Preparing young veterans for civilian life: The effects of a workshop on career decision-making difficulties and self-efficacy

The current study mapped the career decision-making difficulties and career decision self-efficacy of 1315 young veterans who participated in a 5-day workshop aimed at facilitating their transition to civilian life. A pre- and post-test comparison showed that participation in the workshop reduced (d = 0.57) the participants' career decision-making difficulties (measured by the CDDQ; Gati, Krausz, & Osipow, 1996) and increased (d = 0.77) their career decision self-efficacy (measured by the CDSE; Taylor & Betz, 1983). A more advanced decision status, as reflected in the participants' Range of Considered Alternatives ( Saka & Gati, 2007), was negatively associated with participants' career decision-making difficulties, and positively associated with career decision self-efficacy. However, a more advanced decision status and the perceived effectiveness of the workshop were not associated with the decrease in difficulties and the increase in self-efficacy that resulted from participating in the workshop. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

“One of us”: Outstanding willingness to help save a single identified compatriot

Willingness to help victims unrelated to oneself, in situations where reciprocity is irrelevant, is a common form of altruism. Prior research showed that people are more willing to extend such help when the victims are identified, particularly when the target of help is a single individual. However, in the present research we found that only when the perceivers regard the victims as belonging to their own in-group, willingness to help a single identified individual is greater than willingness to help a group of individuals: identifying tsunami victims by name increased actual contributions only when the specified target was a single compatriot. The role of perceived shared social group in promoting the victim singularity advantage in contributions was mirrored in ratings of emotions, thus supporting an affective account of helping behavior.     

Youth from Fundamentalist Societies: What are Their Attitudes Toward War and Peace and Their Relations with Anxiety Reactions?

Journal of Religion and Health - The present study was conducted during “Protective Edge,” a long-lasting military operation between the State of Israel and Hamas in Gaza, during which...     

The Effect of Recipient Identifiability and Neediness on Children's Sharing Behavior

The identifiable victim effect refers to people's greater willingness to share resources with identified targets (about whom they have some identifying information) than to share with unidentified or statistical targets. Previous research examining adults' behavior suggests that identifiable targets arouse in the perceiver an intense emotional reaction that, in turn, increases sharing especially when the target is perceived as needy. In the current research, we examine whether the spontaneous reaction toward an identifiable, needy target and the increase in sharing with such a target appears in young children's sharing behavior and when in early childhood it develops. The results suggest that adding identifying information about a needy recipient increases sharing only in older children (above the age of 5.5) and in children who have acquired higher levels of theory of mind (independent of age). Mediation–moderation analysis suggests that theory of mind mediates the relation between age and sharing mainly when a specific, needy recipient is presented. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

To Ask or Not to Ask: Enhancing Donations to Nonprofits by Soliciting Opinions Upfront,Rather than Donations

The success of non-profit organizations depends mainly on the strategies they use to recruit new donors. One common strategy is to solicit donations upfront (mostly online)—but is this indeed an effective approach? We conducted three experiments (N_total?=?1287), in which we compared an upfront appeal of that sort with one that offered prospective donors the opportunity to express their opinion about a given fundraising campaign—and then asked if they cared to donate to it. Drawing on foot-in-the-door and escalation of commitment theories, we found that soliciting an opinion (as opposed to a donation) led to greater engagement with the charity among prospective donors, as reflected by their greater willingness to read about the cause. This, in turn, encouraged them to donate. In experiment 1, we showed that the direct effect of request type on donations was mediated by the donors’ willingness to learn about the charity. In experiment 2, we showed that pairing an appeal for an opinion with a donation request was more effective than merely appealing for a donation. Finally, in experiment 3, we found that the more donors learn about a given cause, the stronger their emotional response to it, and the greater their donations to it. Further, we showed that soliciting an opinion (as opposed to a donation) made donors feel a greater connection with the organization. In sum, we propose a simple and cost-effective intervention that may help non-profit businesses become more effective.

     

Seeing into the Future: Future Time Orientation as a Moderator of Temporal Distance Effects on Educators' Decisions

Research suggests that the temporal distance from decision outcomes leads to divergent decisions for the near and the distal future. As such, high‐level idealistic concerns and values dominate decisions for the distant future, whereas low‐level pragmatic concerns play a greater role in decisions for the near future. We examined how individual differences in future time orientation are related to decisions vis‐à‐vis the near versus the distal future. The results of three studies, with participants with varying levels of expertise—students (Studies 2 and 3), teachers (Study 1), and school principals (Study 2)—show that principals tend to be overall more idealistic in their choices. Yet discrepancies between decisions for the near versus the distal future exist among all three levels of expertise. However, this dominance of idealistic over pragmatic concerns for more distant future decisions effect was smaller the higher the future time orientation was (whether measured or manipulated). Implications for educational and managerial decision making and training are discussed. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The role of perspective taking and emotions in punishing identified and unidentified wrongdoers

We present two studies examining the effect of identifiability on willingness to punish, emphasising that identifiability of the wrongdoer may increase or decrease willingness to punish depending on the punisher's perspective. When taking the wrongdoer's perspective, identifiability increases pity and decreases anger towards the wrongdoer, leading to a lighter punishment. On the other hand, when adopting the injured perspective, identifiability decreases pity and increases anger, resulting in a severe punishment. We show that while deliberation and rational factors affect the decision regardless of identification, the role of emotions in the decision is greater in the identified condition. Possible implications for public and educational policy are discussed.     

Ally or adversary: The effect of identifiability in inter-group conflict situations

People’s tendency to be more generous towards identifiable victims than towards unidentifiable or statistical victims is known as the identifiable victim effect. Recent research (Kogut & Ritov, 2007) called the generality of the effect into question, showing that in cross-national contexts, identifiability affects mostly willingness to help victims belonging to one’s ‘in-group’. The present research extends the investigation by examining the identifiability effect in inter-group conflict situations. In three experiments, employing hypothetical contributions as well as real monetary allocation in a dictator-game, we found that identifiability increased generosity towards a member of the adversary group, but it decreased generosity towards a member of one’s own group. Possible mechanisms underlying this interaction are discussed.     

Can perceptions of similarity reduce the ability to see the other’s needs? The case of immigrant students’ integration policy

In this age of wide migration waves all over the world, when schools’ populations become more diverse, educators often make policies regarding groups of immigrant students (from the same origin) with unique needs. Perceptions of homogeneity of the group, as well as perceptions of similarity between the decision maker and the group members are likely to have a major influence on these policies. Although research has shown that perceptions of great similarity between the decision maker and a target group enhance empathy and promote decisions in favor of the group; results of the current research, examining immigrant students’ integration policy in schools, suggest that inaccurate high similarity perceptions (on a relevant domain) might decrease the ability to understand the targets’ diverse needs and may lead to decisions that do not serve the group, or the decision maker’s goals. Two studies were conducted to examine the effect of perceived homogeneity and similarity on immigrant integration policy in schools. In the first study, lay people recommended fewer programs for immigrants students when those where judged to be more similar to themselves and more homogenous. Similar results were obtained in the second study, examining school principals’ reports of existing programs for immigrant students in their schools. Implications on policy making are discussed.     

The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations

People’s greater willingness to help identified victims, relative to non-identified ones, was examined by eliciting real contributions to targets varying in singularity (a single individual vs. a group of several individuals), and the availability of individually identifying information (the main difference being the inclusion of a picture in the “identified” versions). Results of the first and second experiments support the proposal that for identified victims, contributions for a single victim exceed contributions for a group when these are judged separately, but preference reverses when one has to choose between contributing to the single individual and contributing to the group. In a third experiment, ratings of emotional response were elicited in addition to willingness to contribute judgments. Results suggest that the greater contribution to a single victim relative to the group stems from intensified emotions evoked by a single identified victim rather than from emotions evoked by identified victims in general.