秒回?信息通讯技术时代的职场通讯压力

职场通讯压力是指员工想要快速回复基于信息通讯技术(information and communication technology, ICT)的工作消息而体验到的紧迫性, 现有研究对其成因及影响路径的探讨较为零散且缺乏系统性认识。基于工作要求-资源模型并结合努力-恢复模型, 讨论作为工作要求的ICT使用以及作为个人要求/资源的个体因素对职场通讯压力的前因作用; 探讨职场通讯压力因阻碍恢复活动而对员工身心健康以及工作和家庭领域产生的消极影响, 以期增进对职场通讯压力的全面了解, 丰富现有研究对ICT使用后果的认识, 并为未来研究的展开以及员工职业心理健康干预实践提供参考。     

自闭症谱系障碍社交动机理论：机制及干预探索

自闭症谱系障碍(Autism Spectrum Disorder, ASD)表现为社会交往困难以及重复刻板兴趣或行为。社交动机理论提出ASD个体是由于社交动机缺乏导致的社交障碍。目前该理论缺乏理论元素及结构关系的系统论证, 及基于此理论的低龄ASD儿童群体的研究证据。本研究拟采用心理实验法、眼动及近红外脑成像技术, 探索低龄ASD儿童早期社交奖赏、社交定向异常眼动标记及眶额叶脑区活动的神经机制。此外, 通过音乐奖赏强化学习的干预方式改善该理论的核心元素(社交奖赏), 观测能否改善ASD儿童的社交动机。本研究的开展有望对该理论进行系统验证, 并形成改善社交行为的潜在干预方案。     

Ten principles of counselling: Grounded theory in a mixed methods research project

This grounded theory (GT) study is part of an extensive mixed methods research project to develop general principles for counselling. Nine hundred counselling protocols were examined. The material is characterised by a quantitative amount of data with a qualitative character. The research is based on the systemic-constructivist research paradigm. The variety of perspectives is an important aspect of the work. Therefore, it is important that the entire research process with GT takes place in exchange with other research settings in order to minimise the limitations caused by the perspective of the researchers. During the research process, there was an intensive examination of GT in order to adapt it to the research project. By using the GT to analyse the extensive qualitative material, the actions of the counsellors were observed and 10 counselling principles were developed. This article presents the research process and the findings.     

“Being human”: A grounded theory approach to exploring how trainers on clinical psychology doctorate programmes decide whether or not to disclose personal experiences of psychological distress to clinical psychology doctorate trainees

Objective

Recent research and guidelines recommend that trainers on clinical psychology doctorate training programmes consider disclosing personal experiences of psychological distress to trainees. Disclosure is thought to promote cultures of openness, validate and normalise trainee distress, encourage trainee disclosure and help-seeking and challenge stigmatising narratives. However, little is known about how trainers decide whether, what or how to disclose. This study aims to address that gap by exploring the processes and factors involved in trainers deciding whether or not to disclose personal experiences of psychological distress to trainees, generating findings of relevance across counselling, psychotherapy and psychology training courses.

Methods

In-depth interviews were conducted with nine trainers on UK clinical psychology doctorate programmes from around the country and analysed in accordance with constructivist grounded theory methods.

Results

Findings indicated that participants valued disclosure personally and professionally but were wary of the dangers of disclosure. Disclosure decisions were made by judging the context against internally held criteria. If criteria were not met, then disclosures were not made. Outcomes, whether positive or negative, served to reinforce the value of disclosure and the importance of managing risks, creating a positive feedback loop.

Conclusions

The findings of this study suggest factors that are important for trainers to consider when deciding whether or not to disclose. The six-factor framework developed may be useful for trainers to consider within reflective practice, supervision or during guided self-reflection in order to make safe, helpful and ethical decisions.     

Rapport-building: Chat versus in-person witness interviews

Tactics recommended for rapport-building consist of verbal (e.g., finding common ground or shared experiences) and non-verbal (e.g., affirmations, displaying empathy) behaviours. Most of the research on rapport, however, has examined it in in-person contexts, where both verbal and non-verbal behaviours are present. In this study, we were interested in the effectiveness of rapport-building when conducting online witness interviews via chat, which de-emphasises the use non-verbal rapport behaviours, compared to traditional in-person interviews. Participants (N = 131) experienced a virtual reality (VR) scenario depicting a mock crime and were interviewed either in person or online via the chat function in Skype. Participants perceived rapport more positively when interviewed in person for three measures: attentiveness, trust and respect and expertise. Two other measures, cultural similarity and connected flow, were not perceived differently across interview medium. Participants interviewed online via chat disclosed similar amounts of crime-related information and were just as accurate as participants interviewed in person. We found that in-person interviews yielded better rapport ratings than interviews via chat but were equally productive in terms of the quality of information obtained, as measured by crime-related details and accuracy. If witnesses are to be interviewed via chat, investigators must carefully consider how to compensate for the lack of those non-verbal rapport tactics that influence witnesses' perceptions of attentiveness, trust/respect and investigator's expertise.     

The sociodemographic and psychosocial correlates of COVID-19 vaccine concerns among urban college students

COVID-19 vaccine concerns remain high among Americans. Although recent studies have investigated the sociodemographic disparities in vaccine concerns, less attention has been given to reasons for vaccine skepticism and psychosocial factors that may explain it. The current study examined specific types of vaccine concerns among a diverse sample of college students (N = 1985) living in New York City. Participants who identified as Black, younger, with later immigrant generational status, and those with more conservative political leanings reported more vaccine concerns. Concerns regarding vaccine side effects were the most frequently reported source of concern. Reason for getting vaccinated, personal experiences with COVID, and COVID stress was also associated with vaccine concerns. Study results emphasize the importance of sociodemographic factors and COVID knowledge and stress in examining and addressing vaccine concerns.     

Stop the blame game: An analysis of blaming on Weibo during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic in rice and wheat areas in China

In the pandemic era, social media has provided the public with a platform to make their voice heard. One of the most important public opinions online during a pandemic is blame. Blame can lead to stigma towards patients as well as potential patients and decrease social cooperation, which might impede prevention and control measures during epidemics. Thus, studying online blame during the early days of COVID-19 can facilitate the management and control of future pandemics. By analyzing 3791 posts from one of the most popular social media sites in China (Weibo) over the 10 days immediately after COVID-19 was declared to be a communicable disease, we found that there were four main agents blamed online: Individuals, corporations, institutions, and the media. Most of the blame targeted individual agents. We also found that there were regional-cultural differences in the detailed types of blamed individual agents, that is, between rice- and wheat-farming areas in China. After controlling influence of distance from the epicenter of Wuhan, there were still stable differences between regions: people in wheat areas had a higher probability of blaming agentic, harmful individuals, and people in rice areas had a higher probability of blaming individuals with low awareness of social norms for preventive health behavior. Findings have implications for preventing and predicting blame across cultures in future pandemics.     

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

Communication of criticism between groups is important to productive societal discourse, but may serve to inflame conflict. The defensive rejection of intergroup, relative to intragroup, criticism (intergroup sensitivity effect [ISE]) may contribute to such divides. The ISE has been observed in self-report measures, but such measures are weak and biased predictors of actual (divisive) behavior. We review recent research demonstrating that the ISE does have costly behavioral consequences. We next consider the debate concerning whether the ISE reflects defense of a valued social identity or enforcement of a conversational norm. We therefore review recent evidence for an ISE among individuals lacking identification with the target of the criticism. Third, we examine how the ISE may affect a variety of behaviors relevant to societal divisions, including political reconciliation, environmental sustainability, and vaccination. Lastly, we outline future research that can clarify the underlying mechanisms of the ISE and promote conciliatory intergroup behavior.     

Intellectual humility predicts COVID-19 preventive practices through greater adoption of data-driven information and feelings of responsibility

Preventive health practices have been crucial to mitigating viral spread during the COVID-19 pandemic. In two studies, we examined whether intellectual humility—openness to one's existing knowledge being inaccurate—related to greater engagement in preventive health practices (social distancing, handwashing, mask-wearing). In Study 1, we found that intellectually humble people were more likely to engage in COVID-19 preventive practices. Additionally, this link was driven by intellectually humble people's tendency to adopt information from data-driven sources (e.g., medical experts) and greater feelings of responsibility over the outcomes of COVID-19. In Study 2, we found support for these relationships over time (2 weeks). Additionally, Study 2 showed that the link between intellectual humility and preventive practices was driven by a greater tendency to adopt data-driven information when encountering it, rather than actively seeking out such information. These findings reveal the promising role of intellectual humility in making well-informed decisions during public health crises.