The Interference of Introversion–Extraversion and Depressive Symptomatology with Reasoning Performance: A Behavioural Study

The objective of this study was to investigate the link between the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) scores and depressive symptomatology with reasoning performance induced by a task including valid and invalid Aristotelian syllogisms. The EPQ and the Zung Depressive Scale (ZDS) were completed by 48 healthy subjects (27 male, 21 female) aged 33.5 ± 9.0 years. Additionally, the subjects engaged into two reasoning tasks (valid vs. invalid syllogisms). Analysis showed that the judgment of invalid syllogisms is a more difficult task than of valid judgments (65.1% vs. 74.6% of correct judgments respectively, p < 0.01). In both conditions, the subjects’ degree of confidence is significantly higher when they make a correct judgment than when they make an incorrect judgment (83.8 ± 11.2 vs. 75.3 ± 17.3, p < 0.01). Subjects with extraversion as measured by EPQ and high sexual desire as rated by the relative ZDS subscale are more prone to make incorrect judgments in the valid syllogisms, while, at the same time, they are more confident in their responses. The effects of extraversion/introversion and sexual desire on the outcome measures of the valid condition are not commutative but additive. These findings indicate that extraversion/introversion and sexual desire variations may have a detrimental effect in the reasoning performance.     

Neoliberalism and Culture in Higher Education: On the Loss of the Humanistic Character of the University and the Possibility of Its Reconstitution

Studies in Philosophy and Education - This paper examines the loss of culture as a possible effect of the neoliberalisation of education, especially higher education. The paper opens with a brief...     

The relevance of the theory of pseudo-culture

Continental Philosophy Review - Some 60&nbsp;years separate us from Theodor W. Adorno’s “Theory of pseudo-culture.” Yet Adorno’s analysis might never have been as...     

Social identities, group norms, and threat: on the malleability of ingroup bias

Ingroup bias is one of the most basic intergroup phenomena and has been consistently demonstrated to be increased under conditions of existential threat. In the present research the authors question the omnipresence of ingroup bias under threat and test the assumptions that these effects depend on the content of social identity and group norm salient in a situation. In the first two studies cross-categorization and recategorization manipulations eliminated and even reversed mortality salience effects on bias in relations between English and Scottish students (Study 1) as well as English and French people (Study 2). In the third study the specific normative content of a given social identity (collectivism vs. individualism) was shown to moderate mortality salience effects on ingroup bias. The results of these studies suggest a social identity perspective on terror management processes.