The Association of Daily Hassles and Uplifts with Family and Life Satisfaction: Does Cultural Orientation make a Difference?

The study examined similarities and differences between people having individualist and collectivist cultural orientations in terms of what they perceive as stressful and uplifting experiences in their daily lives, and the relation between daily experiences and family and life satisfaction. Data were collected from two representative community samples (697 Jews and 303 Arabs). Each sample was grouped into individualist and collectivist cultural orientations. The two cultural orientation groups differed with respect to the appraisal of positive and negative daily experiences. A structural equation modeling (SEM) multi-group analysis indicated a similar factor structure for hassles and uplifts in both groups. However, the two groups differed in the effects of positive and negative daily occurrences on family and life satisfaction.     

Comparative Evaluations

My response to Engelmann (2008) will be based on several questions that will allow both its author and the general reader to determine whether the assumptions I make as an interpreter of this complex paper are congruent or incongruent with their own interpretations of the text. The interpretations by the writer, by any commentator, and the diverse interpretations of a general audience together with my own interpretations will, I hope, facilitate some fruitful ‘comparative evaluations.’ I articulate my inferences of the most dense part of the paper, namely the ‘concrete immediate Consciousness and the developing absent outside.’ My hope is to address Engelmann’s question: “Am I in a better disposition to judge modern theories of consciousness?” The last section of my response spells out more personal comments to my all too brief and single encounter with Arno Engelmann. It is there that Arno Engelmann’s fascinating statement “I am a citizen of the world” is addressed through its counterparts in my life.     

“When Strangers Meet”: John Bowlby and Harry Harlow on Attachment Behavior

From 1957 through the mid-1970s, John Bowlby, one of the founders of attachment theory, was in close personal and scientific contact with Harry Harlow. In constructing his new theory on the nature of the bond between children and their caregivers, Bowlby profited highly from Harlow’s experimental work with rhesus monkeys. Harlow in his turn was influenced and inspired by Bowlby’s new thinking. On the basis of the correspondence between Harlow and Bowlby, their mutual participation in scientific meetings, archival materials, and an analysis of their scholarly writings, both the personal relationship between John Bowlby and Harry Harlow and the cross-fertilization of their work are described.

Splitting as a Focus of Couples Treatment

Current developments in neurophysiology and trauma have re-awakened interest in the reciprocal influences of the interpersonal and intrapsychic domains. Although object relations theory continues to guide clinical practice, its integration into models of best practice has been limited by a lack of empirical study. This paper examines the defense mechanism of splitting in couples from the theoretical, empirical and clinical perspectives in ways that allow for integration with research findings. It is proposed that splitting operates on a continuum from a specific response that is stimulated by anxiety, to a fundamental style of relating that is marked by emotional reactivity, impaired problem solving and relationship instability. Specific treatment interventions that integrate object relations and cognitive perspectives are summarized.     

Authorities’ knowledge of shared group membership and its effects on the respect-informing properties of procedural fairness

We observe that the voice-leads-to-respect process underlying relational models of procedural fairness is assumed to follow primarily if not solely from interaction with an in-group authority. Moreover, if the voice recipients believe that the authority is unaware of this shared group membership, then the provision of voice actually says nothing (to the voice recipients) about their standing as group members; the respect-providing information as valued in-group members is absent because the recipients know that the authority does not know of their shared group membership. We tested these assumptions in a three-way design manipulating the group membership of the authority (in-group vs. out-group), the nature of voice (provided vs. denied) and the nature of group membership knowledge (the authority knows or does not know the voice recipient’s group membership). A significant three-way interaction was found, as predicted, on respect and fairness ratings. These data provide clear experimental support for an unstated, and yet untested, assumption of relational models of procedural fairness.     

Let’s talk about race, Baby! When Whites’ and Blacks’ interracial contact experiences diverge

The present study investigated whether the conditions that make interracial contact anxiety-provoking for Whites differ from those that make it anxiety-provoking for Blacks. Specifically, the present work examined interracial anxiety as a function of discussant race (i.e., White or Black) and discussion topic (i.e., race-related or race-neutral). To that end, we examined the nonverbal behavior of White and Black participants during brief interpersonal interactions. Consistent with previous research, White participants behaved more anxiously during interracial than same-race interactions. Additionally, White participants of interracial interaction behaved more anxiously than their Black interaction partners. Furthermore, whereas White participants of interracial interactions found race-related discussions no more stressful than race-neutral discussions, Black participants of interracial interactions found race-related discussions less stressful than race-neutral discussions. The implications of these racial and contextual differences in interracial anxiety for improving interracial contact and race relations, more broadly, are discussed.     

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Across four experiments, we test the idea that power decreases metastereotyping, and that this effect is mediated by reduced perspective taking. Metastereotypes refer to the beliefs that members of group A share about the stereotypes that members of specific outgroup B typically have about ingroup A. We propose that the dominant psychological orientation of the powerless is aimed at seeing how others see them. In an intergroup situation they are therefore inclined to activate and apply metastereotypes. In the first three experiments we consistently find that low power leads to more metastereotyping than high power and control (in Experiment 3). Specifically, we show this effect with three different manipulations of power, namely a role manipulation (Experiment 1), experiential priming (Experiment 2), and parafoveal priming (Experiment 3). In the fourth experiment we uncover the mediating role of perspective taking. Together these findings provide strong evidence that powerlessness leads to metastereotyping.     

Bird and the Dispositional Essentialist Account of Spatiotemporal Relations

The basic principles of dispositional essentialism do not require that the fundamental spatiotemporal relations are dispositional in nature. Nevertheless, Bird (who defends dispositional monism) argues that they possess dispositional essences in virtue of the fact that the obtaining of these relations can be characterised by the satisfaction of a certain counterfactual. In this paper I argue that his suggestion fails, and so, despite his attempt, the case of the spatiotemporal relations remains the ‘big bad bug’ for the thesis of dispositional monism.

Constructing the law: discourses and social practices

This paper presents an analysis of everyday understandings of the law, within the context of a dispute between colonial and indigenous land interests in New Zealand. The analysis is informed by developments in the areas of critical legal studies, methodological critique of legal psychology, the social constructionist movement within social psychology, and the application of discursive psychology to understandings of racism. Data for this work was drawn from a corpus of letters to the editor of a newspaper, published in the city where the land dispute took place. Writers constructed the dispute as a legal issue and deployed two divergent constructions of the law. When the ‘primacy’ of the law was invoked, indigenous interests and the protesters were positioned as lawbreakers. When ‘the law in context’ was the resource used, protesters became positioned as seekers of justice. These variable constructions are discussed in terms of the social practices they engender and their wider contribution to debates regarding indigenous and colonial interests. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Basic Constructive Logic for a Weak Sense of Consistency defined with a Propositional Falsity Constant

The logic B_Kc1 is the basic constructive logic in the ternaryrelational semantics (without a set of designated points) adequateto consistency understood as the absence of the negation ofany theorem. Negation is introduced in B_Kc1 with a negationconnective. The aim of this paper is to define the logic B_Kc1F.In this logic negation is introduced via a propositional falsityconstant. We prove that B_Kc1 and B_Kc1F are definitionally equivalent.