Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.205
Petra Gradinger, Dagmar Strohmeier, C. Spiel
We investigated the co-occurrence of traditional bullying, cyberbullying, traditional victimization, and cybervictimization, and analyzed whether students belonging to particular groups of bullies (e.g., traditional, cyber, or both), victims (e.g., traditional, cyber, or both), and bully-victims differed regarding adjustment. Seven hundred sixty-one adolescents (49% boys) aged 14–19 years (M = 15.6 years) were surveyed. More students than expected by chance were totally uninvolved, more students were traditional bully-victims, and more students were combined bully-victims (traditional and cyber). The highest risks for poor adjustment (high scores in reactive and instrumental aggression, depressive, and somatic symptoms) were observed in students who were identified as combined bully-victims (traditional and cyber). In addition gender differences were examined.
{"title":"Traditional Bullying and Cyberbullying Identification of Risk Groups for Adjustment Problems","authors":"Petra Gradinger, Dagmar Strohmeier, C. Spiel","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.205","url":null,"abstract":"We investigated the co-occurrence of traditional bullying, cyberbullying, traditional victimization, and cybervictimization, and analyzed whether students belonging to particular groups of bullies (e.g., traditional, cyber, or both), victims (e.g., traditional, cyber, or both), and bully-victims differed regarding adjustment. Seven hundred sixty-one adolescents (49% boys) aged 14–19 years (M = 15.6 years) were surveyed. More students than expected by chance were totally uninvolved, more students were traditional bully-victims, and more students were combined bully-victims (traditional and cyber). The highest risks for poor adjustment (high scores in reactive and instrumental aggression, depressive, and somatic symptoms) were observed in students who were identified as combined bully-victims (traditional and cyber). In addition gender differences were examined.","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"133 1","pages":"205-213"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77211865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.240
Erik Hölzl
{"title":"Call for Papers: “Consumer Behavior and Economic Decisions”","authors":"Erik Hölzl","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.240","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"2016 1","pages":"240-240"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87854870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.2.66
J. Lamiell
During the first third of the 20th century, William Stern (1871–1938) was a prominent contributor to the literature of developmental psychology. Many of his most important contributions, some of which were made in collaboration with his wife Clara Stern, were based on diary observations of the three Stern children; observations that the Sterns accumulated over 18 years. Even as these contributions were materializing, William Stern was formulating and articulating an overarching system of thought, a Weltanschauung or worldview, that he called “critical personalism.” This brief article highlights certain aspects of that system of thought that were of particular relevance to Stern’s contributions to developmental psychology. The article also contrasts the pre-World War II reception of Stern’s ideas among developmental psychologists and differential psychologists, and, within developmental psychology, the reception of those ideas before as compared with after World War II.
{"title":"Some Philosophical and Historical Considerations Relevant to William Stern’s Contributions to Developmental Psychology","authors":"J. Lamiell","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.2.66","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.2.66","url":null,"abstract":"During the first third of the 20th century, William Stern (1871–1938) was a prominent contributor to the literature of developmental psychology. Many of his most important contributions, some of which were made in collaboration with his wife Clara Stern, were based on diary observations of the three Stern children; observations that the Sterns accumulated over 18 years. Even as these contributions were materializing, William Stern was formulating and articulating an overarching system of thought, a Weltanschauung or worldview, that he called “critical personalism.” This brief article highlights certain aspects of that system of thought that were of particular relevance to Stern’s contributions to developmental psychology. The article also contrasts the pre-World War II reception of Stern’s ideas among developmental psychologists and differential psychologists, and, within developmental psychology, the reception of those ideas before as compared with after World War II.","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"61 1","pages":"66-72"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90374387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.197
R. Ortega, P. Elipe, Joaquín A. Mora-Merchán, J. Calmaestra, Esther Vega
We examine the emotional impact caused to victims of bullying in its traditional form, both directly and indirectly, as well as bullying inflicted by use of new technologies such as mobile phones and the Internet. A sample of 1,671 adolescents and young people responded to a questionnaire which asked if they had been victims of various forms of bullying, as well as the emotions this caused. The results show that although traditional bullying affected significantly more young people than cyberbullying, the latter affected one in ten adolescents. Analysis of the emotions caused showed that traditional bullying produced a wide variety of impacts, with the victims being divided into five different emotional categories, while indirect bullying and cyberbullying presented a narrower variety of results with the victims being classifiable into just two groups: Those who said that they had not been emotionally affected and those who simultaneously suffered from a wide variety of negative emotions. The influence of age, gender, and severity on each emotional category is also analyzed.
{"title":"The emotional impact on victims of traditional bullying and cyberbullying: A study of Spanish adolescents.","authors":"R. Ortega, P. Elipe, Joaquín A. Mora-Merchán, J. Calmaestra, Esther Vega","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.197","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.197","url":null,"abstract":"We examine the emotional impact caused to victims of bullying in its traditional form, both directly and indirectly, as well as bullying inflicted by use of new technologies such as mobile phones and the Internet. A sample of 1,671 adolescents and young people responded to a questionnaire which asked if they had been victims of various forms of bullying, as well as the emotions this caused. The results show that although traditional bullying affected significantly more young people than cyberbullying, the latter affected one in ten adolescents. Analysis of the emotions caused showed that traditional bullying produced a wide variety of impacts, with the victims being divided into five different emotional categories, while indirect bullying and cyberbullying presented a narrower variety of results with the victims being classifiable into just two groups: Those who said that they had not been emotionally affected and those who simultaneously suffered from a wide variety of negative emotions. The influence of age, gender, and severity on each emotional category is also analyzed.","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"18 1","pages":"197-204"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85986958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.222
Catarina Katzer
In Germany, research on the topic of ‘‘cyberbullying’’ is scarce; here, I review recent work on this topic. The first such study in Germany was by Katzer and Fetchenhauer in 2005 (Katzer, 2005). It was a standardized survey of 1,700 5th to 11th grade students (648 men and 803 women), which mainly focused on analyzing cyberbullying in Internet chatrooms. Because no scale was available for the assessment of cyberbullying in Internet chatrooms at the time, an instrument was developed based on the short version of the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (Olweus, 1989). Two other studies of cyberbullying were conducted by online questionnaires. Jager, Fischer, Riebel, and Fluck (2007) surveyed 1,997 students from 1st to 13th grade. Staude-Muller, Bliesener, and Nowak (in press) assessed cyberbullying with data from 1,277 children and adolescents aged 6–22 years. Because the studies used different methods and measurements a comparison of the results is difficult. Nevertheless all studies made it clear that cyberbullying is an important issue in Germany (Schultze-Krumbholz & Scheithauer, 2008). Katzer and Fetchenhauer found that frequencies for victimization in chatrooms (every few months to daily) range between 5.4% (being blackmailed or put under pressure) and 43.1% (being abused or insulted). Jager et al. found a frequency of about 20% for cybervictimization in general, with instant messaging the media most frequently used for cyberbullying. Staude-Muller et al. found denigration (22%), insults (20%), and threats (17%) to be the most common forms of cybervictimization in their sample. Of particular interest waswhether bullying is to be viewed as a cross-contextual phenomenon or if cyberbullying has to be seen as a distinct form of bullying. Katzer and Fetchenhauer showed both: on the one hand, there was a correlation between bullying behavior in school and in Internet chatrooms, and also between victimization in school and in Internet chatrooms;most pupils are bullies, or victims, in both environments. On the other hand, 21% of all cyberbullies were only cyberbullies, and 37% of cybervictims were only cybervictims.Of the cyberbullyingvictims, 47% reported that they just knew their bullies from school, while 34% knew the bullies only from the Internet (their chatroom identity), with 19% knowing them from school and the Internet. There was some overlap between victim and bully behavior. Victims of cyberbullying in chatrooms showed a tendency to be a bully exclusively in the environment of the victimization (chatrooms), whereas school victims also bullied others in chatrooms. This suggests that cyberbullying behavior may be the consequence of victimization experienced in school and could be interpreted as ‘‘fighting back’’ or ‘‘letting off steam.’’ Hierarchical regression analyses found as risk factors of bullying behavior in chatrooms: a bad parent relationship, high rates of absence in class, high delinquency, positive attitude toward aggression, and a
{"title":"Cyberbullying in Germany: What has been done and what is going on.","authors":"Catarina Katzer","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.222","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.222","url":null,"abstract":"In Germany, research on the topic of ‘‘cyberbullying’’ is scarce; here, I review recent work on this topic. The first such study in Germany was by Katzer and Fetchenhauer in 2005 (Katzer, 2005). It was a standardized survey of 1,700 5th to 11th grade students (648 men and 803 women), which mainly focused on analyzing cyberbullying in Internet chatrooms. Because no scale was available for the assessment of cyberbullying in Internet chatrooms at the time, an instrument was developed based on the short version of the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (Olweus, 1989). Two other studies of cyberbullying were conducted by online questionnaires. Jager, Fischer, Riebel, and Fluck (2007) surveyed 1,997 students from 1st to 13th grade. Staude-Muller, Bliesener, and Nowak (in press) assessed cyberbullying with data from 1,277 children and adolescents aged 6–22 years. Because the studies used different methods and measurements a comparison of the results is difficult. Nevertheless all studies made it clear that cyberbullying is an important issue in Germany (Schultze-Krumbholz & Scheithauer, 2008). Katzer and Fetchenhauer found that frequencies for victimization in chatrooms (every few months to daily) range between 5.4% (being blackmailed or put under pressure) and 43.1% (being abused or insulted). Jager et al. found a frequency of about 20% for cybervictimization in general, with instant messaging the media most frequently used for cyberbullying. Staude-Muller et al. found denigration (22%), insults (20%), and threats (17%) to be the most common forms of cybervictimization in their sample. Of particular interest waswhether bullying is to be viewed as a cross-contextual phenomenon or if cyberbullying has to be seen as a distinct form of bullying. Katzer and Fetchenhauer showed both: on the one hand, there was a correlation between bullying behavior in school and in Internet chatrooms, and also between victimization in school and in Internet chatrooms;most pupils are bullies, or victims, in both environments. On the other hand, 21% of all cyberbullies were only cyberbullies, and 37% of cybervictims were only cybervictims.Of the cyberbullyingvictims, 47% reported that they just knew their bullies from school, while 34% knew the bullies only from the Internet (their chatroom identity), with 19% knowing them from school and the Internet. There was some overlap between victim and bully behavior. Victims of cyberbullying in chatrooms showed a tendency to be a bully exclusively in the environment of the victimization (chatrooms), whereas school victims also bullied others in chatrooms. This suggests that cyberbullying behavior may be the consequence of victimization experienced in school and could be interpreted as ‘‘fighting back’’ or ‘‘letting off steam.’’ Hierarchical regression analyses found as risk factors of bullying behavior in chatrooms: a bad parent relationship, high rates of absence in class, high delinquency, positive attitude toward aggression, and a ","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"96 1","pages":"222-223"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73268188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.1
P. Sedlmeier
The mindless use of null-hypothesis significance testing – the significance test ritual (e.g., Salsburg, 1985) – has long been criticized. The main component of the ritual can be characterized as follows: Once you have collected your data, try to refute your null hypothesis (e.g., no mean difference, zero correlation, etc.) in an automatized manner. Often the ritual is complemented by the “star procedure”: If p < .05, assign one star to your results (*), if p < .01 give two stars (**), and if p < .001 you have earned yourself three stars (***). If you have obtained at least one star, the ritual has been successfully performed; if not, your results are not worth much. The stars, or the corresponding numerical values, have been door-openers to prestigious psychology journals and, therefore, the ritual has received strong reinforcement. The ritual does not have a firm theoretical grounding; it seems to have arisen as a badly understood hybrid mixture of the approaches of Ronald A. Fisher, Jerzy Neyman, Egon S. Pearson, and (at least in some variations of the ritual) Thomas Bayes (see Acree, 1979; Gigerenzer & Murray, 1987; Spielman, 1974). For quite some time, there has been controversy over its usefulness. The debates arising from this controversy, however, have not been limited to discussions about the mindless procedure as sketched above, but have expanded to include the issues of experimental design and sampling procedures, assumptions about the size of population effects (leading to the specification of an alternative hypothesis), deliberations about statistical power before the data are collected, and decisions about Type I and Type II errors. There have been several such debates and the controversy is ongoing (for a summary see Balluerka, Gómez, & Hidalgo, 2005; Nickerson, 2000; Sedlmeier, 1999, Appendix C). Although there have been voices that argue for a ban on significance testing (e.g., Hunter, 1997), authors usually conclude that significance tests, if conducted properly, probably have some value (or at least do no harm) but should be complemented (or replaced) by other more informative ways of analyzing data (e.g., Abelson, 1995; Cohen, 1994; Howard, Maxwell, & Fleming, 2000; Loftus, 1993; Nickerson, 2000; Sedlmeier, 1996; Wilkinson & Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999). Alternative data-analysis techniques have been wellknown among methodologists for decades but this knowledge, mainly collected in methods journals, seems to have had little impact on the practice of researchers to date. I see two main reasons for this unsatisfactory state of affairs. First, it appears that there is still a fair amount of misunderstanding about what the results of significance tests really mean (e.g., Gordon, 2001; Haller & Krauss, 2002; Mittag & Thompson, 2000; Monterde-i-Bort, Pascual Llobell, & Frias-Navarro, 2008). Second, although alternatives have been briefly mentioned in widely received summary articles (such as Wilkinson & Task Force on S
无脑地使用零假设显著性检验——显著性检验仪式(例如，Salsburg, 1985)——长期以来一直受到批评。这个仪式的主要组成部分可以描述如下:一旦你收集了你的数据，试着用一种自动化的方式反驳你的零假设(例如，没有平均差异，零相关等)。通常，这个仪式是由“星级程序”补充的:如果p < 0.05，给你的结果打一颗星(*)，如果p < 0.01，给两颗星(**)，如果p < 0.001，你已经赢得了自己的三颗星(***)。如果你获得了至少一颗星，那么仪式已经成功完成;如果不是，你的成绩就没有多大价值。星星，或相应的数值，已经成为著名心理学期刊的大门，因此，这种仪式得到了强烈的强化。这种仪式没有坚实的理论基础;它似乎是Ronald a . Fisher、Jerzy Neyman、Egon S. Pearson和Thomas Bayes(至少在仪式的某些变体中)(见Acree, 1979;Gigerenzer & Murray, 1987;Spielman, 1974)。很长一段时间以来，人们对它的实用性一直存在争议。然而，从这一争议中产生的争论并不局限于对上述无意识程序的讨论，而是扩展到包括实验设计和抽样程序的问题，关于总体效应大小的假设(导致另一种假设的规范)，在收集数据之前对统计能力的审议，以及关于类型I和类型II错误的决定。有几次这样的辩论，争论仍在继续(摘要见Balluerka, Gómez， & Hidalgo, 2005;Nickerson, 2000;虽然有人主张禁止显著性检验(例如，Hunter, 1997)，但作者通常得出结论，如果进行得当，显著性检验可能有一些价值(或至少不会造成伤害)，但应该用其他更有信息量的分析数据的方法来补充(或取代)(例如，Abelson, 1995;科恩,1994;霍华德，麦克斯韦和弗莱明，2000;Loftus, 1993;Nickerson, 2000;Sedlmeier, 1996;Wilkinson & Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999)。替代数据分析技术在方法学家中已经广为人知了几十年，但这些知识主要收集在方法期刊上，迄今为止似乎对研究人员的实践几乎没有影响。对于这种令人不满意的状况，我认为有两个主要原因。首先，对于显著性检验结果的真正含义，似乎仍然存在相当多的误解(例如，Gordon, 2001;Haller & Krauss, 2002;米塔格和汤普森，2000;Monterde-i-Bort, Pascual Llobell， & Frias-Navarro, 2008)。其次，尽管在广泛接受的总结文章中(如Wilkinson & Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999)简要地提到了替代方案，但它们很少以非技术和详细的方式呈现给非专业受众。因此，原则上，研究人员可能愿意改变他们分析数据的方式，但学习替代方法所需的努力可能被认为太大了。本期特刊的主要目的是介绍由该领域专家以非技术方式描述的这些可选数据分析方法的集合。在介绍特刊内容之前，我将简要概述推理统计的理想状态，并讨论无意识和有意识显著性检验之间的区别。
{"title":"Beyond the Significance Test Ritual: What Is There?","authors":"P. Sedlmeier","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.1","url":null,"abstract":"The mindless use of null-hypothesis significance testing – the significance test ritual (e.g., Salsburg, 1985) – has long been criticized. The main component of the ritual can be characterized as follows: Once you have collected your data, try to refute your null hypothesis (e.g., no mean difference, zero correlation, etc.) in an automatized manner. Often the ritual is complemented by the “star procedure”: If p < .05, assign one star to your results (*), if p < .01 give two stars (**), and if p < .001 you have earned yourself three stars (***). If you have obtained at least one star, the ritual has been successfully performed; if not, your results are not worth much. The stars, or the corresponding numerical values, have been door-openers to prestigious psychology journals and, therefore, the ritual has received strong reinforcement. The ritual does not have a firm theoretical grounding; it seems to have arisen as a badly understood hybrid mixture of the approaches of Ronald A. Fisher, Jerzy Neyman, Egon S. Pearson, and (at least in some variations of the ritual) Thomas Bayes (see Acree, 1979; Gigerenzer & Murray, 1987; Spielman, 1974). For quite some time, there has been controversy over its usefulness. The debates arising from this controversy, however, have not been limited to discussions about the mindless procedure as sketched above, but have expanded to include the issues of experimental design and sampling procedures, assumptions about the size of population effects (leading to the specification of an alternative hypothesis), deliberations about statistical power before the data are collected, and decisions about Type I and Type II errors. There have been several such debates and the controversy is ongoing (for a summary see Balluerka, Gómez, & Hidalgo, 2005; Nickerson, 2000; Sedlmeier, 1999, Appendix C). Although there have been voices that argue for a ban on significance testing (e.g., Hunter, 1997), authors usually conclude that significance tests, if conducted properly, probably have some value (or at least do no harm) but should be complemented (or replaced) by other more informative ways of analyzing data (e.g., Abelson, 1995; Cohen, 1994; Howard, Maxwell, & Fleming, 2000; Loftus, 1993; Nickerson, 2000; Sedlmeier, 1996; Wilkinson & Task Force on Statistical Inference, 1999). Alternative data-analysis techniques have been wellknown among methodologists for decades but this knowledge, mainly collected in methods journals, seems to have had little impact on the practice of researchers to date. I see two main reasons for this unsatisfactory state of affairs. First, it appears that there is still a fair amount of misunderstanding about what the results of significance tests really mean (e.g., Gordon, 2001; Haller & Krauss, 2002; Mittag & Thompson, 2000; Monterde-i-Bort, Pascual Llobell, & Frias-Navarro, 2008). Second, although alternatives have been briefly mentioned in widely received summary articles (such as Wilkinson & Task Force on S","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"24 1","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75097615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.6
R. L. Rosnow, R. Rosenthal
{"title":"Effect Sizes Why, When, and How to Use Them","authors":"R. L. Rosnow, R. Rosenthal","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.1.6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":"6-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82774556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.3.159
E. Maris, R. Stoffers
There has been a lot of attention for the idea that the reading of a single word (visual word recognition) involves a single mechanism only. This mechanism first maps the orthographic input onto a sublexical phonological code via which, in a second step, the lexicon is accessed. This mechanism is called a single route phonological model, and it should be contrasted with a dual route model, which also assumes an orthographic route. This orthographic route maps the orthographic input onto a lexical orthographic code without phonological recoding. In this paper, both the single route phonological and the dual route models were formulated as multinomial processing tree (MPT) models. These two MPT models were applied to the data of two experiments in which the participants (children in Grades 1 and 2) had to give a combined naming and lexical decision response to four types of stimuli (words and three types of nonwords). The dual route model gave a much better explanation of these data than the single route phonological model.
{"title":"Dual and Single Route Models for Beginning Readers A Comparison by Means of Multinomial Processing Tree Models","authors":"E. Maris, R. Stoffers","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.3.159","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.3.159","url":null,"abstract":"There has been a lot of attention for the idea that the reading of a single word (visual word recognition) involves a single mechanism only. This mechanism first maps the orthographic input onto a sublexical phonological code via which, in a second step, the lexicon is accessed. This mechanism is called a single route phonological model, and it should be contrasted with a dual route model, which also assumes an orthographic route. This orthographic route maps the orthographic input onto a lexical orthographic code without phonological recoding. In this paper, both the single route phonological and the dual route models were formulated as multinomial processing tree (MPT) models. These two MPT models were applied to the data of two experiments in which the participants (children in Grades 1 and 2) had to give a combined naming and lexical decision response to four types of stimuli (words and three types of nonwords). The dual route model gave a much better explanation of these data than the single route phonological model.","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"61 1","pages":"159-174"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82072275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.2.73
D. O’connell, S. Kowal
The phrase becoming a science, as applied to the history of psychology, is at best a tendentious formulation of the status quaestionis. It presumes quite clearly that the direction of development has, indeed, been toward becoming more scientific. This presumption is engaged critically here. The American Psychological Association (APA), flagship of psychological organizations in the modern era, has undoubtedly become an empire. Whether the brand of psychology fostered currently by the APA is also the asymptote or endpoint of a developmental motion toward being more scientific merits inquiry and discussion. Schism and discontent in our midst have not been entirely political; there have also been aberrations and fads that have stunted growth and have accordingly fostered protests. Here, we consider some pioneers whose wisdom regarding the science of psychology has been, from time to time, influential, neglected, or even misguided. Modern psychology cannot, without further ado, be considered the inevitable pr...
{"title":"The Evolution of Modern Psychology","authors":"D. O’connell, S. Kowal","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.2.73","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.2.73","url":null,"abstract":"The phrase becoming a science, as applied to the history of psychology, is at best a tendentious formulation of the status quaestionis. It presumes quite clearly that the direction of development has, indeed, been toward becoming more scientific. This presumption is engaged critically here. The American Psychological Association (APA), flagship of psychological organizations in the modern era, has undoubtedly become an empire. Whether the brand of psychology fostered currently by the APA is also the asymptote or endpoint of a developmental motion toward being more scientific merits inquiry and discussion. Schism and discontent in our midst have not been entirely political; there have also been aberrations and fads that have stunted growth and have accordingly fostered protests. Here, we consider some pioneers whose wisdom regarding the science of psychology has been, from time to time, influential, neglected, or even misguided. Modern psychology cannot, without further ado, be considered the inevitable pr...","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"30 1","pages":"73-78"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75555655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2009-01-01DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.224
Anja Schultze-Krumbholz, H. Scheithauer
With almost all German households owning mobile phones (99%), personal or laptop computers (99%), and having Internet access (96%) (MPFS, 2008), electronic media play a central role in children’s and adolescents’ lives in Germany and also pose a new venue for potentially harmful behavior and experiences such as cyberbullying. Beside first prevalence studies on cyberbullying (Katzer, 2009), there is a lack of studies on risk and protective factors. Impulses for research on this issue can be gained from research on traditional bullying which has shown low scores on empathy to be associated with the status of bully (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2006). Empathy is viewed as the combination of two functionally different aspects: cognitive and affective empathy, with cognitive empathy being the ability to understand another person’s emotions (perspective taking) and affective empathy being the affective response to someone else’s emotions (Hoffman, 1977). Sutton, Smith, and Swettenham (1999) hypothesized that (traditional) bullies are able to process social information very accurately and can use it to their advantage rather than
{"title":"Social-Behavioral Correlates of Cyberbullying in a German Student Sample","authors":"Anja Schultze-Krumbholz, H. Scheithauer","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.224","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.224","url":null,"abstract":"With almost all German households owning mobile phones (99%), personal or laptop computers (99%), and having Internet access (96%) (MPFS, 2008), electronic media play a central role in children’s and adolescents’ lives in Germany and also pose a new venue for potentially harmful behavior and experiences such as cyberbullying. Beside first prevalence studies on cyberbullying (Katzer, 2009), there is a lack of studies on risk and protective factors. Impulses for research on this issue can be gained from research on traditional bullying which has shown low scores on empathy to be associated with the status of bully (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2006). Empathy is viewed as the combination of two functionally different aspects: cognitive and affective empathy, with cognitive empathy being the ability to understand another person’s emotions (perspective taking) and affective empathy being the affective response to someone else’s emotions (Hoffman, 1977). Sutton, Smith, and Swettenham (1999) hypothesized that (traditional) bullies are able to process social information very accurately and can use it to their advantage rather than","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"26 4 1","pages":"224-226"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78047238","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","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：