Assistant Professor Of Psychology Research Articles

Teaching Students about Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination: An Interview with Susan Fiske

Susan T. Fiske is professor of psychology, Princeton University (PhD, Harvard University; honorary doctorate, Université Catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium). She wrote Social Cognition (with Taylor) on how people make sense of each other. Currently, she investigates emotional prejudices (pity, contempt, envy, and pride) at cultural, interpersonal, and neural levels. She won the American Psychological Association's Early Career Award for Distinguished Contributions to Psychology in the Public Interest for antidiscrimination testimony and the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues' Allport Intergroup Relations Award for ambivalent sexism theory (with Glick). She edits the Annual Review of Psychology (with Schacter and Kazdin) and the Handbook of Social Psychology (with Gilbert and Lindzey). She just finished Social Beings: A Core Motives Approach to Social Psychology and a year as President of the American Psychological Society. Amy Hackney received her BA in psychology from Indiana University and her MS and PhD in social psychology from Saint Louis University. She began her career as an assistant professor of psychology at Georgia Southern University in the Fall of 2003. She teaches courses in social psychology, psychology and law, psychology of gender, and research methods. She conducts research on racial and gender stereotypes and prejudice. She is particularly interested in how stereotypes and prejudice affect jury decision making and how minority members experience and cope with prejudice.

College students’ vocational choice: Understanding the personal call to work. Spotlight on Rodger Narloch

Rodger Narloch is Assistant Professor of Psychology at St. John’s University (MN). As a developmental psychologist, he primarily is interested in studying how people change over time. Specifically, his work has focused on how students come to understand themselves during their formative college years and what aspects of the college experience play a role in the identity development of students. He is currently the Assessment Director for SJU’s Theological Exploration of Vocation Project. Dr. Narloch was contacted about his research.

Can Luncheon Behavior Foretell Schizophrenia?

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Clinical & Research NewsFull AccessCan Luncheon Behavior Foretell Schizophrenia?Joan Arehart-TreichelJoan Arehart-TreichelSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:3 Dec 2004https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.39.23.00390036Could youngsters' behavior while eating lunch predict which ones will develop schizophrenia? It sounds rather improbable, but perhaps, a study reported in the November American Journal of Psychiatry suggests. The study was headed by Jason Schiffman, Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.Some 9,000 children were born in a particular hospital in Copenhagen, Denmark, between 1959 and 1961. In 1972, when the children were between 11 and 13 years of age, some 250 were selected for an investigation into the early signs of schizophrenia. A number of these adolescents had a parent with schizophrenia and thus were at high risk for developing the illness.One aspect of the study consisted of videotaping the youngsters while eating lunch to record their social behavior and neuromotor skills. Lunch consisted of Danish open-face sandwiches constructed in layers and requiring some motor skills to consume.These adolescents were followed up in 1992, when they were between the ages of 31 and 33, to determine whether any of them had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or other psychiatric disorders.Now Schiffman and his colleagues have used videotaped lunch behaviors from some 150 of the adolescents to determine whether the social behavior and neuromotor functioning of those who later developed schizophrenia differed from those who later had no mental illness or another mental disorder.The researchers found that the adolescents who later developed schizophrenia had, on average, a lower total score on a sociability scale including smiles, laughs, and vocalizations than did adolescents who developed other kinds of psychopathology or remained free of mental disorder. Boys who later developed schizophrenia scored, on average, higher on a neuromotor scale consisting of involuntary facial movements, raised elbows, nystagmus-like eye movements, and other abnormal movements than did boys who developed other psychopathology or none.In an accompanying editorial, Gabrielle Carlson, M.D., a child-adolescent psychiatrist and professor of psychiatric and pediatrics at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, wrote: “Prospective follow-up studies are treasures.... That a videotape of a casual interaction can detect children at risk for schizophrenia because they smile, laugh, and initiate conversation less often than nonaffected peers is amazing....”Fewer grins and chuckles and less chitchat, of course, are no guarantee that youngsters will develop schizophrenia. They may have a naturally reticent nature or perhaps suffer from another mental condition such as social anxiety.“ Depression and pervasive developmental disorder can also dampen expressions of happiness and volubility in youth,” Carlson told Psychiatric News.So what is needed at this juncture, she said, is further research to examine the sensitivity and specificity of these findings and whether they might be used in conjunction with teacher ratings and parent ratings to identify youth at high risk of schizophrenia. However, “I am not aware of any studies of this nature being done,” she said.Schiffman and his coworkers are conducting another study that should further reveal whether adolescent lunch behaviors might predict schizophrenia. The project, he explained to Psychiatric News, “is a more in-depth analysis of the youth from the current study combining various neurological measures of functioning to increase the predictive ability to detect schizophrenia. In addition to the videotaping conducted for this report, various other indices of neurological functioning were gathered. We anticipate that by combining these predictors, we might not only learn more about the neurodevelopmental basis of schizophrenia, but also gain clinically predictive utility among youth at genetic risk for schizophrenia.”The study was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health.The study, “Childhood Videotaped Social and Neuromotor Precursors of Schizophrenia: A Prospective Investigation,” is posted online at<http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/161/11/2021?>.▪ Am J Psychiatry 2004 161 2021 ISSUES NewArchived

Where History, Philosophy, and Psychology Meet: An Interview with Wayne Viney

Wayne Viney is Professor of Psychology and University Distinguished Teaching Scholar at Colorado State University where he teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in the history of psychology. He is also inaugurating a new course, The Development of Scientific Thought, for the College of Natural Sciences at Colorado State. Earlier in his career, he served as Head of the Department of Psychology, Associate Dean of the College of Natural Sciences, and Director of the University Core Curriculum in the Biological Sciences. Viney was elected President of Division 26 (History of Psychology) and of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association. He has been the recipient of 15 teaching awards at Colorado State University. In 1998, he served as a G. Stanley Hall lecturer for the American Psychological Association. He is coauthor with D. Brett King of A History of Psychology: Ideas and Context. He is also coauthor with Michael and Marilyn Wertheimer of a major bibliography entitled History of Psychology: A Guide to Information Sources. The focus of Viney's historical research has been the psychology and philosophy of William James as well as the life and work of the American humanitarian reformer, Dorothea Lynde Dix. Alexandra Rutherford is Assistant Professor of Psychology at York University in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, where she is a faculty member in the History and Theory of Psychology Graduate Program. She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in the history of psychology and undergraduate courses in abnormal psychology and personality psychology. She supervises both undergraduate and graduate students in historical and theoretical research projects and serves as the assistant editor of the Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences. She also edits the Heritage Column for The Feminist Psychologist, the newsletter of the Society for the Psychology of Women (Division 35 of the American Psychological Association). She has developed a Heritage Web site for Division 35 that is devoted to documenting the role of women in the history of psychology and promoting feminist approaches to writing, teaching, and understanding psychology's history ( www.psych.yorku.ca/femhop/ ). Her primary research areas are the history of B. F. Skinner's system in science and culture and the history of women and feminism in psychology. In 2001 she received the Division 26 (History of Psychology) Early Career Award for scholarship in the history of psychology. She is also a clinical psychologist in private practice.

Should Sleep-Starved Residents Be Setting Off Alarms?

Should Sleep-Starved Residents Be Setting Off Alarms?

Does Stress Impair Efficacy Of Flu Vaccine?

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Clinical & Research NewsFull AccessDoes Stress Impair Efficacy Of Flu Vaccine?Joan Arehart-TreichelJoan Arehart-TreichelSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:7 May 2004https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.39.9.0055During the past decade or so, evidence has been building that psychological stress can dampen people’s immune responses to diseases such as influenza, hepatitis B, and pneumonia. Now a new study reported in the March/April Psychosomatic Medicine shows that psychological stress can also blunt antibody responses to flu vaccination.The researchers—including Gregory Miller, Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia; Bruce Rabin, M.D., Ph.D., a professor of pathology at the University of Pittsburgh; John Treanor, M.D., a professor of medicine at the University of Rochester—conducted their study on 83 healthy, first-year students at Carnegie Mellon University.Using hand-held computers, the students reported for 13 days the extent to which they felt stressed and also various health-related practices such as cigarette smoking, alcohol use, physical activity, and sleep habits. Each day, the students also collected a saliva sample that was used to measure levels of the stress hormone cortisol.Three days into this 13-day period, the subjects were likewise measured for baseline antibody levels and then were given the vaccine. One month after they had been vaccinated, and again four months later, their antibody response to the vaccine was measured.The researchers analyzed the stress results from the subjects and used these results to create an average daily stress index and cumulative stress index for each subject. They then stratified subjects into low-stress, medium-stress, and high-stress groups and attempted to see whether they could find any links between these groups and their vaccine antibody responses.The low-stress, medium-stress, and high-stress groups began the study with similar antibody levels. At both one month and four months following vaccination, however, subjects in the high-stress group had significantly fewer antibodies to the vaccine than subjects in the medium-stress and low-stress groups.The investigators then assessed whether there might be critical periods of time around vaccination during which stressors might have a deleterious impact on vaccine antibody response. They discovered that stress levels during the prevaccine period were not associated with antibody response over the follow-up period. The same was true of stress on the day of the vaccine. However, there was a strong link between stress experienced eight to 10 days after vaccination and vaccine antibody response.The study also revealed that the deleterious impact of psychological stress on vaccine antibody response appeared to be mediated not by the stress hormone cortisol, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, or physical activity, but by sleep deprivation. Indeed, some other investigators have found that sleep deprivation lowers antibody response to vaccination.Do these findings have any clinical implications—for example, can stress diminish the efficacy of human vaccinations? The researchers are not sure since stress dampened vaccine antibody response by only 12 percent to 17 percent. In any event, they concluded, their results “may shed light on the mechanisms through which stress increases vulnerability to infectious diseases.”The study was financed by the National Institutes of Health, National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Socioeconomic Status and Health, the American Heart Association, and the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research.An abstract of the study, “Psychological Stress and Antibody Response to Influenza Vaccination: When Is the Critical Period for Stress, and How Does It Get Inside the Body?,” is posted online at www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/cgi/content/abstract/66/2/215. ▪ ISSUES NewArchived

Lessons Learned from Political Violence and Genocide in Teaching a Psychology of Peace: An Interview with Linda Woolf

Tasha R. Howe got her BA in psychology from the University of California at Santa Barbara. She received her MA and PhD in developmental psychology from the University of California, Riverside. After doing an NIMH-sponsored postdoctoral fellowship in developmental psychopathology at Vanderbilt University, she served as assistant professor of psychology at Transylvania University in Lexington, Kentucky. Currently as assistant professor of psychology at Humboldt State University in California, Dr. Howe specializes in child abuse, family violence, developmental psychopathology, community violence, and ecological factors affecting normal and atypical child development. She teaches a wide variety of courses, including human development, the history of psychology, family violence, assessment and treatment of child abuse and neglect, children's cognitive development, and developmental psychopathology. She is married and has two sons, ages 6 and 1. Linda M. Woolf is the Coordinator of Holocaust and Genocide Studies and Professor of Psychology at Webster University in St. Louis, Missouri. She received her MS and PhD in applied-experimental psychology from Saint Louis University. She currently serves as Review Editor for the e-journal H-Genocide, secretary for the Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Division 2, APA), and an executive committee member for the Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, and Violence (Division 48, APA). In addition to her courses on the Holocaust, genocide, peace and conflict, and women and global human rights, Dr. Woolf also teaches a wide variety of courses such as women's intellectual contributions to the study of mind and society, the history and systems of psychology, social psychology, adult development and aging, and introductory psychology. She loves baseball, Star Trek, and her dogs and cats!

Invited Discussion: Causes of Death Among Finnish Women With Cosmetic Breast Implants, 1971–2001

From the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Center for Human Appearance, Philadelphia, PA. Reprints: Dr. David B. Sarwer, Assistant Professor of Psychology in Psychiatry and Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Center for Human Appearance, 10 Penn Tower, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA. Email: [email protected]

Psychology and the Legal System: An Interview with Edie Greene

William Douglas Woody completed his doctoral work at Colorado State University and is now Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of Northern Colorado. He teaches and conducts research in the areas of psychology and the law, social psychology, and history and systems of psychology. He is the recipient of regional and national teaching awards. While completing his doctoral work, Doug started collaborating with Edie Greene on projects related to civil jury decision making. Edie Greene earned her BA in psychology from Stanford University, her MA from the University of Colorado–Boulder, and her PhD in psychology and law from the University of Washington. Additionally, she completed a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Washington from 1983 to 1986, and she served as Fellow in Law and Psychology at Harvard Law School from 1994 to 1995. Edie is currently Professor of Psychology at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs where she conducts research on jury trials, eyewitness memory, and other topics in psychology and law. Her work has been funded by number of federal agencies, and she has earned extensive research recognition including an award from her college for Outstanding Research and Creative Works. Edie is a coauthor of the textbook Psychology and the Legal System (5th ed.), published by Wadsworth (2002), and she coauthored Determining Damages: The Psychology of Jury Awards, published by the American Psychological Association (2002). She has published more than 70 articles and book chapters as well as an annotated bibliography on the adversarial system (Strier &amp; Greene, 1990). In addition to conducting research, she has served as a trial consultant, and she has testified extensively as an expert witness on eyewitness memory and jury decision making. Edie has been active in the American Psychology–Law Society in numerous roles including membership on the executive committee. She serves on the editorial boards of Law and Human Behavior and Psychology, Public Policy and Law.

Professionalism and Ethics in Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Professionalism and Ethics in Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Trauma and Dreams

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Book ReviewsFull AccessTrauma and DreamsMartha Crowner, M.D.Martha CrownerSearch for more papers by this author, M.D.Published Online:1 Jan 2003https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.54.1.115AboutSectionsView EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Trauma and Dreams could be aptly subtitled "Use of Dreams in Psychotherapy With Traumatized Adults and Children." It is a volume of 17 chapters in three parts, edited by Diedre Barrett, a practicing clinical psychologist, an assistant professor of psychology at Harvard Medical School, and editor-in chief of the journal Dreaming.Most of the book's chapters are examples of the work of practicing therapists, authors who work in varied settings with a wide range of patients, or clients. Some chapters are individual case reports, some summarize group psychotherapy, and some draw generalizations from work with a series of individuals. Many report on research, typically research in which investigators categorize nightmare content and compare the content and frequency of nightmares in different groups.Part 1 consists of five chapters on dreams after childhood trauma. Two chapters describe clinical work with children who have been recently traumatized, and the other three describe work with adults who were traumatized as children. Part 2 is made up of seven chapters on adult trauma in wars and natural disasters. One of these chapters classifies dreams of survivors of the 1991 firestorm in Oakland, California; one describes common nightmares of refugees from political terror in Central America; one discusses nightmares of Vietnam combat veterans; and one compares the dreams of well-adjusted Holocaust survivors with those of survivors who are not so well adjusted. Part 3 is titled "Traumas of Normal Living." It is a mixed group of five chapters, including one on dreams of adults who are recently bereaved and one on dreams of the recently divorced.Trauma and Dreams is useful for anyone who works with traumatized patients but especially for psychotherapists. Its abundant case material provides an intriguing view on the process of therapy with quite varied and unusual groups of patients. The descriptive studies give the practitioner an idea of what to expect. Dr. Barrett's volume is an important contribution. I often found myself wishing for more theory and more general reviews to give perspective and shape to the clinical material. The book contains few broad conclusions, although many authors hold that dreams serve as markers for change as psychotherapy progresses.For theory I turned to Freud, but found that he wrote primarily about the analysis of dreams as part of psychoanalytic technique, not about dreams among traumatized individuals. However, he did appreciate that trauma changes dreaming. In his Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis (1), he wrote "When anyone has lost someone near and dear to him, he produces dreams of a special sort for some time afterwards." This observation could be extended to many other kinds of trauma, as Trauma and Dreams illustrates so well.Dr. Crowner is clinical assistant professor of psychiatry at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and attending psychiatrist at Project Renewal, Inc., in New York City.edited by Deirdre Barrett; Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 2001, 272 pages, $18.95 softcoverReference1. Freud S: Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. New York, Norton, 1966Google Scholar FiguresReferencesCited byDetailsCited byNone Volume 54Issue 1 January 2003Pages 115-115 Metrics History Published online 1 January 2003 Published in print 1 January 2003

Use of psychotropic drugs by mentally ill Medicaid beneficiaries.

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article ColumnsFull AccessDatapoints: Use of Psychotropic Drugs by Mentally Ill Medicaid BeneficiariesKevin D. Hennessy, Ph.D., Sharon Green-Hennessy, Ph.D., Jeffrey A. Buck, Ph.D., and Kay MillerKevin D. HennessySearch for more papers by this author, Ph.D., Sharon Green-HennessySearch for more papers by this author, Ph.D., Jeffrey A. BuckSearch for more papers by this author, Ph.D., and Kay MillerSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:1 Sep 2002https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.53.9.1070AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Psychotropic drugs are often an essential component in the treatment of individuals with mental disorders. Yet few studies have provided data on the proportions of individuals who use specific medications for certain disorders. We present data on the use of psychotropic drugs by persons diagnosed with schizophrenia or an affective disorder and enrolled in Medicaid programs in 1995 in one of ten states—Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Vermont, and Wyoming.We used data from the State Medicaid Research Files of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (formerly the Health Care Financing Administration). The ten states were selected on the basis of criteria related to geographic diversity, completeness and quality of data, and limited penetration of Medicaid managed care in 1995. The analysis included only adults aged 21 to 64 and excluded persons who were dually enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare. Individuals were assigned to diagnostic categories on the basis of their most frequent diagnosis over the year.Across the ten states, a total of 185,791 Medicaid enrollees used some type of mental health or substance use treatment service. Of these, 14 percent (26,256) were classified as having schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and 17 percent (32,192) as having an affective disorder—mania, major depression, or bipolar disorder (additional data available from the authors).Figure 1 summarizes the use of psychotropic drugs by drug type for individuals diagnosed with either schizophrenia or an affective disorder. Not surprisingly, antipsychotics were used by 84 percent of those with schizophrenia, while 70 percent of those with an affective disorder used an antidepressant. Antidepressants were the second most commonly used drug type among those with schizophrenia and antipsychotics the second most commonly used among those with an affective disorder. In both diagnostic groups the use of more than one psychotropic drug was the rule rather than the exception, and thus percentages for use of each drug type sum to more than 100.About half of the sample received prescriptions for more than one type of drug. However, the data we analyzed can tell us nothing about the appropriateness, quality, or outcomes of treatment. Future research could productively examine prescribing patterns and use of psychotropic drugs by individuals with specific mental disorders and how such use is related to the desired outcomes.Dr. Hennessy is with the office of the assistant secretary for planning and evaluation of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 442E, Washington, D.C. 20201 (e-mail, [email protected]). Dr. Green-Hennessy is assistant professor of psychology at Loyola College in Baltimore. Dr. Buck is with the Center for Mental Health Services in Rockville, Maryland. Ms. Miller is with the MEDSTAT Group in Santa Barbara. Harold A. Pincus, M.D., and Terri L. Tanielian, M.A., are editors of this column.Figure 1. Psychotropic drugs prescribed for adults 21 to 64 years of age, by diagnostic category and drug type, in ten state Medicaid programs in 1995 FiguresReferencesCited byDetailsCited byHuman Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental, Vol. 18, No. 1Health Affairs, Vol. 22, No. 5 Volume 53Issue 9 September 2002Pages 1070-1070 Metrics PDF download History Published online 1 September 2002 Published in print 1 September 2002

John Gardner: a salute.

O n 17 February, John W. Gardner died in Stanford, California, at the age of 90. Science does not ordinarily run obituaries, having decided long ago that saluting some worthy lives and ignoring others offered more possibilities to offend than to reward. This page, however, is open to co-option for a more personal kind of editorial farewell. I'm taking advantage of that, but I promise that it won't happen often. John Gardner's is an American story, but I think it will have meaning for Science 's many friends abroad as well. Our long-term readers will remember that he served as secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare during an especially bright period for science, education, and health in the United States. Appointed in 1965 by President Lyndon Johnson, Gardner described the still uncharted landscape of the future Great Society in this way: “What we have before us are some breathtaking opportunities disguised as insoluble problems.” In the 3 years that followed, he launched Medicare, enforced the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and presided over remarkable growth in the nation's support for biomedical research. He resigned in 1968 at the height of the Vietnam War protest. A decade later, when I had come to head an agency in his old department, I discovered that working folks all over the place still remembered his tenure with pride and affection—not a surprising memory to have about a boss who once said “the first and last task of a leader is to keep hope alive.” Even the generation of scientists too young to have known that period owe Gardner a debt for having built a big part of the infrastructure that now supports health research in the United States. But we all should be grateful to him for something else, too. Before his term in federal office, he had led both the Carnegie Corporation and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and laid the groundwork for the White House Fellows program. And after he left government, he played a founding or sustaining role in one vital civic organization after another: first the Urban League, then Common Cause, and then Independent Sector. In this later part of his life, he gradually emerged as the nation's civic conscience, arguing powerfully for citizen engagement with public need and then creating and leading new organizations that could implement that vision. In this work and in his earlier books [for example, Excellence (1961) and Self-Renewal (1964)], he undertook an uncommonly thoughtful exploration of the relationship between individual and society. He had a deep grasp of the chronic paradox in American life, one noted by de Tocqueville (among other wise European visitors): Our frontier devotion to personal freedom, even license, on the one hand; and our strongly felt commitment to social order on the other. It is a topic visited by many scholars, but Gardner had a unique ability to extract the essence of this age-old dilemma. He once compressed it into a nine-word summary of the social contract. “Freedom and responsibility, liberty and duty: that's the deal.” That is, indeed, the deal. In formulating it in this way, he reminds us, as he often did, that we need one another and that our society needs each of us. He also became a counselor and advisor to a host of younger people. Having started life as an academic (Ph.D. in psychology, University of California, Berkeley; assistant professor of Psychology, Connecticut College) he never stopped being a teacher; and one knew, without being told directly, that his mentorship carried a lifetime warranty. A frequent theme of his advice was that lives are built on the promises we make to others; he once told a group of Stanford students: “People run around searching for identity, but it isn't handed out free any more—not in this transient, rootless, pluralistic society. Your identity is what you've committed yourself to.” A colleague once asked him for advice on a choice, in which the preferred option contained a fairly rich mixture of risk and reward. He thought for a while, and then said this: “You don't want to die with the music still in you.” John Gardner left all his music here. It belongs to a legion of beneficiaries, to whom his gift was a special kind of personal inspiration. What a life; what a legacy; what an uncommon man.

Editors' notes

New Directions for EvaluationVolume 2001, Issue 91 p. 1-2 Editors' notes George Julnes, George Julnes George Julnes is assistant professor of psychology with the Research and Evaluation Methodology Program and director of the Center for Policy and Program Evaluation at Utah State University.Search for more papers by this authorE. Michael Foster, E. Michael Foster E. Michael Foster is associate professor of health policy and administration at The Pennsylvania State University.Search for more papers by this author George Julnes, George Julnes George Julnes is assistant professor of psychology with the Research and Evaluation Methodology Program and director of the Center for Policy and Program Evaluation at Utah State University.Search for more papers by this authorE. Michael Foster, E. Michael Foster E. Michael Foster is associate professor of health policy and administration at The Pennsylvania State University.Search for more papers by this author First published: 07 March 2002 https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.18AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume2001, Issue91Special Issue: Outcomes of Welfare Reform for Families Who Leave TANFAutumn (Fall) 2001Pages 1-2 RelatedInformation

Conference Focuses on Mental Illness Stigma

Conference Focuses on Mental Illness Stigma

How top PR professionals handle hearsay: corporate rumors, their effects, and strategies to manage them

Seventy-four experienced public relations professionals serving top global corporations were surveyed to investigate types of organizational rumors, their prevalence and effects, effectiveness of rumor management strategies, and associated psychological and situational variables. Results showed that harmful rumors are commonplace, especially during organizational change. The majority of rumors were internal in nature and were most likely to be about personnel changes, job security, or job satisfaction. External rumors were most likely to consist of hearsay of concern to the general public, such as those rumors affecting the organization’s reputation and those about product/service quality. Rumors incited a variety of effects, most of which were rated as somewhat severe. Three distinct dimensions of rumor effects emerged: external ramifications (e.g., bad press), internal attitudes (e.g., lowered morale), and internal behaviors (e.g., increased absenteeism). Numerous strategies were rated as highly effective in preventing and neutralizing harmful rumors. Two broad approaches, composed of strategies that structured (i.e., gave boundaries to) uncertainty and strategies that focused on enhancing the efficacy of official comments, emerged. Implications for PR professionals are discussed and include anticipating rumors as the norm, monitoring effects in three different dimensions, and proactively creating two-pronged rumor prevention and management action plans that structure uncertainty and enhance formal communications. Nicholas DiFonzo, Ph.D., is assistant professor of Psychology at Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, NY (nxdgss@rit.edu); Prashant Bordia, Ph.D., is lecturer at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia.

BOOK REVIEWS

Book review in this Article:P. Christopher Earley and Miriam Erez. The Transplanted Executive.Leslie A. Perlow. Finding Time: How Corporations, Individuals, and Families Can Benefit from New Work Practices. Ithaca, NY: ILRReviewed by Céleste M. Brotheridge, Ph.D. Student, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.Edward P. Lazear. Personnel Economics for Managers.Reviewed by Wayne F. Cascio, Professor of Management, Graduate School of Business, University of Colorado‐Denver, Denver, CO.Dennis A. Davis. Threats Pending, Fuses Burning: Managing Workplace Violence.Reviewed by Lynne M. Andersson, Assistant Professor, Erivan K. Haub School of Business, Saint Joseph's University, Philadelphia, PA.David W. Bracken, Maxine A. Dalton, Robert A. Jako, Cynthia D. McCauley, and Victoria Pollman. Should 360‐Degree Feedback be Used Only for Developmental Purposes?Reviewed by Anthony T. Dalessio, Senior Specialist, Bell Atlantic Corporation, New York, NY.Mats Alvesson and Yvonne Due Billing. Understanding Gender and Organizations.Reviewed by Gary W. Yunker, Professor of Management, Department of Management and Marketing, and Barbara D. Yunker, Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Resources, Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, AL.P. Christopher Earley. Face, Harmony, and Social Structure: An Analysis of Organizational Behavior across Cultures.Reviewed by Jone L. Pearce, Professor, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Irvine, CA.Clair Brown, Yoshifumi Nakata, Michael Reich, and Lloyd Ull‐man. Work and Pay in the United States and Japan.Reviewed by Edilberto F. Montemayor, Associate Professor, School of Labor and Industrial Relations, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.Hope Landrine and Elizabeth A. Klonoff. Discrimination Against Women: Prevalence, Consequences, Remedies.Reviewed by Mary R. Watson, Assistant Professor of Human Resources, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.Adrian Furnham. The Psychology of Behavior at Work.Wayne F. Cascio. Managing Human Resources: Productivity, Quality of Work Life, Profits (5th edition).Reviewed by Anthony F. Buono, Professor of Management, Bentley College, Waltham, MA.Robert B. Lawson and Zheng Shen. Organizational Psychology: Foundations and Applications.Reviewed by John R. Ogilvie, Associate Dean and Associate Professor of Management, Barney School of Business, University of Hartford, West Hartford, CTDeborah L. Whetzel and George R. Wheaton (Editors). Applied Measurement Methods in Industrial Psychology.Reviewed by Malcolm James Ree, Associate Professor, Our Lady of the Lake University, Center for Leadership Studies, San Antonio, TX.Robert D. Gatewood and Hubert S. Feild. Human Resource Selection (4th ed.).Reviewed by Kathie L. Pelletier, Graduate Student, and Janet L. Kottke, Professor and Director, Industrial‐Organizational Psychology Graduate Program, California State University, San Bernardino, CA.Milton D. Hakel (Editor). Beyond Multiple Choice: Evaluating Alternatives to Traditional Testing for Selection.Reviewed by Paul E. Spector, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.David T Lykken. A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector.Reviewed by Theodore L. Hayes, Senior Research Analyst, The Gallup Organization, Lincoln, NE.Jeffrey A. Berman. Competence‐Based Employment Interviewing.Reviewed by David W. Denton, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, TN.Pierre Mornell. 45 Effective Ways for Hiring Smart: How to Predict Winners and Losers in the Incredibly Expensive People‐Reading Game.Reviewed by Jay C. Thomas, Associate Professor, Pacific University, Portland, OR.Richard Beckhard. Agent of Change: My Life, My Practice.Albert A. Vicere and Robert M. Fulmer. Leadership by Design.Susan Albers Mohrman, Jay R. Galbraith, Edward E. Lawler III, and Associates. Tomorrow's Organization: Crafting Winning Capabilities in a Dynamic World.Reviewed by Victoria Buenger, Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Texas A&amp;M University, College Station, TX.Susan Albers Mohrman and Allan M. Mohrman, Jr. Designing and Leading Team‐Based Organizations: A Workbook for Organizational Self‐Design.Reviewed by Christopher A. Hall, University of Missouri, and Michael M. Beyerlein, University of North Texas.Bill Bamberger and Cathy N. Davidson. Closing: The Life and Death of an American Factory.Reviewed by Lynn Summers, Mediappraise Corporation, Raleigh, NC.

Developing a Web-Assisted Class: An Interview with Mark Mitchell

Jeanne M. Slattery (JMS), an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Clarion University (Clarion, PA), conducted this issue's interview for the Generalist's Corner. She uses electronic communication to mentor students us well as to help students develop a sense of being members of an academic community. She interviewed Mark Mitchell (MM), an Associate Professor of Psychology at Clarion University, who has written and presented extensively on the use of the World Wide Web (Web) in the classroom. Mitchell coordinates the home page for the Society for the Teaching of Psychology ( http://psyl.clarion.edu/mm/Division2/d2.html ). His classes can be found at psyl.clarion.edu/mm , and Slattery's can be accessed through psyl. clarion.edu/jms/index.html .

Reading list

Reading list

Constructing the Self, Constructing America: A Cultural History of Psychotherapy.

Anderson, Timothy Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Psychology, Ohio University, Athens Author Information