents and Offspring: Study of Five Factors Across Four Samples and Questionnaires

The aim of this study was to compare personality resemblance in four independent Croatian samples using the same family study design, but different measures of five-factor personality traits. The family study design can provide evidence of familial aggregation of personality and of assortative mating. Father-mother correlations, father-offspring correlations, mother-offspring correlations and regressions of offspring on midparent score were computed for five broad personality domains in each sample. Father-mother correlations ranged between ?.12 and .27 across different samples and questionnaires, while father-offspring correlations ranged between .04 and .34, mother-offspring correlations between ?.01 and .28 and regressions of offspring on midparent scores between .05 and .35. These results are congruent with earlier findings of: (a) low assortative mating for personality, and (b) moderate familial aggregation of personality, which is lower compared to heritability estimates from earlier studies using twin design. Familial aggregation is mostly comparable in size across four different five-factor questionnaires suggesting that, from a behavior genetic perspective, conclusions on family resemblance should not differ depending on the five-factor personality questionnaire used.     

The Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) in Transitional Post-War Croatia: Psychometric and Cultural Considerations

The Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) is a recently developed measure for assessing grandiose and vulnerable themes of narcissistic pathology. The aim of this study was to validate the PNI in the transitional post-war Croatian society by examining its psychometric properties and factor structure in a sample of Croatian university students (N?=?651). The participants filled out several self-report measures of narcissism, as well as measures of trait emotional stability and negative emotional states. Findings of this study supported the existence of seven first-order and two second-order factors of the PNI, invariant across genders. Additionally, all the subscales had good reliability coefficients, while the associations with other measures supported the concurrent validity of the instrument. These findings support the use of the PNI in a transitional post-war society and emphasize certain aspects of cross-cultural stability of pathological narcissism, although some cross-cultural variants should be considered when applying this measure in different cultural settings.     

Is Racial Profiling a Legitimate Strategy in the Fight against Violent Crime?

Racial profiling has come under intense public scrutiny especially since the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement. This article discusses two questions: (1) whether racial profiling is sometimes rational, and (2) whether it can be morally permissible. It is argued that under certain circumstances the affirmative answer to both questions is justified.     

Disentangling the Relationship Between Implicit Aggressiveness and Counterproductive Work Behaviors: The Role of Job Attitudes

Implicit aggressiveness, measured by the Conditional Reasoning Test for Aggression (CRT-A), has been shown to be important for understanding counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs). However, it is not clear how employees justify CWBs that stem from their unconscious tendencies. We tested the idea that implicitly aggressive individuals develop negative job attitudes (JAs) to justify their CWBs. In Study 1, 333 employees completed the CRT-A, a battery of JAs, and a CWBs scale. In Study 2, another sample (n = 341) completed the CRT-A and different measures of JAs and CWBs. In both studies, implicit aggressiveness explained JAs and self-reported CWBs. Although the design did not allow establishment of exact causal sequence, both studies were more consistent with the model where CWBs mediated the CRT-A and JA relationship.     

False Dilemma: A Systematic Exposition

False dilemma is a specific form of reasoning: despite the fact that it is based on a deductively valid argument form, it is rightly depicted as fallacy. A systematic exposition of false dilemma is missing in theoretical approaches to fallacies. This article formulates six criteria for a well-grounded exposition of a fallacy, suggesting also a systematic exposition of false dilemma. These criteria can be used to both explain, and categorise, the various false dilemma fallacies. The article introduces distinction between four types of false dilemma (and the respective subtypes): (1) False quandary, (2) Defeasible sound quandary, (3) False obstruction and (4) Defeasible sound obstruction. The types of criticism appropriate for each variant of false dilemma are suggested. Being able to discover false dilemma in situations when it is important to make good and free choices is a significant dimension of critical thinking. It may liberate us from accepting the consequences that necessarily follow from prearranged alternatives, when these are not the only alternatives possible. It may also liberate us from refraining from actions on the basis of obstructive disjunctive statements. In that respect, the faculty of critical thinking directed at uncovering reasoning based on false dilemma may also initiate the discovery of new alternatives, or discover the ways of unifying seemingly opposing alternatives. Thus, a well-developed ability to understand the tricky argumentative moves of false dilemma may be a good step towards initiating some features of creative thinking.