In a preregistered study, we investigated whether two different procedures increased people’s recognition and motivation to self-regulate personal bias and also recognition and motivation to combat systemic bias. Non-Black undergraduates (N = 467) were randomly assigned to either a IAT procedure (i.e., took a racial IAT, received fixed feedback indicating racial bias, and received an explanation for why people may hold implicit biases), a discrimination experiences procedure (i.e., read about Black people’s discrimination experiences across various institutional contexts), or a control procedure (i.e., rated their preferences for common consumer products). Then, participants completed measures assessing recognition of and motivation to combat personal and systemic bias. Among average IMS participants, results indicated that the IAT procedure significantly increased recognition of personal racial bias, compared to the control procedure. The discrimination experiences procedure significantly increased motivation to combat systemic bias, support for policies aimed at addressing inequality, and motivation to self-regulate personal bias, compared to both the control and IAT procedures. We also found that the IAT heightened negative self-directed affect especially among higher IMS participants, which in turn was associated with increased acknowledgement of and motivation to combat not only personal but also systemic bias. Finally, among all participants, the discrimination experiences procedure heightened negative other-directed affect, which in turn was associated with increased recognition of and motivation to combat systemic bias. Although additional research is needed, these initial results may suggest that personal bias interventions influence personal bias outcomes but do not similarly influence systemic bias outcomes. In contrast, systemic bias interventions may be more likely to influence awareness of and motivation to combat both personal and systemic bias. These results pave the way for future investigation into the nature of crossover effects between personal and systemic bias procedures.

<p>Seligman (2011) introduced well-being theory as a multidimensional model to increase and measure well-being. The PERMA model of well-being theory defines well-being in terms of five constructs: Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, and Accomplishment. Together, these five constructs are the foundation of individual and community well-being. The end goal of well-being theory is flourishing, which is defined as optimal well-being, where one is in the upper range of all five PERMA elements. The purpose of this study was to test whether all five PERMA elements of well-being could be derived from items in the <i>2018 Purdue Student Experience at a Research University</i> (SERU) survey, thus providing support for the multidimensional model in context of undergraduate students at a research-intensive university. Using confirmatory factor analysis, all five PERMA constructs were supported with use of 32 items and demonstrated good model fit statistics. A second order PERMA well-being construct was built and demonstrated adequate model fit with RMSEA = 0.04. In the full PERMA model, all 32 items were significant at <i>p</i> < .05. In the full PERMA model, all five constructs were significant at <i>p</i> < .001. Accomplishment had the highest factor loading (0.76) and Meaning had the lowest factor loading (0.25). Results from this study provide initial support for use of well-being theory in context of undergraduate students.</p>

<p>Theorists conceptualize gratitude as incorporating either an <i>interpersonal perspective</i> in which an individual feels or gives thanks to another person as the source of a provided benefit, or an <i>impersonal perspective</i> in which one’s feelings of gratitude are not necessarily directed to other human beings as the beneficial source, but rather feelings of gratitude are attributed to a nonhuman source (e.g., nature, fate, luck, God, the cosmos). This latter perspective maintains that not only do people feel gratitude for valued benefits provided by another person (i.e., interpersonal source), but people can also experience gratitude for valued benefits that do not emerge or originate from others (i.e., impersonal source). Theorists also posit that over time, people can take any particular benefit for granted (i.e., habituate), failing to experience feelings of gratitude because they presume that the availability of a benefit/source is stable and certain, and unlikely to be lost. By comparison, evidence suggests that perceiving uncertainty or the potential loss of a benefit/source inspires a greater sense of gratitude. Reflecting on the pragmatic uncertainty of finite benefits/resources that are frequently taken for granted should lead to enhanced feelings of gratefulness. </p> <p>Although the majority of empirical work examining feelings and functions of gratitude is structured around an interpersonal source perspective in which people receive one-time benefits, investigations focused on gratitude for impersonal sources of benefits remain scant and understudied. The present research follows from McCullough’s (2001) and Watkins’ (2014) call to increase empirical research examining gratitude in contexts in which the source does not involve a human benefactor. The current work including a pilot test and four studies (N = 1459) offers such an examination. The findings from this initial set of studies demonstrated some evidence that those with pro-environmental attitudes exhibited increased gratitude for water when provided with specific information about water’s value (vs an unrelated topic) (Study 1). I also found that people with more pro-environmental attitudes value water more when water is presented as a relatively more uncertain resource (Study 2). The effect of certainty on gratitude was replicated in Study 3, showing that those in a low certainty condition were more grateful for water than those in a high certainty condition. Moreover, gratitude for water predicted the intent to perform water conservation behaviors and interest in water conservation volunteering (Study 3). I also found some evidence that habituation mediated the effect between the perceived certainty of a benefit and lower gratitude, suggesting that people experience less gratitude for benefits they take for granted, in part, because they think less about them (Study 4). However, this affect only appeared consistently among more liberal, pro-environmental people. The current research contributes to and expands gratitude theory and research by providing some initial evidence that feelings of gratitude can serve broader adaptive purposes than is currently theorized. Thus, gratitude not only helps people identify and bond with social benefactors, but it also may serve as a generalized psychological system that prompts people to recognize and positively respond to most any form of benefit/source. </p>

No description available.

<div>Invisibility is an abstract concept captured in film, literature, and social science. It is often desired as a superpower and in fiction portrayed as something that allows self-serving behaviors otherwise prevented by visibility. However, as a social construct used to describe marginalized individuals, it is regarded as largely distressing and disadvantageous. Key to these two opposing conceptualizations is the temporariness or permanence of the invisibility—if temporary and under the control of the individual, it serves the individual’s needs and desires; if permanent, it strips the individual of a sense of meaning and worthiness. The present studies examine invisibility from both perspectives. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate the desirable aspects of temporary invisibility, but also show that people are less enamored with possessing invisibility when its occurrence is permanent or not under the control of the individual. In Study 3, employing a 3-person video telephony paradigm, I test the impact of ostracism—being ignored and excluded—for one of two motives: role prescribed, in which individuals’ roles encourage their social invisibility, and oblivious, in which status differentials render those with lower status invisible. The results show that whereas obliviously ostracized individuals take advantage of their invisibility to prematurely begin a questionnaire, they also show higher levels of personal distress. These results indicate that being unnoticed may have negative psychological impact on individuals while also affording them the opportunity to engage in self-serving, yet possibly socially undesirable, behaviors. </div>

<p>Challenges to or criticisms of existing social arrangements often result in individuals bolstering the status quo rather than becoming inspired to consider avenues for improvement - a phenomenon known as system justification. However, it is not yet known whether characteristics of the individual challenging the system might magnify (or alleviate) system-defensive responding. New entrance into a system might be one such characteristic to heighten defensiveness because new entrants likely have had fewer opportunities to prove their commitment to the system’s values. Thus, I conducted three initial studies to develop experimental paradigms testing whether recommendations for change are particularly repudiated when advocated by newcomers. Study 1 examined responses to proposals by a freshman congressperson (vs. senior or control) to change an obscure U.S. policy (<i>N </i>= 540). Study 2 examined responses to a proposal by a new employee (vs. senior or control) to change a workplace policy (<i>N </i>= 515), and Study 3 investigated student responses to a proposal by a junior transfer student (vs. junior continuing student) to change a proudly-held university policy (<i>N </i>= 309). Together, findings across these three paradigms suggest mixed evidence that both newcomers themselves, and their policy ideas, are derogated more than are full members when advocating change, particularly among individuals higher on dispositional system justification. Future, sufficiently-powered research should continue to examine impacts of proposer’s membership status on resistance to system change in order to provide insight into the actors most likely to successfully advocate for social progress. </p>

Abstract Views of addiction etiology predict religious individuals’ willingness to help. Emily Brady, Valerie Hoots, Joseph Barnet, and Andrea Clements, Department of Psychology, East Tennessee State University. Addiction to drugs and alcohol is an accrescent societal problem. Individuals with substance addiction face stigma in their daily lives, specifically from religious individuals as explored in this study. The stigma these religious individuals might portray could be related to their ideas on addiction etiology. The purpose of this project is to evaluate if different views of addiction etiology predict religious individuals’ willingness to help individuals with substance addition. Our hypothesis for this sample consists of two parts. (1) Religious individuals who hold the belief of a moral etiology of addiction will be less willing to help individuals with substance addiction. (2) Religious individuals who hold the ideology of a physical etiology of addiction will be less willing to help individuals with substance addiction. A survey, which contained the Addiction Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (AABS) and the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription medication, and other Substance use Tool (TAPS), was administered to a sample of 215 individuals recruited through social media advertising via Facebook and Reddit platforms, email, and East Tennessee State University’s SONA research portal. Results showed significance in beliefs of moral etiology and willingness to help across religious individuals. One limitation for this project is a lack of generalizability due to the majority of participants being female (73.6%) and white (92.1%). Another limitation is that the measure is based on self-report, and given the sensitivity on the topic, individuals may not be willing to report accurately.

Adolescence traditionally has been recognized and accepted as a period of exploration of an occasional rebellion against the adult world. Explorations are viewed by behavioral scientists as a quest for identity expansion, and as such, a necessary phase for attaining maturity. Several tasks have been identified which each adolescent must complete if he is to reach maturity. For the present these tasks can be summarized as character formation, attainment of sexual identity, establishment of mature relationships and emancipation from parental control. Society's attitude towards the rebellion and exploitation of youth is mixed. This confusion seems related to a general breakdown in custom, dispensation of child-adolescent labor, and restriction on sexual activity. Perhaps the confusion is particularly noted in relation to the adolescent unwed mother who may be viewed as having violated moral standards. While America has been from its inception relatively free of entrenched social groups, traditions and values, there were customs and values which served to regulate behavior: curfew, chaperones, maiden aunts in the parlor and mothers in the kitchen.

The domestic violence movement has had remarkable success illuminating the scope, prevalence and consequences of battering, but has been more limited in its ability to successfully intervene and prevent abuse of women by their intimate male partners. Surprisingly, there has been little research directed at understanding why intervention strategies with perpetrators are only minimally effective. Studies have focused on assessing the degree to which and for whom individual components such as arrest, prosecution and psycho-educational programs for abusive men are successful, but few explorations have attempted to describe limitations and challenges to the domestic violence intervention 'system as a whole'. Employing a systems approach, a process-oriented evaluation of the domestic violence intervention system in Portland, Oregon was conducted. Ten focus groups were facilitated with key stakeholders in the coordinated community response. Participants included police and probation officers, victim advocates, victim/survivors, batterer intervention program providers, and batterer intervention program participants. The focus group discussions were analyzed using constructivist grounded theory and emergent themes were identified. Based on stakeholder testimony, it appears as though seven interacting features may limit the effectiveness of domestic violence intervention strategies with abusive men: 1) attempting to simultaneously punish and rehabilitate perpetrators, 2) dominance of a "one size fits all" approach, 3) insufficient accountability within the system for abusive men, 4) rampant victim blaming, 5) barriers to effective collaboration, 6) confusion created by complex domestic violence dynamics, and 7) reactivity instead of activism and prevention. These and other findings are discussed in light of their capacity to illuminate fundamental tensions associated with relying so heavily on the criminal justice system to intervene in domestic violence (e.g., the contradictions that surface when attempting to protect and empower victims, the difficulty of balancing consistency with an individually tailored response when sanctioning perpetrators). Despite these and other challenges, complete dismissal of the criminal justice system's role in holding abusive men accountable seems unwise. Instead, it will be important for movement activists, practitioners, and researchers to critically reflect upon its limitations and work to redress and refine its use, while simultaneously developing new strategies that engage a wider range of community resources.

Stigma has been described as the most significant obstacle to quality of life for individuals with major psychiatric diagnoses (Sartorious, 1998). Much of the psychological literature on stigma focuses on individual attributes and interactions at the micro level, rather than macro level dynamics. In critiquing this traditional focus, Link and Phelan (2001) present a model in which stigma ensues when labeling, stereotyping, separation, status loss, and discrimination co-occur in a situation of power imbalance. Even as the model fills a gap in conceptualizing stigma, its emphasis on power is unidirectional and fails to account for power as a form of resistance to stigmatization. This study explores the question of how a consumer/survivor activist perspective can inform the Link and Phelan model of stigma. A semi-structured interview methodology was used to gather qualitative data on the perspectives of 10 activists who are both the targets of stigma and active change agents in resisting stigma. The content of the interviews was thematically analyzed based on an iterative coding approach in order to identify the points of overlap with and divergence from the Link and Phelan model. The results of the study support the applicability of the model for psychiatric stigma. The participants' experiences illustrate which aspects of stigmatization take precedence in this context, indicating significant points for intervention. The anti-stigma work discussed by the participants illustrates the power of grassroots resistance, expanding the understanding of power presented in the model. Emergent discursive themes include the importance of similarity, the rejection of negative portrayals of mental illness, and a focus on a shared continuum of human experience. Participants' emphasis on the importance of having their voices silenced was a particularly recurring motif. Several respondents challenge the premises of the Link and Phelan model. These participants emphasize the positive aspects of diagnosis and labeling, while several other participants reject the choice of the term stigma because it may obscure the structural aspects of discrimination. These findings can serve as a guideline for designing future interventions, and focusing on strategies for social change.