Plagues,Pagans, and Christians: Differential Survival,Social Networks,and the Rise of Christianity

In his book, The Rise of Christianity, Rodney Stark argues that the early Christian church indirectly benefitted from the plagues that struck the early Roman Empire in the 2nd and 3rd centuries of the Common Era. In particular, he argues that the early church's doctrines concerning love, charity, and social service would have led Christians to enjoy higher survival rates than pagans, which would have left the social networks of the former relatively intact, while those of the latter in disarray. Moreover, since recruitment to new religious movements occurs largely through social ties, the probability that an average pagan would have converted to Christianity would have been greater after the plagues than before. In this article, we use computer modeling to test Stark's hypothesis. Not only do we find support for his hypothesis, we also show that higher survival rates for either group not only would have benefitted their respective social networks but also would have benefitted their competitor's social networks, highlighting how network effects often flow in multiple and unexpected ways. We conclude with suggestions for future research, in particular how scholars can build upon our analyses and explore alternative assumptions.     

Resurgence is greater following a return to the training context than remaining in the extinction context

The present study examined whether resurgence of a previously reinforced target response upon removing alternative reinforcement would be greater when (1) returning to the original training context (ABA context changes) versus (2) remaining in the analogue treatment context in which the alternative response was differentially reinforced (ABB context changes). Experiment 1 arranged reinforcement of button pressing with points exchangeable for money in university students. Experiment 2 arranged reinforcement of lever pressing with food for rats. Experiment 3 arranged reinforcement of responses to a touchscreen with small bites of food with children diagnosed with ASD. Overall, resurgence of target responding tended to be greater when returning to the original training context (A) than when remaining in the analogue treatment context (B). These findings suggest context changes with differential reinforcement treatments could exacerbate the recurrence of problem behavior resulting from reductions in treatment integrity through failure to reinforce appropriate behavior.     

Noncontingent and differential reinforcement in the treatment of pediatric feeding problems

We conducted functional analyses of the inappropriate mealtime behavior of 5 children diagnosed with feeding problems. Then, we compared the effects of differential and noncontingent reinforcement, and the relative effects of escape extinction with and without differential or noncontingent reinforcement, when escape extinction appeared necessary. Both reinforcement procedures were effective without escape extinction to treat food refusal for 1 child, but only differential reinforcement was effective without escape extinction to treat the child's liquid refusal. Escape extinction was necessary for 4 of 5 children. The addition of positive reinforcement resulted in beneficial effects (i.e., more stable acceptance, decreased inappropriate mealtime behavior or negative vocalizations) with 3 of 4 children. With escape extinction, differential reinforcement was more effective to treat food refusal for 2 children and noncontingent reinforcement was more effective for 1 child.     

Rater Model Using Signal Detection Theory for Latent Differential Rater Functioning

Differential rater functioning (DRF) occurs when raters show evidence of exercising differential severity or leniency when scoring examinees within different subgroups. Previous studies of DRF have examined rater bias using manifest variables (e.g., use of covariates) to determine the subgroups. These manifest variables include gender and the ethnicity of the examinee. For example, a rater may score males more severely. Ideally, each rater’s severity should be invariant across subgroups. This study examines DRF in the context of latent subgroups that classify possible sources of DRF based on raters’ scoring behavior rather than manifest factors. An extension of the latent class signal detection theory (LC-SDT) model for identifying DRF is proposed and examined using real-world data and simulations. Results from real-world data show that the signal detection approach leads to an effective method to identify latent DRF. Simulations with varying sample sizes and conditions of rater precision were shown to recover parameters at an adequate level, supporting its use to identify latent DRF in large-scale data. These findings suggest that the DRF extension of the LC-SDT can be a useful model to examine characteristics of raters and add information that can aid rater training.     

Discrete emotions linking abusive supervision to employee intention and behavior

Drawing on appraisal theories of discrete emotions, we propose and test a model in which abusive supervision directed toward oneself and toward work unit peers (coworker abusive supervision) are interactively related to generalized feelings of shame, anger, and fear. These discrete emotions, in turn, tend to precipitate distinct responses that do not directly target the supervisor. We tested our hypotheses with a three-wave, time-lagged survey of 285 full-time workers from 55 work units. Consistent with our theorizing, supervisory abuse was associated with stronger feelings of shame while at work when the abusive supervision reported by one's coworkers was lower (vs. higher), whereas abuse had a stronger association with anger when coworkers also perceived relatively high levels of abuse. The distinct action tendencies associated with shame and anger are related to employees engaging in less voice behavior and more interpersonal deviance, respectively, and fear is related to higher turnover intentions. We discuss the study's implications for theory development concerning abusive supervision.     

When your heart is in your mouth: the effect of second language use on negative emotions

Research on bilingualism and emotions has shown stronger emotional responses in the native language (L1) compared to a foreign language. We investigated the potential of purposeful second language (L2) use as a means of decreasing the experience of psychological distress. Native Swedish speakers read and answered questions about negative and neutral texts in their L1 (Swedish) and their L2 (English) and were asked to rate their level of distress before or after the questions. The texts and associated questions were either written in the same (within-language), or different languages (cross-language). We found that within-language trials when the text was written in participants’ native language (Swedish–Swedish) resulted in an increase of distress, whilst cross-language trials (Swedish–English) resulted in a decrease of distress. This implies that purposeful second language use can diminish levels of distress experienced following a negative event encoded in one's first language.     

Fear,Anger, and Voting for the Far Right: Evidence From the November 13, 2015 Paris Terror Attacks

The conjecture that negative emotions underpin support for far‐right politics is common among pundits and scholars. The conventional account holds that authoritarian populists catalyze public anxiety about the changing social order and/or deteriorating national economic conditions, and this anxiety subsequently drives up support for the far right. We propose that while emotions do indeed play an independent causal role in support for far‐right parties and policies, that support is more likely built upon the public’s anger rather than fear. This article explores the relative impact of fear and anger in reaction to the 2015 Paris terror attacks on the propensity to vote for the French far‐right party, the Front National, in the 2015 regional elections. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find that anger is associated with voting for the Front National, while fear is associated with voting against the Front National. Moreover, anger boosts the Front National vote most powerfully among far‐right and authoritarian voters. On the other hand, fear reduces support for the far right among those same groups.     

Studying Emotions in Security and Diplomacy: Where We Are Now and Challenges Ahead

The core objective of this special issue has been to shed light on emotions as (1) frames that shape interpersonal diplomatic relations, (2) as key tools that are used as part of the statecraft's toolbox, and (3) as formative/productive dynamics with real effects on human beings—that, in turn, often construct and maintain conflicts. It is therefore pertinent that we interrogate the political psychology of individual, collective, mass, and communal emotions and how these are often (mis)used in diplomacy and security narratives to legitimize politicians' decisions and practices. This concluding article provides a state of the art account of the study of emotions in International Relations (IR), sums up the main findings from all special issue contributions and constructively explores potential challenges ahead for the study of emotions in IR, especially in security and diplomacy studies. It concludes with an appeal for the development of a multiperspective approach—that is, one that combines social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities—for a nuanced study of the role of emotional work in state, diplomatic as well as security narratives and practices. This approach will in turn require methodological pluralism in how we go about, as reflexive researchers, our emotional research.     

Methodological Challenges in the Study of Emotions in Politics and How to Deal With Them

This introductory article to the special issue zooms in on the literature on political emotions with a specific focus on methodological questions of “how to study” political emotions. To the extent that methodological matters are addressed in the extant literature, the associated challenges are often portrayed as a clash between social science and natural science disciplines, a clash frequently illustrated by the meeting between political science and neuroscience. Rather than being a clash between academic disciplines, this article argues that many of the methodological challenges facing emotional research have their origin in scholars' diverse views on the relationship between themselves as researchers and political emotions as a research object. In the light of this acknowledgment, the article encircles and discusses the methodological challenges associated with three key conceptual distinctions between: (1) individual and collective emotions, (2) emotions and reason, and between (3) involuntary political emotions and the strategic usage of political emotions. Using the contributions to this special issue as illustrations, the article argues in favor of moving beyond mutually exclusive dichotomies regarding these conceptual distinctions and offers pathways for dealing with current methodological challenges to emotional research. It points to methodological pluralism, transparency, and context‐sensitive research strategies.     

Rousing the Partisan Combatant: Elite Incivility,Anger, and Antideliberative Attitudes

The claim that elite political incivility can rouse partisan, antideliberative attitudes has many adherents, but the empirical record demonstrating a relationship is surprisingly limited. Yet the extant research suggests that incivility can stimulate aversive feelings, of the sort that discrete and dimensional theories of emotion predict should induce a partisan, antideliberative mode of citizenship among those exposed. Leveraging two online experiments, I address the questions of whether elite incivility provokes anger, rather than enthusiasm and anxiety, and whether the affective reactions induced by incivility yield the changes in deliberative attitudes that theories of emotion predict. I find that elite incivility, when counterattitudinal, rouses anger, which in turn can provoke an active and combative form of partisan citizenship. Despite claims to the contrary, the link between proattitudinal incivility, anger, and antideliberative attitudes is less clear. The results provide insight into the dynamics of discourse in the digital age, when affective polarization is the norm and elites commonly employ uncivil rhetoric.