Judging the implications of a concession: Conversational distance and belief bias effects

An arguer's position at a given point in an argument can be characterized as a set of commitments. The present study considers the perceptions of ordinary language users about the implications of making a concession for the contents of the conceder's commitment set. In particular, we examine two sources of influence on such lay perceptions—conversational distance (i.e., the number of turns separating the concession from commitments incurred earlier in the argument) and an individual's prior beliefs regarding the content of the argument. Across two studies, college students were administered an argument task assessing the extent to which a concession by the protagonist of an argument on the last move indicated changes to other commitments incurred earlier in the argument. Results indicated that participants were more likely to judge a concession as indicating a change in prior commitments if (a) the commitment was incurred later in the argument than earlier, and (b) the participant disagreed with the protagonists’ thesis in the argument. In addition, performance on deductive reasoning tasks predicted individual differences in the conversational distance effect, but not the belief bias effect.     

On the Future of Group Therapy Theory

The author presents a hypothetical view of group therapy theories as they may evolve over the first decades of the New Milennium. Looking at the problem of prediction from the standpoint of postmodernism and social constructivism, the importance of these perspectives as frameworks of the social sciences is emphasized. The influence of general systems theory, Foulkesian group analysis, object relations theory, self psychology, cognitive-behavioral psychology, and neuropsychiatry are briefly examined with respect to the expected evolution of increasingly sophisticated, detailed, and nuanced theories of group psychology and group psychotherapy.     

Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group

Bullying was investigated as a group process, a social phenomenon taking place in a school setting among 573 Finnish sixth-grade children (286 girls, 287 boys) aged 12–13 years. Different Participant Roles taken by individual children in the bullying process were examined and related to a) self-estimated behavior in bullying situations, b) social acceptance and social rejection, and c) belongingness to one of the five sociometric status groups (popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average). The Participant Roles assigned to the subject were Victim, Bully, Reinforcer of the bully, Assistant of the bully, Defender of the victim, and Outsider. There were significant sex differences in the distribution of Participant Roles. Boys were more frequently in the roles of Bully, Reinforcer and Assistant, while the most frequent roles of the girls were those of Defender and Outsider. The subjects were moderately well aware of their Participant Roles, although they underestimated their participation in active bullying behavior and emphasized that they acted as Defenders and Outsiders. The sociometric status of the children was found to be connected to their Participant Roles. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Children's reasoning about responses to peer aggression: Victim's and witness's expected and prescribed behaviors

This research examined children's reasoning about expected (i.e., what a peer would do) and prescribed (i.e., what a peer should do) responses to unprovoked, intentional aggressive actions in two contexts: as a victim of such a transgression and as a witness to the incident. Physical harm and property damage items were used in a structured interview format. There were 90 subjects drawn from three elementary school grades (2nd, 4th, and 6th). Children differentiated between the expected and prescribed responses of peers and significant developmental differences in children's evaluations were found. Although the majority of the subjects in all grades denounced retaliation on the basis of concerns about others' welfare, older children stated that peers were likely to retaliate against the perpetrator nonetheless. Across different contexts, older children's responses appeared to reveal a greater independence from authority in negotiating peer interactions. In evaluating the witness's responses to aggressive acts, younger children's expected and prescribed responses were less disparate than that of the older children. The utility of including different vantage points of the child in examining children's social reasoning about aggression and the application of the present findings to social information-processing models are discussed. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

A response to the proposed ELCA inter‐religious policy statement

In this solicited essay, an undergraduate Interfaith Scholar and Interfaith Studies minor at Concordia College responds to the ELCA proposed interreligious policy statement. In this essay, I will contend that the policy statement beautifully articulates our Lutheran commitment to accompany our neighbors by envisioning a world in which God celebrates all forms of diversity. Moreover, by framing our vocation in the context of relational theology, the document lays the groundwork for mutual understanding that prioritizes service to the neighbor over proselytization.     

De‐legitimizing hostility and strengthening joint agency: Lutheran inter‐religious commitment today

The ELCA Declaration of Inter‐Religious Commitment is an important instrument for mainstreaming inter‐religious engagement in local communities and diverse ministries. This article assesses this recent policy document and highlights how the text engages Lutheran theological reasoning on “the neighbor” for a profound understanding of God's grace, theologically de‐legitimizes hostility and exclusion, and strengthens joint agency. This resonates with current concerns in the global Lutheran communion and the wider ecumenical movement.     

Gender-Based Effects of Frames on Bullying Outcomes

The study extends research on the effect of frames. It is the first study to examine how framing affects the impact of being bullied. College students were randomly assigned to one of two groups: one framing bullying in terms of resilience and the other framing bullying with negative psychosocial consequences. Participants were asked to engage in a brief writing task aimed to actively create a frame and then completed both implicit and explicit measures. There was a significant main effect by gender and several significant interaction effects between frame and gender. These results suggest that framing impacts an individual’s conceptualization of emotionally salient personal memories and should be considered when developing bullying interventions. The impact of framing bullying may vary by gender.     

Freedom and idealism in Mary Whiton Calkins

This paper explores Calkins’ absolute idealism and its ramifications for libertarian free will. Calkins’ metaphysics is a version of absolute idealism, according to which the absolute is a person who has everything else as either a part or an aspect. Three different arguments for the conclusion that Calkins’ metaphysics is incompatible with libertarian freewill are formulated and critically assessed. Finally, I assess the extent to which these arguments are independent of each other.