Catching up with wonderful women: The women‐are‐wonderful effect is smaller in more gender egalitarian societies

Inequalities between men and women are common and well‐documented. Objective indexes show that men are better positioned than women in societal hierarchies—there is no single country in the world without a gender gap. In contrast, researchers have found that the women‐are‐wonderful effect—that women are evaluated more positively than men overall—is also common. Cross‐cultural studies on gender equality reveal that the more gender egalitarian the society is, the less prevalent explicit gender stereotypes are. Yet, because self‐reported gender stereotypes may differ from implicit attitudes towards each gender, we reanalysed data collected across 44 cultures, and (a) confirmed that societal gender egalitarianism reduces the women‐are‐wonderful effect when it is measured more implicitly (i.e. rating the personality of men and women presented in images) and (b) documented that the social perception of men benefits more from gender egalitarianism than that of women.     

A Visual Representation to Quantitate,Diagnose, and Improve Creativity in Insight Problem Solving

A new visual representation for insight problems permits 22 new quantitative measures; which leads to a detailed diagnosis of a person's (or team's) creative weaknesses; which then leads to prescribing targeted, effective counter‐techniques for each weakness. Currently, only two measures are consistently used for insight problem solving: the number of problems solved and the time to solve the problems. These coarse measurements do not reveal the intricate dynamics of solving insight problems. Furthermore, four commonly used creativity measures (i.e., fluency, originality, flexibility, and elaboration) are often not applied to insight problems. This new visualization permits the easy application of all four creativity measures. I challenge creativity researchers to help determine which of the 22 proposed quantitative measures are the most diagnostic for insight problem solving in isolation and, in a weighted linear combination, which might yield an effective quotient (i.e., overall measure) of insight problem solving ability.     

Training analysis and training models

This article has the intention of giving impulses to a hopefully more creative and open-minded discussion of the function of training analysis and the kind of training model we seem to take for granted in the Scandinavian countries, the Eitingon model. I will consider some historical background data on this model as well as some historical data on the development in France which have created an alternative model of training. Especially in Sweden, there has been a stormy debate during the last years about the training analyst functions and some members have actually decided to leave our association because of this. I would like to try to shift focus from just a ‘yes-or-no-perspective’? to a broader question of our psychoanalytical society’s purpose and structure and how the training-model could sustain it.     

Clinician-Guided Assessment of Personality Using the Structural Interview and the Structured Interview of Personality Organization (STIPO)

This article demonstrates the utility of a theory-guided psychodynamic approach to the assessment of personality and personality pathology based on the object relations model developed by Kernberg (1984). We describe a clinical interview, the Structural Interview (SI; Kernberg, 1984), and also a semistructured approach, the Structured Interview of Personality Organization (STIPO; Clarkin, Caligor, Stern, & Kernberg, 2004) based on this theoretical model. Both interviews focus on the assessment of consolidated identity versus identity disturbance, the use of adaptive versus lower level defensive operations, and intact versus loss of reality testing. In the context of a more clinically oriented assessment, the SI makes use of tactful confrontation of discrepancies and contradictions in the patient's narrative, and also takes into account transference and countertransference phenomena, whereas the more structured approach of the STIPO incorporates clinical judgment informed by clinical theory into a well-guided interaction with the patient. Both interviews have good interrater reliability and are coherent with the alternative model for personality disorder diagnosis proposed by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.), Section III. Finally, they provide the clinician with specific implications for prognosis and treatment planning and can rationally guide clinical decision making.