Singular neutrosophic extended triplet groups and generalized groups

Neutrosophic extended triplet group (NETG) is an interesting extension of the concept of classical group, which can be used to express general symmetry. This paper further studies the structural characterizations of NETG. First, some examples are given to show that some results in literature are false. Second, the differences between generalized groups and neutrosophic extended triplet groups are investigated in detail. Third, the notion of singular neutrosophic extended triplet group (SNETG) is introduced, and some homomorphism properties are discussed and a Lagrange-like theorem for finite SNETG is proved. Finally, the following important result is proved: a semigroup is a singular neutrosophic extended triplet group (SNETG) if and only if it is a generalized group.     

Conversation: The challenges of teaching in a “nano department”

A panel at the 2016 American Academy of Religion conference staged, taped, transcribed, and edited this conversation about the challenges and opportunities of teaching in a “nano department” – an undergraduate religion or religious studies department (or combined religion and philosophy department) with only one, two, or three faculty members. Two things quickly become evident: one is the impossibility of coverage of the full religious studies curriculum, and the other is the necessity for collaboration with other departments. Neither of these is unique to nano departments, but there exists an intimacy between students and faculty in small departments, a necessary freedom to rethink the place of the study of religion in the liberal arts curriculum, and a disruptive value in what can be critiqued and contributed from a marginalized position. Arguably, nano departments are the canaries in the academic coal mine, charting the future of the humanities that cannot be discerned from the vantage point of Research‐1 contexts.     

How Otto did not extend his mind,but might have: Dynamic systems theory and social-cultural group selection

Proponents of cognitive Situationism argue that the human mind is embodied, embedded in both natural and social-cultural environments and extended creating both extended and distributed cognition. Anti-situationists reject all or some of these claims. I argue that four major objections to extended cognition: (1) the mark of the cognitive, (2) the function-identity fallacy, (3) cognitive bloat, and (4) scientific irrelevance lose much of their sting in the case of distributed cognition, the extension of cognitive agency to a group of cognitive agents, such as a scientific research team. However, I claim that a crucial fifth challenge, that advocates of the extended mind commit the causal-constitution fallacy, has yet to be satisfactorily addressed. I focus on Spyridon Palermos’ use of dynamic systems theory to refute this charge and I argue that his appeal to dynamic systems theory as a way of understanding system-constitution fails. Instead, I suggest a social-cultural group selection hypothesis for understanding system-constitution. But, I leave it for another day to elaborate that hypothesis’ empirical plausibility.     

群体内疚:界定、心理机制、行动倾向及干预策略

当个体认为内群体为外群体受到的不道德伤害负有责任时会体验到群体内疚。该情绪常见的触发情境包括过往历史的伤害事件、当下的群际冲突、不公正的社会关系及未来的伤害事件。群体认同、内群体责任和不当性评估是影响群体内疚产生的三大心理机制。群体内疚会导致施害群体对受害群体表现出积极行动,如友善态度,冲突和解、群体补偿及群际支持。通过群体肯定、自我肯定、促进共同认同、强调内群体责任及展现已有补偿行为等干预策略可以引发施害群体的群体内疚。未来的研究应澄清群体内疚的成因机制,进一步探索群体内疚与补偿行为间的作用关系。     

Accommodating Small Sample Sizes in Three-Level Models When the Third Level is Incidental

Small samples sizes are a pervasive problem when modeling clustered data. In two-level models, this problem has been well studied, and several resources provide guidance for modeling such data. However, a recent review of small-sample clustered data methods has noted that no studies have investigated methods for modeling three-level data with small sample sizes. Furthermore, strategies for two-level models do not necessarily translate to the three-level context. Moreover, three-level models are prone to small samples because the “small sample” designation is primarily based on the sample size of the highest level, and large samples are increasingly difficult to amass as one progresses up a hierarchy. In this study, we focus on the case when the third level is incidental, meaning that the third level is important to consider but there are no explicit research questions at the third level. This study performs a simulation study to examine the performance of seven methods for modeling three-level data with a small sample at the third level. A motivating educational psychology example is also provided to demonstrate how the choice of method can greatly affect results.     

The design of the MBT‐G adherence and quality scale

Few group psychotherapy studies focus on therapists' interventions, and instruments that can measure group psychotherapy treatment fidelity are scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reliability of the Mentalization‐based Group Therapy Adherence and Quality Scale (MBT‐G‐AQS), which is a 19‐item scale developed to measure adherence and quality in mentalization‐based group therapy (MBT‐G). Eight MBT groups and eight psychodynamic groups (a total of 16 videotaped therapy sessions) were rated independently by five raters. All groups were long‐term, outpatient psychotherapy groups with 1.5 hours weekly sessions. Data were analysed by a Generalizability Study (G‐study and D‐study). The generalizability models included analyses of reliability for different numbers of raters. The global (overall) ratings for adherence and quality showed high to excellent reliability for all numbers of raters (the reliability by use of five raters was 0.97 for adherence and 0.96 for quality). The mean reliability for all 19 items for a single rater was 0.57 (item range 0.26–0.86) for adherence, and 0.62 (item range 0.26–0.83) for quality. The reliability for two raters obtained mean absolute G‐coefficients on 0.71 (item range 0.41–0.92 for the different items) for adherence and 0.76 (item range 0.42–0.91) for quality. With all five raters the mean absolute G‐coefficient for adherence was 0.86 (item range 0.63–0.97) and 0.88 for quality (item range 0.64–0.96). The study demonstrates high reliability of ratings of MBT‐G‐AQS. In models differentiating between different numbers of raters, reliability was particularly high when including several raters, but was also acceptable for two raters. For practical purposes, the MBT‐G‐AQS can be used for training, supervision and psychotherapy research.     

In‐group relevance facilitates learning across existing and new associations

Studies have shown that attention prioritizes stimuli associated with the in‐group. However, the extent to which this so‐called in‐group favoritism is driven by relevance is not clear. Here, we investigated this issue in a group of university rowers using a novel perceptual matching task based on the team label–color associations. Across three experiments, participants showed enhanced performance for the in‐group stimulus regardless of its familiarity level. These findings confirmed the role of relevance in in‐group favoritism. In a further control study, the advantage for certain stimuli was not found in an independent sample of participants who were not identified with the teams but were familiar with the label–color associations, indicating that in‐group relevance was necessary for the in‐group favoritism. Together, these findings suggest that in‐group relevance facilitates learning across existing and new associations. The consequences of these findings for understanding in‐group effects on perceptual processing are discussed.     

Explaining White Opposition to Black Political Leadership: The Role of Fear of Racial Favoritism

Despite the election of America's first Black president, most non‐Hispanic Whites continue to oppose Black political leadership. The conventional explanation for White opposition is sheer racial prejudice, yet the available empirical evidence for this theory is inconsistent. I test an alternative theory that Whites perceive Black political leaders as a threat to their group's interests. Using a new survey measure and nationally representative panel data covering the 2008, 2010, and 2012 U.S. elections, I find that a majority of Whites perceive Black elected officials as likely to favor Blacks over Whites. Moreover, fear of racial favoritism predicts support for Barack Obama in both cross‐sectional models and fixed‐effects models of within‐person change, controlling for negative racial stereotypes. I replicate these findings using a separate cross‐sectional survey fielded after the 2014 election that controls for racial resentment. Collectively, these results suggest that perceptions of conflicting group interests—and not just prejudice—drive White opposition to Black political leadership.