			Home About us Contact

Psychological Findings (psychological + finding)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Psychology	75%

Selected Abstracts

Global Risk, Investment and Emotions

ECONOMICA, Issue 307 2010
RONALD BOSMAN
We investigate a novel dynamic choice problem in an experiment where emotions are measured through self-reports. The choice problem concerns the investment of an amount of money in a safe option and a risky option when there is a ,global risk' of losing all earnings, from both options, including any return from the risky option. Our key finding is that global risk can reduce the amount invested in the risky option. This result cannot be explained by Expected Utility or by its main contenders, Rank-Dependent Utility and Cumulative Prospect Theory. An explanation is offered by taking account of emotions, using the emotion data from the experiment and recent psychological findings. [source]

Support for religio-political aggression among teenaged boys in Gaza: Part I: psychological findings,

AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR, Issue 4 2010
Jeff Victoroff
Abstract Politically aggressive militant groups usually rely on support from a larger community, although evidence suggests that only some members of that larger community support that aggression. A major subtype of political aggression is that associated with religious differences,or Religio-Political Aggression (RPA). Little previous research has explored demographic or psychological factors that might distinguish supporters from non-supporters of RPA. In an exploratory study, we investigated whether factors previously associated with aggression might correlate with support for RPA in the case of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. During the second intifada, fifty-two 14-year-old Palestinian boys in Gaza completed self-report measures of life events, emotional status, and political attitudes. Teenaged boys who reported family members having been wounded or killed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) expressed greater support for RPA (t(50)=,2.30, P=.026). In addition, boys who felt their group was treated unjustly reported greater support for RPA compared with those who did not (t(50)=,2.273, P=.027). Implications of these preliminary data are discussed. Aggr. Behav. 36:219,231, 2010. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source]

Jung as psychologist of religion and Jung as philosopher of religion

THE JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 3 2010
Robert A. Segal
Abstract:, Is it possible to be both a psychologist and a philosopher? Is it possible for a psychologist, or more generally a social scientist, to use social scientific findings to make philosophical claims? Specifically, is it possible for a social scientist to use social scientific findings to determine the existence of God? Did Jung profess to be only a psychologist or also a philosopher? If he professed to be both, did he enlist his psychological findings to make philosophical claims? Specifically, did he enlist his psychological findings to determine the existence of God? Translations of Abstract Est-il possible d'être à la fois psychologue et philosophe? Est-il possible pour un psychologue ou plus généralement pour un spécialiste des sciences sociales de faire usage des découvertes en sciences sociales pour formuler des revendications philosophiques? Plus spécifiquement, est-il possible pour un spécialiste des sciences sociales de faire usage des découvertes en sciences sociales pour déterminer l'existence de Dieu? Est-ce que Jung se déclare n'être que psychologue ou est-il philosophe à la fois? S'il se dit être les deux à la fois, a-t-il fait usage de ses découvertes en psychologie pour avancer des revendications philosophiques? Plus spécifiquement, est-ce qu'il s'est servi de ces découvertes en psychologie pour déterminer l'existence de Dieu? Ist es möglich, sowohl Psychologe als auch Philosoph zu sein? Ist es einem Psychologen, oder allgemeiner, einem Sozialwissenschaftler möglich, sozialwissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse zu benutzen um philosophische Behauptungen aufzustellen? Besonders, ist es einem Sozialwissenschaftler möglich, sozialwissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse zu benutzen um die Existenz Gottes zu untersuchen? Verstand Jung sich nur als Psychologe oder auch als Philosoph? Wenn er sich als beides verstand, zog er seine psychologischen Entdeckungen heran um philosophische Behauptungen aufzustellen? Im besonderen: benutzte er seine psychologische Entdeckungen um die Existenz Gottes zu beweisen? E' possibile essere sia un filosofo che uno psicologo? E' possibile per uno psicologo, o più genericamente per uno scienziato sociale, usare le scoperte scientifiche sociali per fare affermazioni filosofiche? In particolare, è possibile per uno scienziato sociale usare scoperte scientifiche sociali per dimostrare l'esistenza di Dio? Jung affermò di essere solo uno psicologo o anche un filosofo? E se affermò di essere entrambe le cose usò le sue scoperte psicologiche per fare affermazioni filosofiche? In particolare utilizzò le scoperte psicologiche per determinare l'esistenza di Dio? ¿Es posible ser ambos, un psicólogo y un filósofo?¿Es posible para un psicólogo, o más generalmente un sociólogo, utilizar conclusiones científicas sociales para hacer reclamos filosóficos?¿Específicamente, es posible para un sociólogo utilizar conclusiones científicas sociales para determinar la existencia de Dios?¿Actuó Jung como psicólogo o también como filósofo? Si él asegura ser ambos, usó sus conclusiones psicológicas para establecer conceptos filosóficos? Específicamente, ¿utilizó sus conclusiones psicológicas para comprobar la existencia de Dios? [source]

The development of decision-making capacities in children and adolescents: Psychological and neurological perspectives and their implications for juvenile defendants

BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES & THE LAW, Issue 2 2009
Praveen Kambam M.D.
The development of decision-making capacities in children and adolescents has been a topic of interest for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Questions regarding the development of decision-making capacities (and moral reasoning) of youth frequently arise in juvenile justice settings, other forensic settings, and sometimes in treatment settings. This article attempts to review the latest and most relevant research on the development of decision-making capacities likely to be relevant in children and adolescents who are defendants. We distinguish cognition versus judgment in decision-making and briefly review adolescent decision-making in laboratory and real world conditions. We review a theoretical framework of two different systems, a cognitive-control system and socio-emotional system, and potentially correlated neurobiological and psychological findings. Implications for selected aspects of the juvenile adjudicative process are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]