Role of Hindsight Bias,Ethics, and Self-Other Judgments in Students’ Evaluation of an Animal Experiment

Does hindsight knowledge make research seem more ethical and predictable? In line with the notion of hindsight bias, students in 3 experiments knowing the outcome of an animal experiment judged the results as more foreseeable and ethical relative to students who did not know the outcome. Via self to other comparisons, students evaluate themselves more favorably compared to a peer but exhibited hindsight bias in doing so. Uniquely, the findings reveal the possibility that students deem themselves to be more skeptical and objective than their peers. Implications for teaching animal ethics and for Institutional Review Boards are discussed.     

Self-directedness and the susceptibility to distraction by saliency

People with low Self-directedness (SD) tend to explain their behaviour as being significantly influenced by events in the external environment. One important dimension of external cues is their level of salience: highly salient external stimuli are more likely to capture attention, even when such stimuli are not relevant to goals. We examined whether adults reporting low SD would exhibit greater susceptibility to distraction by highly salient external stimuli. Fifty-four (42 males) subjects completed the Attention Modulation by Salience Task (AMST) measuring reaction times to early- or late-onset auditory stimuli in the presence of high- or low-salience visual distractors. SD was assessed via self-report, and analyses tested the relationship between SD and performance on the AMST. Results showed a slowed early response to auditory cues during high salience compared to low salience. Indeed, individuals reporting low SD showed stronger salience interference, suggesting that external causality attribution is accompanied by a subconscious perceptual deficit.     

Associations of Stress Exposures and Social Support With Long-Term Mental Health Outcomes Among U.S. Iraq War Veterans

The long-term mental health effects of war-zone deployment in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars on military personnel are a significant public health concern. Using data collected prospectively at three distinct assessments during 2003–2014 as part of the Neurocognition Deployment Health Study and VA Cooperative Studies Program Study #566, we explored how stress exposures prior, during, and after return from deployment influence the long-term mental health outcomes of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety disorders, and problem drinking. Longer-term mental health outcomes were assessed in 375 service members and military veterans an average of 7.5 years (standard deviation = 1.0 year) after the initial (i.e., “index”) Iraq deployment following their predeployment assessment. Anxiety disorder was the most commonly observed long-term mental health outcome (36.0%), followed by depression (24.5%), PTSD (24.3%), and problem drinking (21.0%). Multivariable regression models showed that greater postdeployment stressors, as measured by the Post-Deployment Life Events scale, were associated with greater risk of depression, anxiety disorders, and problem drinking. Anxiety disorder was the only outcome affected by predeployment stress concerns. In addition, greater postdeployment social support was associated with lower risk of all outcomes except problem drinking. These findings highlight the importance of assessing postdeployment stress exposures, such as stressful or traumatic life events, given the potential impact of these stressors on long-term mental health outcomes. This study also highlights the importance of postdeployment social support as a modifiable protective factor that can be used to help mitigate risk of long-term adverse mental health outcomes following war-zone exposure.     

The ironic consequences of Obama’s election: Decreased support for social justice

Do Americans think that, because of Barack Obama’s election, affirmative action and other policies that address racial injustice are no longer necessary? In this study, we examined this question by assessing participants’ perceptions of racial progress and support for remedying racial injustice both prior to and after Barack Obama’s presidential victory. Following the election, participants increased their perception that racism is less of a problem in the US today than in times past. They also expressed less support for policies designed to address racial inequality. Given the continued prevalence of racial disparities in virtually all aspects of American society, these results raise important implications for the status of policies aimed at eliminating racial injustice.     

Group identification moderates attitudes toward ingroup members who confront discrimination

Three studies examined the hypothesis that group identification moderates African Americans’, Asian Americans’, and women’s attitudes toward fellow ingroup members who challenge an outgroup member’s discriminatory comments or who do not speak up about the comments. Highly identified racial minorities expressed more positive attitudes toward ingroup members who confronted discriminatory comments compared to those who did not confront; whereas weakly identified minorities did not express different attitudes across the two conditions. Among women, the weakly identified expressed more negative attitudes toward other women who confronted discrimination relative to those who did not confront; whereas highly identified women did not differentially evaluate ingroup members in the two conditions. The less women identified with their group, the more negatively they evaluated ingroup members who confronted sexism. This research highlights the important role of group identification in understanding how members of devalued groups respond toward ingroup members who take a stand against discrimination.