Traditional and modern characteristics across the generations: similarities and discrepancies

The authors examined, through an analysis of self-construals and beliefs about social interaction, the traditional and modern orientations of younger and older generations of Taiwanese people. The authors surveyed 169 pairs of parent-child dyads with a battery of structured questionnaires. Within-subjects analyses revealed high generational correlations as well as discrepancies in both traditional and modern characteristics. Between-subjects analyses further indicated that individual traditional and modern characteristics were affected by age and gender and by their interactions. The authors discuss (a) the pattern of generational similarities and discrepancies in the framework of culture stability and change and (b) the coexistence of traditional and modern characteristics in a rapidly changing society.     

亚里士多德逻辑的现代意义

亚里士多德是逻辑的创始人,也是形而上学的开拓者,他的逻辑为西方哲学提供了一种工具和眼界,一直促进和影响西方哲学的发展.因此,理解亚里士多德逻辑,不仅有助于理解他本人的逻辑观和哲学思想,也有助于理解西方人的逻辑观念和哲学.对照亚里士多德逻辑和现代逻辑,则有助于深入地理解逻辑的本质,有助于清楚地认识西方传统哲学和现代哲学的同异,有助于揭示为什么说西方哲学的主要特征是逻辑分析的,从而有助于更加深刻地理解哲学的本质.     

Validation of the Chinese version of the Walsh Family Resilience Questionnaire

The Walsh Family Resilience Questionnaire (WFRQ) is one of the most widely used and strong theory-based measurement tools of family resilience. This study aimed to develop and psychometrically test the Chinese version of the WFRQ (WFRQ-C). The WFRQ was translated following Brislin's translation model. Psychometric testing, combining classical theory test and item response theory, was conducted with a sample of 800 community adult residents. The Connor-Davidson resilience scale-10 (CD-RISC-10), Self-reported Family Happiness Scale (SFHS-1), and Family APGAR (Adaption, Partnership, Growth, Affection, Resolve) Scale (Family APGAR-5) were applied for convergent validity. Six items were deleted at the item analysis level. The minimum average partial test and a parallel analysis supported a three-factor structure, which was validated by confirmatory factor analysis. The three factors were named “Family belief system,” “Organization, communication and problem solving,” and “Utilization of external resources.” The WFRQ-C was significantly correlated with CD-RISC-10, SFHS-1, and Family APGAR-5, with r values ranged from 0.51 to 0.56. The Cronbach's α was 0.97 for the scale and 0.93, 0.95, and 0.72 for the three factors, respectively. The ICCs of 0.96 for the whole scale, and 0.95, 0.75, and 0.95 for the three factors, respectively. The mean score for the WFRQ-C was 97.00 ± 17.94, of which per capita monthly income and education level were predictors. The 26-item WFRQ-C is a stable, concise, and validated tool to measure family resilience. It is applicable for Chinese community adults in nonspecific stressful settings and has potential utility in the health care domain.     

“逻辑、现代性与现代主义”会议综述（英文）

<正>1 When and where The workshop‘Logic,Modernity,Modernism:Chinese and Western Perspectives’took place on October 11–12,2014 at the Department of Philosophy at Tsinghua University in Beijing.It was organised by Wang Lu and Martin Stokhof,and received financial support from the School of Humanities of Tsinghua University,from     

Double Reference Points: the Effects of Social and Financial Reference Points on Decisions Under Risk

The existing literature is inconsistent about how social comparison affects risk attitudes. We propose a framework where the total utility is composed of the social and financial utilities. The financial utility is consistent with prospect theory (i.e., an S‐shaped utility function with a financial reference point), whereas the social utility is affected by both social and financial reference points. Therefore, social risk attitudes are determined by interaction between gains/losses in both social and financial contexts. On the basis of safety‐first principle, we propose that when experiencing financial gains, individuals tend to seek upside potential and take social risks (i.e., a convex social utility function). In contrast, when facing financial losses, people would be more risk seeking in social gains but more risk averse in social losses to maximize security (i.e., an inverse S‐shaped utility function). We also propose that the relative importance of financial and social utilities depends on the saliency of the reference points and size of stakes. Studies 1 and 2 showed that individuals were risk seeking in both social gains and losses with social reference points alone. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that when both financial and social reference points were salient, participants were risk averse in both social gains and losses when facing financial gains, but risk seeking in social gains and risk averse in social losses when facing financial losses. The hypotheses derived from the theoretical framework were in general supported by our experiments. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Representations of Mental Health Among Middle‐Aged Urban Chinese Men

Little is understood by the ideas that urban Chinese population holds about mental health. Insufficient research and recognition of mental illnesses, and a dearth of social resources for mental health support and promotion limit understandings of how daily life stresses restrict the quality of life of China's urban population. Drawing on in‐depth interviews with 15 middle‐age urban men, we map out men's accounts of how they battle to cope with the demands of everyday social, political, and familial pressures. The study reveals that the representations of mental health are shaped by notions of control over emotions, adherence to Confucian philosophy, familial obligations, and the need to demonstrate social obedience and conformity. Data also suggest that the participants represent stable family support along with healthy social interactions as important enabling factors of positive mental health, whereas pressures of modernity are regarded as significant disruptive factors in mental health. The theory of social representations guides the process as well as analytic interpretations of this research. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.