On the Prospects for Democratic Deliberation: Values Analysis Applied to AustralianPolitics

Democratic theorists increasingly stress that democratic legitimacy rests primarily on authentic deliberation. Critics of deliberative democracy believe that this hope is unrealistic—that deliberation either will prove intractable across political differences or will exacerbate instability. This paper deploys some tools of political psychology, notably Q methodology and values analysis, to investigate the conditions under which effective deliberation is likely to occur. These tools are applied to contemporary political debates in Australia, concerned with how the Australian polity should be constituted in light of a reform agenda underpinned by a discourse we term "Inclusive Republicanism." An investigation of the character of the basic value commitments associated with discursive positions in these debates shows that some differences will yield to deliberation, but others will not. When two discourses subscribe to different value bases, deliberation will induce reflection and facilitate positive-sum outcomes. When a discourse has a value base but finds its specific goals opposed by a competitor that otherwise has no value base of its own, deliberation will be ineffective. When one discourse subscribes to a value base that another questions, but without providing an alternative, deliberation can help to bridge idealism and cynicism.     

Creativity, unique designs, and schizotypy in a nonclinical sample

The present study examined whether creativity and novel design construction differ in 60 individuals who scored low and high (based on a median split) on a measure of schizotypy. Groups differed on one measure, total designs made, but not on creativity.     

Multidimensional influences of anxiety and assessment type on task performance

We examined state evaluation anxiety, trait evaluation anxiety, and neuroticism in relation to New Zealand first-year university students’ (n = 234) task performance on either a...     

Fighting patterns in young coyotes: Initiation,escalation, and assessment

The fighting patterns of young coyotes were studied and 2,350 fights were analyzed. Our results can be summarized as follows: 1) No major injuries were sustained by any of the infants, even in unritualized bouts. 2) In pairs, there was no relationship between social rank and the proportion of fights that were initiated by either animal. 3) Dominant animals were more likely than subordinate individuals to escalate first (perform the first unprovoked dangerous move) during short interactions and to escalate and then subsequently win short fights. 4) Highest-ranking (alpha) individuals in litters did not fight the most. 5) Alpha individuals initiated 73% of the fights in which they partook. Alpha coyotes initiated and then won 86% of the contests that they initiated. 6) For fourth-ranking coyotes in litters, there was a perfect positive correlation between the proportion of times that they initiated fights and the proportion of times that they initiated and then won encounters. They initiated interactions least with the first- to third-ranking animals. 7) Alpha and fourth-ranking animals escalated about the same proportion of the time, but alpha coyotes escalated and then won a greater proportion of fights. 8) Both alpha and fourth-ranking animals initiated and then escalated the greatest proportion of time with individuals nearest in rank, with whom they may have experienced the greatest difficulty in assessing relative social standing. 9) Our data suggested that individuals, especially in litters, were able to make pre-fight assessments but that they were not perfect with respect to this ability. During-fight assessments appeared to be easier to make, using escalation to test an opponent.     

Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview: development, reliability, and validity in an adolescent sample

The authors developed the Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview (SITBI) and evaluated its psychometric properties. The SITBI is a structured interview that assesses the presence, frequency, and characteristics of a wide range of self-injurious thoughts and behaviors, including suicidal ideation, suicide plans, suicide gestures, suicide attempts, and nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI). This initial study, based on the administration of the SITBI to 94 adolescents and young adults, suggested that the SITBI has strong interrater reliability (average kappa = .99, r = 1.0) and test-retest reliability (average kappa = .70, intraclass correlation coefficient = .44) over a 6-month period. Moreover, concurrent validity was demonstrated via strong correspondence between the SITBI and other measures of suicidal ideation (average kappa = .54), suicide attempt (kappa = .65), and NSSI (average kappa = .87). The authors concluded that the SITBI uniformly and comprehensively assesses a wide range of self-injury-related constructs and provides a new instrument that can be administered with relative ease in both research and clinical settings.     

The influence of eye-gaze and arrow pointing distractor cues on voluntary eye movements

We investigated Ricciardelli et al.'s (2002) claim, that the tendency for gaze direction to elicit automatic attentional following is unique to biologically significant information. Participants made voluntary saccades to targets on the left or the right of a display, which were either congruent or incongruent with a centrally presented distractor (eye-gaze or arrow). Contrary to Ricciardelli et al., for both distractor types, saccade latencies were slower, and participants made more directional errors, on incongruent than on congruent trials. Moreover, a cost-benefit analysis showed no difference between the two distractor types. However, latencies for erroneous saccades were faster than correctly directed saccades for the eye-gaze distractors, but not for the arrow distractors.     

Selves in contact: how integrating perspectives on sociocultural selves and intergroup contact can inform theory and application on reducing inequality

Research within cultural psychology and intergroup relations represent two, often separate and distinct, approaches to examining social groups—including outcomes and experiences that define and distinguish group membership and its consequences. Often, social group membership (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, and social class) is tied to persistent and pervasive divides—separations that mark the difference in who attends college, stays in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, and even views personal and societal events (e.g., microaggressions, police‐involved shootings) as involving bias. Addressing such complex and often divisive issues, psychological science has contributed theoretical and applied insights to mitigate social differences and inequalities experienced by historically disadvantaged social groups. The present paper integrates research on cultural psychology and intergroup relations by (a) reviewing empirical findings on sociocultural selves and intergroup contact and (b) considering how merging approaches from these literatures, using a selves in contact framework, can inform and elaborate theoretical perspectives and applications aimed at reducing inequality.