When Validity Testing Lacks Validity: Comment on Levine et al.

The death of self‐construal research has been greatly exaggerated. Levine et al. (2003) highlight the alleged methodological limitations of the current body of the self‐construal model of culture. Their allegations, whether true or not, require a fair investigation. Careful examination of Levine et al. reveals pervasive logical flaws, methodological errors, and interpretation biases, which stem from ethnic stereotyping and other erroneous assumptions at various junctures. These fundamental errors, in turn, render their conclusions untenable. In testing their 1st set of hypotheses, which they proclaim to be “central to the validity” of self‐construal scales, Levine et al. bifurcate the participants into “Westerners” versus “Asians,” and then impose their a priori stereotype of how Westerners ought to be versus how Asians ought to be, which is scientifically unacceptable. This is an unscientific validation criterion (comparable to crude ethnic stereotypes such as “Asians are smarter”) and should not be used to judge the scales' validity. Next, in their discussion of priming, Levine et al. assert that the construct validity of the interdependent self‐construal requires that it must be susceptible to priming. This is an elementary logical fallacy. It simply does not follow from the definition of the interdependent self‐construal and therefore cannot be used as a criterion which reflects on construct validity. Their priming experiments are also deeply flawed by the unrepresentative sample of participants. Further, in their factor analyses, Levine et al. set up the “straw man” of a “universal a priori 2‐factor solution” although no self‐construal scholar or theory insists that there are precisely 2 universally applicable self‐construals or that the current self‐construal scales are perfect. The results of statistical analyses, such as those in Levine et al., crucially depend on the selection of presuppositions. Levine et al.'s presuppositions are untenable, yet they are passed off as self‐evident criteria for validity testing. Their article tries to create an illusion of finality, but is pervasively and fundamentally flawed.     

感情经历、失恋角色对恋爱认知-情绪分辨能力的影响

为探究失恋后个体所出现的认知和情绪状况的原因,本研究考察了不同感情经历个体以及失恋个体中主动失恋和被动失恋者对"恋爱事件"的记忆和陈述方式的特征。方法:招募113名被试,根据感情经历和现状分为四组(失恋后单身45人,失恋后恋爱23人,从未失恋现恋爱11人,从未失恋现单身34人),失恋角色(主动36人、被动32人),使用多维尺度分析技术测量个体的认知-情绪分辨能力。结果 :四组中只有失恋后单身组且被动失恋的个体记忆方式中混淆了恋爱的认知和情绪成分,表现出较低的认知-情绪分辨能力。结论:(1)失恋后的再恋爱能够修复因失恋带来的混淆感;(2)失恋事件中的被动方往往比主动方体验到更多的混淆感。     

The moderating role of interviewer's regulatory focus in the effectiveness of impression management tactics: Regulatory fit as a source of subjective value

Based on the recently explored regulatory fit effect in social contexts, the present research is the first to investigate the interaction between interviewer's regulatory focus and interviewee's impression management (IM) tactics. We hypothesized that assertive and defensive IM tactics would fit with interviewer's promotion and prevention focus, respectively, and that interviewer's experience of this regulatory fit would lead to enhanced interview evaluation. We conducted four studies in which the participants were asked to rate an interviewee after reading a list of the interviewee's IM-related behaviours or watching a videotaped interview. Additionally, the participant's regulatory focus was operationalized as both an induced situational state and a measured chronic trait. The results supported our hypotheses by showing a significant interaction of the interviewer's regulatory focus and the IM tactics on interview evaluation: the promotion-assertive and the prevention-defensive ratings were more positive than the prevention-assertive and the promotion-defensive ratings. Moreover, mediation analysis revealed that the interaction exerts its effects on interview evaluation by providing interviewers with an intrapersonal regulatory fit experience.     

The (In)validity of Self‐Construal Scales Revisited

This paper offers a critical rejoinder in the discussion concerning the viability of self‐construal scales. It is our contention that the existing data reported in our previous article (Levine et al., 2003) and elsewhere are more than sufficient to justify the conclusion that self‐report scales purporting to measure interdependent and independent self‐construals as 2 orthogonal constructs lack validity. The arguments to the contrary offered by Gudykunst and Lee (2003) and Kim and Raja (2003) are disputed. Additional data (N = 1,013) show that neither age, occupation, sample size, standardization, nor a 2nd‐order structure can account for the problems we documented previously. Although we see potential utility in the self‐construal construct, we believe that the 3 primary scales fail to meet reasonable and accepted social scientific standards. Difficult conceptual problems will need to be solved prior to the development of new and improved measures.     

山西芮城县九峰山纯阳宫修复工程奠基仪式隆重举行

<正>10月26日,山西芮城县九峰山彩球高悬,仙乐缥缈;高道云集,瑞雪呈祥;天象和氛围增添了道教圣地的钟灵之气。九峰山纯阳宫修复工程奠基仪式在此隆重举行,这是两岸三地道教界弘扬道教文化、增进合作交流的一大盛事、喜事。国家宗教事务局副局长张乐斌、一司副巡视     

中国道教协会领导赴辽宁调研道教情况

2007年6月30日至7月3日,中国道教协会任法融会长、袁炳栋秘书长等一行在辽宁省就部分道观情况进行了调研。辽宁是     

马克思《1861—1863年经济学手稿》对唯物史观的运用与发展——以对斯密生产劳动理论的批判为视角

唯物史观在《德意志意识形态》中创立之后,马克思在《资本论》及其手稿中通过对资本主义社会的科学批判使其得到运用与发展。马克思在《1861—1863年经济学手稿》中对斯密关于生产劳动社会规定性和物质规定性定义的批判,运用了唯物史观科学批判功能的历史辩证法引导出生产劳动的历史性生产关系线索,阐释了资本主义生产劳动的历史性;运用从抽象上升到具体的方法,在揭示出资本主义生产关系的实质之上,论证了资本主义生产劳动的本质特征。与此同时,唯物史观的价值批判功能表现出对资本主义生产劳动非人道性质的批判。马克思在《1861—1863年经济学手稿》中通过对斯密生产劳动理论的批判,创立了科学的生产劳动理论,丰富与发展了唯物史观关于资本主义生产劳动问题的研究。这对于我们理解新时代中国特色社会主义的生产劳动有一定的启发意义。     

读徐梵澄译《薄伽梵歌论》中的案语提示

《薄伽梵歌》着意所在综合,即"究天人","通古今",所得必是一大和谐,这也是"精神"的主旨。而人类之精神事业,落实必在行业瑜伽,即有为于世间,盖由于"人能弘道,非道弘人"。这事业犹如远征,需要引路之人,也即天神降世应身者,吾华称之为圣人。在圣人眼中,人皆得平等,因为每一个人都潜在是"天神之子",他们有能力为精神的进步、也即"变化气质"作出努力。     

试论社会关怀与恪守福音之间的张力——以当代英国基督教会为例

本文以历史上针对基督教会与社会关系的两种相反态度为依据,分析了在世俗化背景下,主张顺应或对抗世俗社会发展趋势的英国自由派和保守派教会在强调社会关怀或恪守福音问题上进退两难的处境,以及它们如何在二者之间进行取舍,凸显了自由派教会广泛而深入地参与社会政治生活与保守派教会坚持履行宣扬上帝福音的使命和基督教传统道德理念、与国家政权机构保持距离之间的张力,并指出二者都在经历着某种意义上的创新和变革,只是所采取的方式及其程度有所不同,它们也都为当代教会发展所必需。