Collective student characteristics alter the effects of teaching practices on academic outcomes

The goal of this study was to examine the influence of collective student characteristics (academic skills and task persistence at the beginning of first grade) and different teaching practices (child-centered, teacher-directed, and child-dominated) on the development of academic skills and task persistence during the first two years in school. We hypothesized that teaching practices would differentially impact the development of academic skills and task persistence depending on the collective needs of the classroom. Participants were 523 students (273 boys) from 32 classrooms across Estonia. By using multilevel modeling, we found several interactions indicating that both contextual influences are important in determining subsequent academic functioning and task persistence but that some teaching practices are more beneficial depending on the collective starting point of students. These findings highlight the importance of studying different contextual influences hand in hand when trying to understand what enhances young children's academic development.     

Integrating who “we” are with what “we” (will not) stand for: A further extension of the Social Identity Model of Collective Action

Collective action refers to any action that individuals undertake as group members to pursue group goals such as social change. In this chapter, we further extend the Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA) by including not just (politicised) identity but also moral motivations into its core, effectively integrating who “we” are with what “we” (will not) stand for. Conceptually, we utilise self-categorisation theory’s notion of normative fit to elaborate this special relationship between the moral and identity motivations for collective action. Empirically, we review two research projects (the experimental and survey-based Value-Identity Fit Project and the longitudinal Politicisation Project) that both suggest that the SIMCA needs to be extended to include, both conceptually and empirically, a broader range of (violated) moral beliefs and a focus on identity content. We discuss key implications of expanding the core of the SIMCA for the social psychology of collective action and social change, and suggest new directions for future theorising and research in this field.     

Can we Build on Social Movement Theories to Develop and Improve Community‐Based Participatory Research? A Framework Synthesis Review

A long‐standing challenge in community‐based participatory research (CBPR) has been to anchor practice and evaluation in a relevant and comprehensive theoretical framework of community change. This study describes the development of a multidimensional conceptual framework that builds on social movement theories to identify key components of CBPR processes. Framework synthesis was used as a general literature search and analysis strategy. An initial conceptual framework was developed from the theoretical literature on social movement. A literature search performed to identify illustrative CBPR projects yielded 635 potentially relevant documents, from which eight projects (corresponding to 58 publications) were retained after record and full‐text screening. Framework synthesis was used to code and organize data from these projects, ultimately providing a refined framework. The final conceptual framework maps key concepts of CBPR mobilization processes, such as the pivotal role of the partnership; resources and opportunities as necessary components feeding the partnership's development; the importance of framing processes; and a tight alignment between the cause (partnership's goal), the collective action strategy, and the system changes targeted. The revised framework provides a context‐specific model to generate a new, innovative understanding of CBPR mobilization processes, drawing on existing theoretical foundations.     

Shame and guilt development in preschoolers: The role of context,audience and individual characteristics

The study examined the early development of shame and guilt, the individual differences related to them and the role of situation and audience. Fifty-eight children aged 3 to 5 years were observed in two paradigms: moral, in which they were led to believe that they had broken an object, and non-moral, in which they failed an easy task. Each session was led twice, with an adult and with a peer. Temperament and conduct were assessed through parental reports. Results showed that older children expressed more guilt than younger children. Shame-proneness was characterized by bodily tension, reticence and gaze avoidance, whereas guilt-proneness by latency to repair and confession. Children were able to distinguish the moral from the non-moral situation and, only in the former, shame was associated with difficult temperament and with emotional problems, whereas guilt was correlated with adaptive characteristics. Finally, children mainly expressed distress with the adult, who holds the authority.     

Please accept my sincere and humble apologies: The HEXACO model of personality and the proclivity to apologize

We investigated the links of the HEXACO personality factors and facets with the proclivity to apologize for transgressions, using self- and observer-reports of personality in two adult samples. The proclivity to apologize showed its strongest correlations with the honesty–humility factor, whether evaluated by the self or a knowledgeable observer. Agreeableness was a positive correlate of the proclivity to apologize in one sample only. In both samples, self-reported conscientiousness was positively associated with a proclivity to apologize. We also obtained self-reports on the guilt and shame proneness scales, given the strong conceptual link between guilt and apology. The proclivity to apologize was associated positively with facets of guilt (especially Negative Behavior Evaluation) but negatively with one facet of Shame (Withdrawal).     

Individual differences in guilt proneness affect how people respond to moral tradeoffs between harm avoidance and obedience to authority

High guilt proneness was associated with valuing harm avoidance more than obedience to authority on questionnaires (Study 1). Results from a laboratory study suggest that people high in guilt proneness, but not those low in guilt proneness, disobeyed an experimenter to prevent a confederate from suffering through an unpleasant task (Study 2). The present research highlights the role of guilt proneness in moral decision making.