Since the days of Freud and Wundt, psychology has evolved into a complex professional field, demanding competence across a wide range of skills, from traditional therapy to inter-professional healthcare collaboration. This complexity presents a multitude of stressors and unique challenges as psychologists manage their clinical practice while remaining current in the ever-changing market. Piotrowski (2012) studied the research trends that reflect the current emphasis and professional demands in an increasingly complex field. He found increasing emphases on evidence-based treatments, multicultural and ethical issues, military and veteran affairs and natural disaster community response. Other areas of emphasis remained constant over several decades, such as health and child psychology, forensic, interpersonal violence and suicide, chronic pain, and rural practice. As interest expands, professional expectations press psychologists to maintain knowledge and proficiency in a broad scope of practice while building new skills in emerging practice areas. Professional psychology is unique in that it not only requires technical competence in the complex set of skills described above; it also requires a significant amount of personal investment, which is inherent to a relationship-focused vocation. Psychologists' personal investment in their clinical work may represent the most significant risk factor, as it may gradually tax the emotional and physical resources of the clinician. Recent research has noted the parallel process that can occur as psychologists face their own set of stressors, which may be similar to their clients, while also experiencing the stress that is unique to being a patient caregiver (Wise, Hersh, & Gibson, 2012). In addition to the challenges related to specific clinical work, psychologists frequently practice in settings where systemic pressures such as limited resources and/or excessive administrative demands create a multi-faceted stress that may be difficult to identify, let alone manage (Rupert & Morgan, 2005). While the profession is not inherently stressful, the sources of professional stress decrease the psychologist's quality of life. Anxiety, depression, grief processing, trauma, and performance fears are many of the common stressors that challenge the practitioners' ability to work (Bearse et al., 2013). The social impact of professional stress can include increased family stress and conflict, cultural stress, financial concerns, and isolation. Stevanovic and Rupert (2009) found the presence of family stressors correlated with a psychologist experiencing less family support and less life satisfaction. Psychologists working in rural settings or unique settings experience isolation that negatively affects the quality and/or perceived stability of life. Learning ways to adaptively manage the sources of stress may not only improve a psychologist's quality of life but increase their professional effectiveness. Additionally, suici
{"title":"Stressors and Resources of Oregon Psychologists: How Are Helpers Being Helped?","authors":"N. Engle","doi":"10.1037/e541782014-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e541782014-001","url":null,"abstract":"Since the days of Freud and Wundt, psychology has evolved into a complex professional field, demanding competence across a wide range of skills, from traditional therapy to inter-professional healthcare collaboration. This complexity presents a multitude of stressors and unique challenges as psychologists manage their clinical practice while remaining current in the ever-changing market. Piotrowski (2012) studied the research trends that reflect the current emphasis and professional demands in an increasingly complex field. He found increasing emphases on evidence-based treatments, multicultural and ethical issues, military and veteran affairs and natural disaster community response. Other areas of emphasis remained constant over several decades, such as health and child psychology, forensic, interpersonal violence and suicide, chronic pain, and rural practice. As interest expands, professional expectations press psychologists to maintain knowledge and proficiency in a broad scope of practice while building new skills in emerging practice areas. Professional psychology is unique in that it not only requires technical competence in the complex set of skills described above; it also requires a significant amount of personal investment, which is inherent to a relationship-focused vocation. Psychologists' personal investment in their clinical work may represent the most significant risk factor, as it may gradually tax the emotional and physical resources of the clinician. Recent research has noted the parallel process that can occur as psychologists face their own set of stressors, which may be similar to their clients, while also experiencing the stress that is unique to being a patient caregiver (Wise, Hersh, & Gibson, 2012). In addition to the challenges related to specific clinical work, psychologists frequently practice in settings where systemic pressures such as limited resources and/or excessive administrative demands create a multi-faceted stress that may be difficult to identify, let alone manage (Rupert & Morgan, 2005). While the profession is not inherently stressful, the sources of professional stress decrease the psychologist's quality of life. Anxiety, depression, grief processing, trauma, and performance fears are many of the common stressors that challenge the practitioners' ability to work (Bearse et al., 2013). The social impact of professional stress can include increased family stress and conflict, cultural stress, financial concerns, and isolation. Stevanovic and Rupert (2009) found the presence of family stressors correlated with a psychologist experiencing less family support and less life satisfaction. Psychologists working in rural settings or unique settings experience isolation that negatively affects the quality and/or perceived stability of life. Learning ways to adaptively manage the sources of stress may not only improve a psychologist's quality of life but increase their professional effectiveness. Additionally, suici","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57886585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Many factors affect what is considered profane language and the relative offensiveness of different profane words. Perceived offensiveness is affected by mere exposure to profanity (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004), the profanity spoken (Jay, 2009), the gender (Selnow, 1985) and ethnicity of the speaker and perceiver (Popp, Donovan, Crawford, Marsh, & Peele, 2003), as well as the context in which profanities are spoken (Johnson & Lewis, 2010). Additionally, the use of profanity has long been found to affect individuals' perceptions of the speaker and impression formation (Cohen & Saine, 1977; Mulac, 1976). The current research examined gender and ethnicity of the speaker as well as the choice of expletive with regard to perceived offensiveness of the profanity spoken. Profane Language There has been a general increase in the use of profanities spoken in both public and private settings. Words that would have been censored by the media twenty-years ago are now commonplace. Within the broadcasting media, 9 out of 10 programs contained at least one obscenity, and most television programs have an incidence of risque language approximately once every five minutes (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004, 2009). As the media have changed their standards of acceptance of profane language, the public's exposure to words that were traditionally considered taboo has increased. There are potential negative consequences of increased public exposure to profanities through media sources. Mere exposure to excessive cursing can desensitize listeners to the use of profane words (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004). Additionally, based on the principles of behavior modeling, increased exposure to profanities increases their use in everyday language, particularly when reinforced (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004). Whether the use of obscenities is reinforced is dependent upon the purpose and context of use. Individuals curse for a variety of reasons; reasons include serving to release negative emotions in the speaker, to shock or insult the receiver, and out of sheer habit (Rassin & Van der Heiden, 2005). An estimated two-thirds of all incidents of profanity usage are for the purpose of expressing anger and frustration; in such instances, a decrease in the speaker's perceived anger or frustration would negatively reinforce the use of profanity under similar circumstances in the future (Jay, 2000). The taboo words individuals speak are typically contingent upon the situational context, thereby affecting the formality/informality of speech (Jay 2009; Johnson & Lewis, 2010). As context varies (e.g., a formal dinner versus a casual conversation between friends), so does the perceived offensiveness of coarse language. Although the frequency of hearing obscenities has increased, the top 10 most frequently used taboo words have remained consistent over time and contains words such as fuck, shit, and variants of the word ass (e.g., a-hole; Jay, 2009). Various researchers have grouped taboo words by type, such as the "seven
{"title":"Perceptions of Profanity: How Race, Gender, and Expletive Choice Affect Perceived Offensiveness","authors":"Lora L. Jacobi","doi":"10.1037/e603132013-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e603132013-001","url":null,"abstract":"Many factors affect what is considered profane language and the relative offensiveness of different profane words. Perceived offensiveness is affected by mere exposure to profanity (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004), the profanity spoken (Jay, 2009), the gender (Selnow, 1985) and ethnicity of the speaker and perceiver (Popp, Donovan, Crawford, Marsh, & Peele, 2003), as well as the context in which profanities are spoken (Johnson & Lewis, 2010). Additionally, the use of profanity has long been found to affect individuals' perceptions of the speaker and impression formation (Cohen & Saine, 1977; Mulac, 1976). The current research examined gender and ethnicity of the speaker as well as the choice of expletive with regard to perceived offensiveness of the profanity spoken. Profane Language There has been a general increase in the use of profanities spoken in both public and private settings. Words that would have been censored by the media twenty-years ago are now commonplace. Within the broadcasting media, 9 out of 10 programs contained at least one obscenity, and most television programs have an incidence of risque language approximately once every five minutes (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004, 2009). As the media have changed their standards of acceptance of profane language, the public's exposure to words that were traditionally considered taboo has increased. There are potential negative consequences of increased public exposure to profanities through media sources. Mere exposure to excessive cursing can desensitize listeners to the use of profane words (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004). Additionally, based on the principles of behavior modeling, increased exposure to profanities increases their use in everyday language, particularly when reinforced (Kaye & Sapolsky, 2004). Whether the use of obscenities is reinforced is dependent upon the purpose and context of use. Individuals curse for a variety of reasons; reasons include serving to release negative emotions in the speaker, to shock or insult the receiver, and out of sheer habit (Rassin & Van der Heiden, 2005). An estimated two-thirds of all incidents of profanity usage are for the purpose of expressing anger and frustration; in such instances, a decrease in the speaker's perceived anger or frustration would negatively reinforce the use of profanity under similar circumstances in the future (Jay, 2000). The taboo words individuals speak are typically contingent upon the situational context, thereby affecting the formality/informality of speech (Jay 2009; Johnson & Lewis, 2010). As context varies (e.g., a formal dinner versus a casual conversation between friends), so does the perceived offensiveness of coarse language. Although the frequency of hearing obscenities has increased, the top 10 most frequently used taboo words have remained consistent over time and contains words such as fuck, shit, and variants of the word ass (e.g., a-hole; Jay, 2009). Various researchers have grouped taboo words by type, such as the \"seven ","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57920632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There are many ways to be competitive (as there are many ways to be cooperative, too). The most studied one, both theoretically and empirically, is called "rationality" (maximization of self-interest). The term rationality traditionally refers to individuals acting towards the maximization of their own selfish interests, measured by the "pay-off" concept originally introduced in game theory (Neumann, & Morgenstern, 2004; Tversky, Kahneman, 1986). In a sense, one compares his/her fate in all possible scenarios and chooses the best possible outcome. However, in most real situations of experimental interest, people compete against each other. Taking as an example an experimental game, where each of two individuals has two strategic possibilities and pay-off functions associated with all possible combinations, a simple maximization of one's pay-off says nothing about the effect of this decision to the direct competitor's pay-off. If a strategic decision maximizes one's pay-off but results in an even higher pay-off for the opponent, then this may be a wrong decision in an environment of direct competition. In fact, mathematical models along these lines are considered the starting point of the studies of cooperation, as the benefit of one is also a benefit for the other (Chalub, Santos, Pacheco, 2006; Falk, Fehr, & Fischbacher, 2005; Hamilton, 1970; Leimar, & Hammerstein, 2001; Santos, & Pacheco, 2005; Santos, Pacheco, & Lenaerts, 2006; Trivers, 1971). Evolutionary psychology has further explored this by studying the impact that neurological and emotional processes related to altruism and cooperation have on the survival and spread of individuals (Van Lange, 1999; Van Lange, Agnew, Harinck, & Steemers, 1997; de Wall, 1996). Defined as an act that causes loss of payoff (or any other type of cost) to the opponent, spite may be advantageous in a competitive scenario given certain precise conditions. We will not specify here the full set of conditions that make spite advantageous; we stress however, that rationality (maximization of own's payoff) and spite (minimization of other's payoff) are not mutually exclusive. Humans display many behaviors that could be classified as spiteful and spite is often linked with negative emotional responses to inequity such as envy and jealousy (Berke, 1988; Dufwenberg, & Guth 2000; Salovey, & Rothman 1991; Smith, 1991). Although apparently maladaptive, these behaviors are suited to certain competitive contexts. By comparing payoffs directly with another individual, one could be empowered with the means of assessing the best strategy for obtaining a payoff. Some authors have suggested that this would elicit an "outcompete your neighbor" decision process that would allow exerting just the right amount of effort to succeed in outcompeting rivals (Hill & Buss, 2008). In economics, the process of dumping (where a firm decreases the price of its product, possibly below cost price, intending to drive competitors out of the marke
{"title":"Much or More? Experiments of Rationality and Spite with School Children","authors":"A. F. d'Almeida, R. C. Teixeira, F. A. Chalub","doi":"10.5281/ZENODO.19607","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.19607","url":null,"abstract":"There are many ways to be competitive (as there are many ways to be cooperative, too). The most studied one, both theoretically and empirically, is called \"rationality\" (maximization of self-interest). The term rationality traditionally refers to individuals acting towards the maximization of their own selfish interests, measured by the \"pay-off\" concept originally introduced in game theory (Neumann, & Morgenstern, 2004; Tversky, Kahneman, 1986). In a sense, one compares his/her fate in all possible scenarios and chooses the best possible outcome. However, in most real situations of experimental interest, people compete against each other. Taking as an example an experimental game, where each of two individuals has two strategic possibilities and pay-off functions associated with all possible combinations, a simple maximization of one's pay-off says nothing about the effect of this decision to the direct competitor's pay-off. If a strategic decision maximizes one's pay-off but results in an even higher pay-off for the opponent, then this may be a wrong decision in an environment of direct competition. In fact, mathematical models along these lines are considered the starting point of the studies of cooperation, as the benefit of one is also a benefit for the other (Chalub, Santos, Pacheco, 2006; Falk, Fehr, & Fischbacher, 2005; Hamilton, 1970; Leimar, & Hammerstein, 2001; Santos, & Pacheco, 2005; Santos, Pacheco, & Lenaerts, 2006; Trivers, 1971). Evolutionary psychology has further explored this by studying the impact that neurological and emotional processes related to altruism and cooperation have on the survival and spread of individuals (Van Lange, 1999; Van Lange, Agnew, Harinck, & Steemers, 1997; de Wall, 1996). Defined as an act that causes loss of payoff (or any other type of cost) to the opponent, spite may be advantageous in a competitive scenario given certain precise conditions. We will not specify here the full set of conditions that make spite advantageous; we stress however, that rationality (maximization of own's payoff) and spite (minimization of other's payoff) are not mutually exclusive. Humans display many behaviors that could be classified as spiteful and spite is often linked with negative emotional responses to inequity such as envy and jealousy (Berke, 1988; Dufwenberg, & Guth 2000; Salovey, & Rothman 1991; Smith, 1991). Although apparently maladaptive, these behaviors are suited to certain competitive contexts. By comparing payoffs directly with another individual, one could be empowered with the means of assessing the best strategy for obtaining a payoff. Some authors have suggested that this would elicit an \"outcompete your neighbor\" decision process that would allow exerting just the right amount of effort to succeed in outcompeting rivals (Hill & Buss, 2008). In economics, the process of dumping (where a firm decreases the price of its product, possibly below cost price, intending to drive competitors out of the marke","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71046462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
People are motivated to create relationships with one another. Strangers approach each other at parties, people join online networking sites, and others join other social groups (e.g., churches, clubs, fraternal organizations) with the hope of forming social connection with others. This motivation to form social bonds stems from innate belongingness needs (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and this desire for social connection has been shown to be a powerful determinant of much of human thought and behavior (see Leary, 2010 for review). There are many ways by which people can regulate their belongingness needs. In an effort to form social relationships (and thus satisfy belongingness needs), people become attentive to signs of social acceptance (DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009), express a great interest in forming relationships (Maner, DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007), and monitor their social environment for relationship opportunities (Gardner, Pickett, & Brewer, 2000). In a similarly adaptive fashion, people may also construe potential relationship partners in a manner that facilitates social connection. That is, people especially motivated to satisfy belongingness needs may think that others share a similar interest as themselves in forming relationships. The current research addresses this functional approach to perceiving others as similar as ones' self as a means of regulating one's own belongingness needs. At first glance, the literature paints a disheartening picture of the individual with unmet belongingness needs. Several studies have demonstrated relationships between a lack of social connection and an array of negative physical and psychological health outcomes (see Pickett, Gardner, and Knowles, 2004, Twenge, Catonese, & Baumeister, 2003, Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000). Equally as dejecting, numerous studies have shown that thwarted belongingness needs, via social rejection, lead to increases in aggressive behavior (see Baumeister, Brewer, Tice, & Twenge, 2007 for a review). However, a negative portrait of the individual with unmet belonging needs conveys only half of the story. A lack of social connectedness can also evoke more inclusive-driven thoughts and promote more socially adaptive behavior (DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009; Lakin & Chartrand, 2003). Although people who experience social rejection view instigators of their rejection negatively and aggress towards them, they also view new interaction partners more positively (Maner, DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007). In regards to novel social targets, those who experience social rejection report more favorable impressions and express a greater interest in establishing a future relationship than those who are not previously rejected. It appears that favorable attitudes towards novel social targets may be one of the preliminary steps necessary for social connection and the satisfaction of belongingness needs (Maner, DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007). Other research has shown that
{"title":"The Social Projection of Belongingness Needs","authors":"Brian Collisson","doi":"10.1037/e634112013-971","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e634112013-971","url":null,"abstract":"People are motivated to create relationships with one another. Strangers approach each other at parties, people join online networking sites, and others join other social groups (e.g., churches, clubs, fraternal organizations) with the hope of forming social connection with others. This motivation to form social bonds stems from innate belongingness needs (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and this desire for social connection has been shown to be a powerful determinant of much of human thought and behavior (see Leary, 2010 for review). There are many ways by which people can regulate their belongingness needs. In an effort to form social relationships (and thus satisfy belongingness needs), people become attentive to signs of social acceptance (DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009), express a great interest in forming relationships (Maner, DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007), and monitor their social environment for relationship opportunities (Gardner, Pickett, & Brewer, 2000). In a similarly adaptive fashion, people may also construe potential relationship partners in a manner that facilitates social connection. That is, people especially motivated to satisfy belongingness needs may think that others share a similar interest as themselves in forming relationships. The current research addresses this functional approach to perceiving others as similar as ones' self as a means of regulating one's own belongingness needs. At first glance, the literature paints a disheartening picture of the individual with unmet belongingness needs. Several studies have demonstrated relationships between a lack of social connection and an array of negative physical and psychological health outcomes (see Pickett, Gardner, and Knowles, 2004, Twenge, Catonese, & Baumeister, 2003, Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000). Equally as dejecting, numerous studies have shown that thwarted belongingness needs, via social rejection, lead to increases in aggressive behavior (see Baumeister, Brewer, Tice, & Twenge, 2007 for a review). However, a negative portrait of the individual with unmet belonging needs conveys only half of the story. A lack of social connectedness can also evoke more inclusive-driven thoughts and promote more socially adaptive behavior (DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009; Lakin & Chartrand, 2003). Although people who experience social rejection view instigators of their rejection negatively and aggress towards them, they also view new interaction partners more positively (Maner, DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007). In regards to novel social targets, those who experience social rejection report more favorable impressions and express a greater interest in establishing a future relationship than those who are not previously rejected. It appears that favorable attitudes towards novel social targets may be one of the preliminary steps necessary for social connection and the satisfaction of belongingness needs (Maner, DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007). Other research has shown that","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57929540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abigail A Brown, Leonard A Jason, Meredyth A Evans, Samantha Flores
This article contrasts the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis International Consensus Criteria (ME-ICC) (Carruthers et al., 2011) with the Fukuda et al. (1994) CFS criteria. Findings indicated that the ME-ICC case definition criteria identified a subset of patients with more functional impairments and physical, mental and cognitive problems than the larger group of patients meeting the Fukuda et al. (1994) criteria. The sample of patients meeting ME-ICC criteria also had significantly greater rates of psychiatric comorbidity. These findings suggest that utilizing the ME-ICC may identify a more homogenous group of individuals with severe symptomatology and functional impairment. Implications of the high rates of psychiatric comorbidity found in the ME sample are discussed.
本文对比了肌痛性脑脊髓炎国际共识标准(ME-ICC) (Carruthers et al.， 2011)和Fukuda et al. (1994) CFS标准。研究结果表明，ME-ICC病例定义标准确定的一小部分患者比符合Fukuda等人(1994)标准的更大群体的患者有更多的功能障碍和身体、精神和认知问题。符合ME-ICC标准的患者样本也有显著更高的精神合并症发生率。这些发现表明，使用ME-ICC可以识别出具有严重症状和功能障碍的更同质的个体群体。讨论了在ME样本中发现的高精神共病率的含义。
{"title":"Contrasting Case Definitions: The ME International Consensus Criteria vs. the Fukuda et al. CFS Criteria.","authors":"Abigail A Brown, Leonard A Jason, Meredyth A Evans, Samantha Flores","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article contrasts the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis International Consensus Criteria (ME-ICC) (Carruthers et al., 2011) with the Fukuda et al. (1994) CFS criteria. Findings indicated that the ME-ICC case definition criteria identified a subset of patients with more functional impairments and physical, mental and cognitive problems than the larger group of patients meeting the Fukuda et al. (1994) criteria. The sample of patients meeting ME-ICC criteria also had significantly greater rates of psychiatric comorbidity. These findings suggest that utilizing the ME-ICC may identify a more homogenous group of individuals with severe symptomatology and functional impairment. Implications of the high rates of psychiatric comorbidity found in the ME sample are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4215640/pdf/nihms544494.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"32788213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Leonard A Jason, Inga Mileviciute, Darrin M Aase, Ed Stevens, Julia Digangi, Richard Contreras, Joseph R Ferrari
The present study examined self-regulation, unemployment, and substance use outcomes for individuals with and without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) who had transitioned from substance use treatment centers to the community. Participants, recruited from substance abuse treatment centers, were randomly assigned to an Oxford House self-help communal living environment (n = 75) or received usual aftercare (n = 75). Among these 150 individuals, 32 participants (27 women, 5 men) were diagnosed with lifetime PTSD. At a two year follow-up, individuals with PTSD in the usual aftercare condition showed significantly lower levels of self-regulation than those in the Oxford House condition with or without PTSD. These findings highlight the importance of abstinence supportive settings following substance use treatment, especially for individuals with PTSD.
{"title":"How Type of Treatment and Presence of PTSD affect Employment, Self-regulation, and Abstinence.","authors":"Leonard A Jason, Inga Mileviciute, Darrin M Aase, Ed Stevens, Julia Digangi, Richard Contreras, Joseph R Ferrari","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study examined self-regulation, unemployment, and substance use outcomes for individuals with and without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) who had transitioned from substance use treatment centers to the community. Participants, recruited from substance abuse treatment centers, were randomly assigned to an Oxford House self-help communal living environment (n = 75) or received usual aftercare (n = 75). Among these 150 individuals, 32 participants (27 women, 5 men) were diagnosed with lifetime PTSD. At a two year follow-up, individuals with PTSD in the usual aftercare condition showed significantly lower levels of self-regulation than those in the Oxford House condition with or without PTSD. These findings highlight the importance of abstinence supportive settings following substance use treatment, especially for individuals with PTSD.</p>","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3552303/pdf/nihms266513.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"31194621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christin N. Hobbs, D. Kreiner, Matthew W. Honeycutt, Ryan M. Hinds, C. Brockman
The purpose of the present research is to investigate the possibility that individuals could experience an illusion of control related to their actions in virtual reality. In one sense, all actions in a virtual reality environment are illusory; that is what makes it a virtual environment. The utility of virtual reality environments depends on the degree to which individuals believe that they are in control. We believe that investigating perception of control in a virtual reality environment could increase our understanding of how such simulations work. Further, we believe that this investigation will add to the literature on the situations in which the illusion of control has been shown to occur. Illusion of Control The illusion that we can control events over which we do not have control has been the topic of a great deal of research over the last four decades. In a seminal paper, Langer (1975) demonstrated that participants were willing to bet greater amounts on the outcome of a card game when they believed their opponent, a confederate, to be less competent. The outcome of the card game was purely a chance event, yet participants believed they had some control over who won. Langer reported other experiments indicating that the ability to choose options, active involvement in the game, and practice all affected participants' expectations of success. A meta-analysis conducted two decades later indicated a consistent and moderately strong illusion of control effect across 53 studies (Presson & Benassi, 1996). The authors argued that the effect should be called an illusion of judgment, as most of the research had involved indirect measurements such as the size of a wager that participants were willing to make on a game. Presson and Benassi argued that a direct measure of the degree to which participants felt they controlled an event was necessary to label the effect an illusion of control. What causes the feeling of control? The feeling of causing an action is characterized by three factors: priority - the thought occurred before the action; consistency - the thought is consistent with the action; and exclusivity - no other potential causes are present (Wegner & Wheatley, 1999). In other words, an individual will experience the perception of control over an action if the individual thinks about carrying out an action prior to the action occurring, the thought-about action is consistent with the action that actually occurs, and there are no other apparent reasons why that action occurred. In one study on the feeling of control, a participant and confederate jointly moved a computer mouse in a situation similar to using a Ouija board. When participants heard a word corresponding to one of the items displayed on the computer screen shortly before the confederate stopped the mouse, the participants appeared to believe that they had played a role in stopping the mouse (Wegner & Wheatley, 1999). Numerous other examples of illusion of control have been d
{"title":"The Illusion of Control in a Virtual Reality Setting","authors":"Christin N. Hobbs, D. Kreiner, Matthew W. Honeycutt, Ryan M. Hinds, C. Brockman","doi":"10.1037/e627782009-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e627782009-001","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the present research is to investigate the possibility that individuals could experience an illusion of control related to their actions in virtual reality. In one sense, all actions in a virtual reality environment are illusory; that is what makes it a virtual environment. The utility of virtual reality environments depends on the degree to which individuals believe that they are in control. We believe that investigating perception of control in a virtual reality environment could increase our understanding of how such simulations work. Further, we believe that this investigation will add to the literature on the situations in which the illusion of control has been shown to occur. Illusion of Control The illusion that we can control events over which we do not have control has been the topic of a great deal of research over the last four decades. In a seminal paper, Langer (1975) demonstrated that participants were willing to bet greater amounts on the outcome of a card game when they believed their opponent, a confederate, to be less competent. The outcome of the card game was purely a chance event, yet participants believed they had some control over who won. Langer reported other experiments indicating that the ability to choose options, active involvement in the game, and practice all affected participants' expectations of success. A meta-analysis conducted two decades later indicated a consistent and moderately strong illusion of control effect across 53 studies (Presson & Benassi, 1996). The authors argued that the effect should be called an illusion of judgment, as most of the research had involved indirect measurements such as the size of a wager that participants were willing to make on a game. Presson and Benassi argued that a direct measure of the degree to which participants felt they controlled an event was necessary to label the effect an illusion of control. What causes the feeling of control? The feeling of causing an action is characterized by three factors: priority - the thought occurred before the action; consistency - the thought is consistent with the action; and exclusivity - no other potential causes are present (Wegner & Wheatley, 1999). In other words, an individual will experience the perception of control over an action if the individual thinks about carrying out an action prior to the action occurring, the thought-about action is consistent with the action that actually occurs, and there are no other apparent reasons why that action occurred. In one study on the feeling of control, a participant and confederate jointly moved a computer mouse in a situation similar to using a Ouija board. When participants heard a word corresponding to one of the items displayed on the computer screen shortly before the confederate stopped the mouse, the participants appeared to believe that they had played a role in stopping the mouse (Wegner & Wheatley, 1999). Numerous other examples of illusion of control have been d","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57929221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Edward B Stevens, Leonard A Jason, Joseph R Ferrari, Bronwyn Hunter
Previous researchers found that abstinence-specific self-efficacy has been predictive of the likelihood of relapse for individuals in recovery from substance abuse. Oxford Houses are sober living homes that provide mutual support and are resident funded and operated. The relationships between house level sense of community and abstinence-specific self-efficacy were examined in the present study with a sample of 754 adults living in 139 Oxford Houses nationwide in a multilevel model. A significant positive relationship between house level sense of community and self-efficacy was observed. These findings have both research and therapeutic implications.
{"title":"Self-Efficacy and Sense of Community among Adults Recovering from Substance Abuse.","authors":"Edward B Stevens, Leonard A Jason, Joseph R Ferrari, Bronwyn Hunter","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous researchers found that abstinence-specific self-efficacy has been predictive of the likelihood of relapse for individuals in recovery from substance abuse. Oxford Houses are sober living homes that provide mutual support and are resident funded and operated. The relationships between house level sense of community and abstinence-specific self-efficacy were examined in the present study with a sample of 754 adults living in 139 Oxford Houses nationwide in a multilevel model. A significant positive relationship between house level sense of community and self-efficacy was observed. These findings have both research and therapeutic implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3596175/pdf/nihms442620.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"31315756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent research suggests that women are more likely to participate in the helping dimension of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) whereas men are more likely to participate in the civic virtue dimension. Three laboratory studies were conducted to test the hypotheses that observers expect employees to participate in gender-congruent OCBs and that, when exhibited, observers are more likely to attribute gender-incongruent OCBs than gender-congruent OCBs to impression management motives. Results indicated that OCBs in general were expected more of women than of men. Only under specific conditions were OCB-civic virtue behaviors expected more of men. Additionally, participants were more likely to attribute men's OCB than women's OCB to impression management motives. Implications and future research suggestions are discussed. Over the past two decades, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has become a popular research topic among industrial / organizational psychologists. One line of research has investigated the degree to which OCB impacts performance appraisal ratings (see Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000 for a review). Other research has begun to explore the relationship between OCB and gender (Allen & Rush, 2001; Ehrhart & Godfrey, 2003; Heilman & Chen, 2005; Kidder, 2002). The goal of the current research was to replicate previous research on the link between OCB and gender using an alternative methodology and to extend that previous research by investigating differences in attributions made by the perceivers of such behavior. A commonly used definition of OCB was put forth by Organ: "individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization" (Organ, 1988, p. 4). Accordingly, OCB is typically considered "extra-role" behavior. However, many researchers have acknowledged that employees who engage in OCB are often informally rewarded for such actions in performance appraisals (e.g., Allen & Rush, 1998; Organ, 1997). In addition, recent articles have generated interest in investigating the possibility that subtle discrimination exists such that men and women are differentially rewarded in performance appraisals based on their participation in OCBs (e.g., Allen, 2004; Heilman & Chen, 2005; Kidder & Parks, 2001). This position is grounded in the assumption that women are expected to participate in certain dimensions of OCBs, whereas men are expected to participate in others. In fact, actual research in this particular area has been limited (Allen & Rush, 2001; Podsakoff, McKenzie, Paine, & Bacharach, 2000). Research on gender differences has focused on two of Organ's (1988) dimensions in particular: helping and civic virtue. The helping dimension includes behaviors that help a specific other person (e.g., assisting others with their workloads). The dimension of civic virtue was first described by G
{"title":"Organizational citizenship behavior and gender: Expectations and attributions for performance.","authors":"Sara K. Farrell, Lisa M. Finkelstein","doi":"10.1037/e518612013-535","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e518612013-535","url":null,"abstract":"Recent research suggests that women are more likely to participate in the helping dimension of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) whereas men are more likely to participate in the civic virtue dimension. Three laboratory studies were conducted to test the hypotheses that observers expect employees to participate in gender-congruent OCBs and that, when exhibited, observers are more likely to attribute gender-incongruent OCBs than gender-congruent OCBs to impression management motives. Results indicated that OCBs in general were expected more of women than of men. Only under specific conditions were OCB-civic virtue behaviors expected more of men. Additionally, participants were more likely to attribute men's OCB than women's OCB to impression management motives. Implications and future research suggestions are discussed. Over the past two decades, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has become a popular research topic among industrial / organizational psychologists. One line of research has investigated the degree to which OCB impacts performance appraisal ratings (see Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000 for a review). Other research has begun to explore the relationship between OCB and gender (Allen & Rush, 2001; Ehrhart & Godfrey, 2003; Heilman & Chen, 2005; Kidder, 2002). The goal of the current research was to replicate previous research on the link between OCB and gender using an alternative methodology and to extend that previous research by investigating differences in attributions made by the perceivers of such behavior. A commonly used definition of OCB was put forth by Organ: \"individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization\" (Organ, 1988, p. 4). Accordingly, OCB is typically considered \"extra-role\" behavior. However, many researchers have acknowledged that employees who engage in OCB are often informally rewarded for such actions in performance appraisals (e.g., Allen & Rush, 1998; Organ, 1997). In addition, recent articles have generated interest in investigating the possibility that subtle discrimination exists such that men and women are differentially rewarded in performance appraisals based on their participation in OCBs (e.g., Allen, 2004; Heilman & Chen, 2005; Kidder & Parks, 2001). This position is grounded in the assumption that women are expected to participate in certain dimensions of OCBs, whereas men are expected to participate in others. In fact, actual research in this particular area has been limited (Allen & Rush, 2001; Podsakoff, McKenzie, Paine, & Bacharach, 2000). Research on gender differences has focused on two of Organ's (1988) dimensions in particular: helping and civic virtue. The helping dimension includes behaviors that help a specific other person (e.g., assisting others with their workloads). The dimension of civic virtue was first described by G","PeriodicalId":35502,"journal":{"name":"North American Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57875699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：