Parent and child causal attributions during clinical interviews

Attributions made by children and their parents for the cause of the child's clinical problem were monitored during assessment interviews. Results support previously observed differences obtained through questionnaires, with parents making more attributions than their children to characteristics of the child. This pattern was affected by variations in interview format. Parents and children differed in the locus of their attributions when interviewed individually, but these differences were not present when families were interviewed with both parents and children present. Implications for the methodology of attribution research with child-clinical populations are highlighted.     

Communicating the reasons for social rejection

Two studies examined the pattern of reasons given for rejecting dates and how they reflect concerns of the rejector. Study One examined retrospective accounts of rejection. Rejectors often reported withholding the reason for rejection from the rejected person. A content analysis of the reasons communicated to rejected persons was performed using Weiner's (Journal of Educational Psychology, 1979, 71, 3–25) attributional dimensions of locus, controllability, and stability. The stated reasons were found to be primarily impersonal, uncontrollable, and unstable. Study Two examined rejectors' willingness to communicate certain types of reasons. The true, privately held reasons for turning down dates were systematically varied as to locus, controllability, and stability. The types of reasons subjects offered to rejected persons were consistent with Study One. Reasons for refusal were less likely to be revealed when they related to the appearance or personality of the rejected person, particularly when the personal reasons were uncontrollable and stable. Rejectors were not as forthright when they controlled the reason for rejection as when they lacked control. The rejectors' actions were interpreted as being self-presentational, reflecting concerns about rejected persons' emotional reactions, expectancies for the future of the relationship, and blame for rejection.     

Comparison of the WISC and WISC-R on a psychiatric adolescent inpatient sample

The present study compared the WISC and WISC-R on a group of psychiatric adolescent inpatients. The results indicated high intercorrelations between the two test versions but with the correlations linearly related to the changes in content and administration rules of the WISC-R. Analyses of variance indicated that, on the basis of the Full Scale IQ, the WISC is an easier test than the WISC-R.The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Ms. Kathleen Lennox for her aid in data analysis and computer programming.     

Racialized Religion and Judicial Injustice: How Whiteness and Biblicist Christianity Intersect to Promote a Preference for (Unjust) Punishment

America's judicial system is both exceptionally punitive and demonstrably unjust toward racial minorities. While these dual realities are structured into America's institutions, we propose they are also partially sustained by the intersection of ideologies that are both racialized and sacralized. Using multiple waves of the General Social Surveys and a unique measure that asks Americans to choose between two forms of judicial injustice (wrongful conviction or erroneous acquittal), we examine how white racial identity intersects with biblical literalism to bolster America's bent toward unjust punitiveness. In the main effects, Americans who affirm biblical literalism are more likely to show a preference for convicting the innocent, as are whites compared to Black Americans. Examining interaction effects, however, we find whiteness moderates the influence of biblical literalism such that only white biblical literalists (as opposed to non‐white biblical literalists or white non‐biblical literalists) are more likely to prefer wrongful conviction. Indeed, in our full model, being a white biblical literalist is the strongest predictor of preferring wrongful conviction. We theorize that preference for wrongful conviction over erroneous acquittal stems, at least in part, from the combination of sacralized authoritarianism and perceived racial threat.     

When Gender Matters in Scientific Communication: The Role of Generic Language

Sex Roles - Prior research has documented gender differences in self-presentation and self-promotion. For example, a recent analysis of scientific publications in the biomedical sciences reveals...     

Romantic Conflict Narratives in Emerging Adult Couples: Viewpoint and Gender Matter

Healthy romantic relationships entail understanding the needs of the self and other when interpreting conflict events. Yet how couples make meaning around specific conflicts and their capacity to reflect on their own and their partners’ unmet needs is understudied. Using narratives, we examined destructive (e.g., extreme anger and break-up anxiety) and constructive (e.g., perspective taking) interpretations of past romantic conflicts in 80 emerging adult heterosexual couples and the extent to which such interpretations varied by viewpoint and gender. Couple members were interviewed separately about two conflict episodes in which their partner did not meet their needs (victim viewpoint) and two episodes in which they did not meet their partners’ needs (perpetrator viewpoint). As anticipated, destructive interpretations were more evident in the victim viewpoint and for female couple members. In contrast, within constructive interpretations, the use of insight was greater in the perpetrator than the victim viewpoint. Although perspective taking was expected to be more common in the perpetrator viewpoint and in female narratives, this was not the case, as this type of constructive interpretation was infrequent in narratives about conflict. The findings revealed aspects of meaning making that might be useful to mental health professionals concerned with building skills to improve romantic competence in emerging adult couples.     

How Religion Predicts Pet Ownership in the United States

Over 60 percent of Americans have some sort of family pet. Although studies have explored the personality and demographic correlates of pet ownership, none have considered whether religious characteristics may influence not only pet ownership, but the kind of pet Americans own. Drawing on data from the 2018 General Social Survey, we examine the religious antecedents of pet ownership in general as well as owning a cat or a dog, taking into account factors previously associated with owning certain pets (e.g., urban vs. rural residence, political affiliation). Although religious tradition and biblical literalism generally do not predict pet ownership, frequent worship attendees and the most conservative evangelicals report owning fewer pets. Religious characteristics also predict Americans’ ownership of particular pets. Most notably, we find a strong, negative association between worship attendance and cat ownership. We theorize potential mechanisms. On the one hand, certain personality types might simultaneously attract some Americans toward religious participation and away from pets, and cats in particular. Alternatively, to the extent that pet ownership is a partial substitute for human bonding and interaction, Americans more deeply embedded within a religious community may have less need (or time) for pets generally, and specifically more independent “roommate pets,” like cats.     

Evaluation of a finger prompt variation in the treatment of pediatric feeding disorders

Children with feeding disorders often engage in refusal behavior to escape or avoid eating. Escape extinction combined with reinforcement is a well-established intervention to treat food refusal. Physical guidance procedures (e.g., jaw prompt, finger prompt) have been shown to increase food acceptance and decrease inappropriate mealtime behavior when more commonly employed escape extinction (e.g., nonremoval of the spoon) procedures are ineffective. The finger prompt, however, has not been extensively evaluated as a treatment adjunct to target food refusal, thus necessitating further examination. The purpose of this prospective study was to assess a variation of a finger prompt procedure to treat food refusal and to assess caregivers' acceptability of the procedure. Three children age 1 to 4 years admitted to an intensive feeding disorders program and their caregivers participated. The finger prompt was effective in increasing bite acceptance across all participants and decreasing or maintaining low levels of inappropriate behavior for 2 participants. The procedure was also acceptable to all caregivers.