bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Conservation
Authors: Kaji Akiko 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Conservation in developmental psychology refers to the cognitive ability to understand the preservation of characteristics of a material object when that object is manipulated. Piaget stated that children seven or eight years of age understand the conservation of a substance; for example, a change in the shape of a lump of clay does not alter the total volume of the clay. Children appear to grasp the concept of the conservation of weight at age nine or 10, and the conservation of volume (e.g., measurement of displaced water when an object is immersed) at 11 or 12.
Construct Equivalence
Authors: Chen Fang Fang 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Construct equivalence means that the psychological construct in cross‐cultural comparisons has the same meaning across cultural groups. With a measured construct, it implies that the theoretical meaning of the construct is adequately represented in the instrument. Lack of construct equivalence, that is, construct bias, can arise from a variety of sources. In general, it is likely to occur when researchers from various cultures use definitions of a concept that do not fully overlap or a construct that is simply imported from one cultural setting to another. In other words, construct bias occurs when the construct measured is not identical across cultural groups. For example, the Chinese concept of “friend” refers to someone who is very close psychologically and can be counted on when needed, and the relationship is expected to last long. The Western concept of “friend” may include friends, close friends, short‐time friends, long‐time friends, and acqaintances. Therefore, the Chinese concept of “friend” is more equivalent to a narrower Western concept – “long‐time close friend.”
Contact Hypothesis
Authors: Keith Kenneth D. 
Published: October 2013

AbstractThe contact hypothesis is the notion that contact between groups may reduce tension between them. Psychologist Gordon stated that people would understand and appreciate members of other groups when their contact met four criteria: (a) equal status (i.e., the two parties are peers); (b) the contact is meaningful; (c) the contact is institutionally supported; and (d) the groups have common values and goals. The contact hypothesis was the product of Allport's work with racial prejudice, and he reasoned that if prejudice were the result of social ignorance, meaningful contact with diverse other people should serve to reduce it.
Context Variable
Authors: J. Zagumny Matthew 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
A context variable in research design generally refers to a variable that is tied to the specific context (i.e., setting, procedure, environment, participants) of a research study. An example of a common context variable present in most social/behavioral research occurs when research participants select the studies they wish to participate in or when researchers select participants in a biased (non‐random) manner. Context variables are variables that, “operationalize meaningful dimensions of culture.”. These variables can be participant level, such as demographics like age or gender, or cultural level variables like values or attitudes. One example of the varying level of pertinent context variables in research is offered. He examined inductive reasoning among secondary school children in four different cultural groups (Zambian, Dutch, Turkish, and Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands). The study involved context variables at both the individual level, such as the education level of the students' parents, and the school level, including the instructional technology available to teachers.
Control
Authors: Misra Girishwar 
Published: October 2013

AbstractControl signifies the experience of causing an outcome to happen. Supposed to be an inherent tendency, it refers to competence or effectance, and implies the experience of agency and mastery. Researchers have proposed an array of control concepts such as desire for control, action control, control motive, and locus of control. Other closely related concepts are locus of control, self‐efficacy, personal causation, self‐determination and causality orientation, attribution, learned helplessness, and perceived competence. Most emphasize the capabilities of self to impact environment to achieve desired goals across the lifespan. They are embedded in a partitioning of the world into categories of self and other, and their aim is to enhance the powers of an independent, autonomous, and isolated self.
Cooperation
Authors: Zagumny Matthew J. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
The colloquial definition of cooperation is “an act or instance of working or acting together for a common purpose or benefit; joint action” and it is similarly conceptualized in the cross‐cultural psychology literature. Thus, cooperation includes both behavioral and instrumental components. The behavioral component is that people are working or acting together, while the instrumental component involves a common purpose or benefit for those involved. Therefore, cooperation is an occurrence involving two or more people who share an activity for the purpose of achieving a goal that benefits all of those involved. Cooperation is often defined within a goal structure that includes: 1) cooperation, in which achieving one's goals is dependent on other people achieving their goals; 2) competition, which requires that to achieve one's goals, others must not achieve their goals; and 3) individualism, in which attaining one's goals is not dependent on whether others attain their goals. In the research literature, cooperation and competitiveness are typically conceptualized as polar opposites, with the defining dimension being the level of collectiveness that actions and goals have for those involved. Cooperation is defined by high levels of collectiveness in action and purpose while competition is defined by low levels (or absence) of collectiveness.
Cross‐Cultural Psychology
Authors: Silvestri Mark M. , Buskist William 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Cross‐cultural psychology encompasses three broad goals: understanding behavior that is universal regardless of culture, understanding how culture shapes behavior, and understanding psychological commonalities across cultures. Overall, the underlying theme of cross‐cultural psychology is the examination of behavior across culture, and how these behaviors may be manifested as a function of culture. In any given study, researchers may examine participants from different cultures, and then compare their behavior with respect to a particular criterion or outcome. Culture may be considered an independent variable, such that manipulation of cultural variables allows researchers to determine how culture impacts specific behavior. Although the emphasis is on cultural comparisons, cross‐cultural psychology research utilizes methodology and experimental designs based primarily on traditional Western psychology.
Cross‐Cultural Competence in Clinical Supervision
Authors: Wong Lilian C. J. , Wong Paul T. P. 
Published: October 2013

AbstractA noticeable trend in the clinical supervision literature is the greater attention paid to cross‐cultural supervision as a result of increasing cultural diversity of counseling students and clients. Recently, multicultural competence has been bench‐marked as one of the core areas for professional psychology and clinical supervision. Multicultural counseling competence does not necessarily mean multicultural supervision competence, because the supervision situation is more complex, including three possible types of cross‐cultural relationships between supervisor, supervisee, and client. have developed a Multicultural Supervision Competencies Questionnaire (MSCQ) which includes four subscales: attitudes, knowledge, skills, and supervisor‐supervisee relationship (Table 1).
Cross‐Ethnicity Effect (Face Recognition)
Authors: Stepanova Elena V. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract

The
cross‐ethnicity
effect or
own‐ethnicity effect
, also commonly referred to as the
cross‐race effect
or
own‐race effect
, generally refers to a tendency for people to recognize/identify more accurately faces of their ethnic group than members of other ethnic groups. It has been established across various ethnic and racial groups and appears to be very robust. For example, this effect has been found in European Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, White Europeans, Black Africans, Asians, and individuals of Middle Eastern, Israeli Jewish, Hispanic, and Canadian First Nation origins. Most of the research has been conducted with individuals of African (Black) and European (White) descent. This phenomenon has been well established in experimental settings as well as in field studies, and documented across various age groups, including children as young as three‐ to five‐year olds. Developmental research has suggested that even infants as young as nine‐month olds are capable of discriminating between own‐race faces, but not between other‐race faces.
Cultunit
Authors: Goldstein Susan B. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract

Defined
cultunit
or
culture‐bearing unit
as “People who are domestic speakers of a common distinct language and who belong either to the same state or the same contact group.” Naroll's concept of
cultunit
is perhaps the most detailed and comprehensive effort to address the question of how to define and identify a group of people with a shared culture; or, as expressed by biologist Ralph Gerard in a seminar attended by Naroll, “Exactly where is the skin of a culture?”
Cultural Anthropology
Authors: Abi‐Hashem Naji , Driscoll Elizabeth G. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Cultural anthropology is a branch of anthropology that deals with the social and cultural aspects of humanity. It specializes in exploring the roots of group customs, heritages, and traditions. It is a purposeful study of the cultural variations and similarities among societies and also what it means to be human within the context of a particular culture. Cultural anthropology encompasses the scientific study of the development of human cultures based on ethnographic, linguistic, kinship, ethnologic, and psychosocial information. It deals with human cultures, especially with respect to social structure, habits, law, politics, religion, magic, art, trade, industry, symbols, communal bonding, and organization.
Cultural Attribution Fallacy
Authors: Yoo Seung Hee 
Published: October 2013

AbstractCultural attribution fallacy occurs when researchers make cultural interpretations about differences found between countries without empirical justification. The most widely used cultural interpretation involves the cultural dimension Individualism‐Collectivism (IC). For example, if a researcher assumes, without linking differences to IC, that two countries differ on a psychological process because one country is an individualistic culture and the other is a collectivistic culture, the researcher is making a cultural attribution fallacy. This tendency is problematic because although the observed differences may well have occurred because of differences in IC, it may also be the case that the differences occurred because of other factors.
Cultural Identity
Authors: Chakkarath Pradeep 
Published: October 2013

Abstract

Cultural identity is a key term and major research topic of psychologists who adopt culturally sensitive approaches like cross‐cultural, cultural, and indigenous psychology. However, the meaning of the concept is unclear due to the fact that neither of the component concepts “culture” and “identity” has been defined consistently in the history of ideas or the history of science. As is well known, definitions of “culture” abound and vary from discipline to discipline. Similarly, in anthropology, philosophy, sociology, and psychology, “identity” is used interchangeably with terms like “self” or “person” and overlaps with terms like “personality,” “personhood,” “selfhood,” “individuality,” and even aspects of “autonomy.” Although these conceptual ambiguities need to be further examined, based on current research the following broad understanding of cultural identity or the
cultural self
can be suggested: If identity is seen as the sum total of psychological experience (e.g., sensations, thoughts, feelings, motives), which forms our understanding of our place, role, and meaning in the world, then cultural identity can be conceived of as the result of our co‐constructive interactions with the meanings, beliefs, thinking styles, practices, and traditions that are implicit in our social environment and considered essential for our perception of our place, role, and meaning in a given culture in comparison to other cultures. Thus, people often attribute their feelings and behavior as well as that of other individuals or groups to their respective cultural identity.
Cultural Ingroup Advantage Hypothesis
Authors: Matsumoto David , Hwang Hyi Sung 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Although emotion recognition in facial expressions is universal, there is evidence for a cultural ingroup advantage in emotion recognition. This refers to the tendency for individuals to more accurately recognize emotional expressions produced by members of their own culture rather than those produced by another. Researchers arguing for the existence of this effect have suggested that it occurs because of “emotion dialects” – culturally‐derived, minor variants of emotional expressions. Presumably, people are more accurate when judging such expressions because those expressions are differentially used in their culture. For instance, raising an eyebrow could be a sign of skepticism in one culture. If people of that culture judged expressions of people raising an eyebrow, they are likely to respond that the expression was one of skepticism. People from another culture, however, may not, because the expression may not be used in that culture, or it may have a different meaning in that culture.
Cultural Intelligence
Authors: Ng Reuben 
Published: October 2013

AbstractDefined cultural intelligence (also known as cultural quotient; CQ) as an individual's capability to function and manage effectively in culturally diverse settings. CQ was proposed as a counter to typical one‐size‐fits‐all cultural training programs that assume similar cultural background and experiences in potential expatriates. In contrast, the CQ framework diagnoses one's cultural competence through the Cultural Intelligence Scale, and provides customized training.
Cultural Measurement Equivalence
Authors: Trimble Joseph E. , Vaughn Lanen 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
In cross‐cultural research, understanding and interpreting the influence of varying individual perspectives on psychosocial scales and standardized tests is the subject of much discussion. Many cross‐cultural psychologists further contend, “comparing elements from differing societies leads to inadmissible distortions of reality”. Comparative research, on ethnic and cultural levels, is burdened with these concerns of incomparability. Often, due to the frequency with which a scale is used, many have assumed the metric is equal between groups. These assumptions fuel findings that may be not only unjustified but also invalid. Sensitivity toward issues of cultural measurement equivalence has not been thoroughly cultivated throughout psychological discourse. By addressing these matters of cultural equivalence, we may dispel inaccurate notions regarding cultural research.
Culture and Personality School
Authors: (Hans) Bakker J. I. 
Published: October 2013

AbstractPsychological anthropology has moved away from cross‐cultural study of modal personality and such topics as child rearing and has become less interested in psychoanalytic perspectives in comparative psychology. But the contemporary interest in finding common ground between the two disciplines goes back to the general notion of collective meaning structures, norms, and values influencing individuals’ beliefs and actions – to the era when anthropologists saw personality types as the product of cultural socialization. To comprehend the Culture and Personality School it is necessary to go back to the shifts in the meanings of the concepts of culture and personality.
Culture Shock
Authors: Goldstein Susan B. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract

Since the early 1970s, the term
culture shock
has been central to discussions of the sojourner experience. It has become a fundamental concept in cross‐cultural training, as well as in the scholarship and practice of anthropology, cross‐cultural psychology, and intercultural communication. The term
culture shock
may have been first used publicly by Cora Dubois in a 1951 speech to the Institute of International Education in which she described the cross‐cultural adjustment experiences of anthropologists engaged in fieldwork. She credited fellow anthropologist Ruth Benedict with originating the term. Kalvero Oberg first applied the term more generally to all individuals who travel across cultures. In a 1960 article, Oberg defined culture shock as “precipitated by the anxiety that results from losing all our familiar signs and symbols of social intercourse”. His use of the term may have shaped early perceptions of culture shock as stigmatizing in that he presented it as a form of pathology to be avoided. For example, in a 1954 speech on culture shock to the Women's Club of Rio de Janeiro, Oberg used such disease‐related terms as “malady,” “afflicted,” “ailment,” “pain,” and “cure” to describe the process of adjusting to an unfamiliar culture.
Culture
Authors: Matsumoto David , Hwang Hyi Sung 
Published: October 2013

Abstract

Scholars and laypersons alike use the words
culture
,
race
,
nationality
, and
ethnicity
interchangeably, as if they were all terms denoting the same concepts. They are not. Clearly, we use the word culture in many different ways in everyday language and discourse. Culture can be used to describe activities or behaviors, refer to the heritage or tradition of a group, describe rules and norms, describe learning or problem solving, define the organization of a group, or refer to the origins of a group. Culture can refer to: general characteristics; food and clothing; housing and technology; economy and transportation; individual and family activities; community and government; welfare, religion, and science; and sex and the life cycle. Thus, the concept of culture is used to describe and explain a broad range of activities, behaviors, events, and structures in our lives. It is used in many different ways because it touches on so many aspects of life.
Danziger, Kurt
Authors: Brock Adrian C. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Kurt Danziger (b. 1926) is Professor Emeritus of Psychology at York University in Toronto, Canada. He is a Fellow of the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) and the Royal Society of Canada. He received the CPA Education and Training Award in 1994, having played a major role in establishing the graduate program in history and theory of psychology at York University.
Darwin, Charles R
Authors: Simanke Richard Theisen , de Freitas Araujo Saulo 
Published: October 2013

AbstractCharles Robert Darwin was born in Shrewsbury, England, in 1809, and died in his house near the village of Donne (then part of the county of Kent), where he had lived, researched and written during the last 40 years of his life. Before becoming interested in natural history, Darwin had unenthusiastically studied medicine in Edinburgh, Scotland (1825–1828). After that, he moved to Cambridge to follow an education preparatory to the Anglican religious ministry (1828–1831). His personal and academic contacts with the geologist Adam Sedgwick (1785–1873) and the botanist John Henslow (1796–1861) enhanced his previous amateurish interest in natural history. Through a recommendation of the latter, Darwin obtained a position on the exploratory and scientific expedition of theHMS Beaglearound the world, at first as a personal companion of the commander, Captain Robert FitzRoy (1805–1865).
Dasen, Pierre R
Authors: Brisset Camille 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Pierre Dasen (b. 1942) is a pioneer in cross‐cultural developmental psychology. He started his studies in developmental psychology at the University of Geneva, and after being an assistant to Jean Piaget from 1965 to 1967, he earned a Ph.D. in 1971 from the Australian National University, under the supervision of Gavin Seagrim.
Death Anxiety
Authors: Gire James T. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
One of the few certainties in life is that once you are born, you are bound to die. This certainty does not make death a welcome thought, however. Thus, the most common response to the thought of one's death, or the death of other loved ones, is fear. Some researchers on this topic have suggested that the fear of death is a major motivator of much behavior, and can influence such behavior in both positive and negative ways. On the positive side, this viewpoint suggests that people who are afraid of dying tend to do whatever it takes to ensure that they stay alive. Staying alive contributes to the continuity and socialization of the species because people so driven are more likely to want to have children and to raise them according to their society's acceptable standards. However, the same death anxiety can become a destructive force and could even result in both physical and mental problems. High levels of death anxiety in older adults are associated with lower ego integrity and more physical and psychological problems relative to individuals with low death anxiety. Death anxiety is a multifaceted construct that is difficult to define but has been conceptualized to include: fear of death of oneself; fear of death of others; fear of dying of self; and fear of the dying of others.
Dialectical Thinking
Authors: Howe Katie , Goodman David M. 
Published: October 2013

AbstractDialectical thinking represents a method and approach to understanding causality and truth construction that eschews linear, unidimensional, and insulating discourses and ideologies. Inherent in dialectical thinking is a fundamental recognition that truth is not monadic, but relational. Truth, rationality, and subjectivity are defined by their positioning in relationship to alternative positions (e.g., “master/slave,” “male/female,” “immanence/transcendence”). Truth and rationality are emergent from the interaction and interface of difference. Conflicts and contradictions are viewed, in dialectical thinking, as the source of phenomena rather than depending on a static and logically coherent base. Truth emerges from dynamic interchange and through the construction and deconstruction of dualisms and position points.
Disaster Mental Health
Authors: Priya Kumar Ravi 
Published: October 2013

AbstractA disaster is said to occur when a hazard (an event or physical condition with potential to cause loss of life, property, or environment) is realized and the losses incurred exceed the ability of the society to cope using its own resources. It is not just the disastrous event, but also its spiralling sociocultural and political consequences that can be traumatizing for the survivors.
Doob, Leonard W
Authors: Keith Kenneth D. 
Published: October 2013

Abstract
Leonard W. Doob, born in New York on March 3, 1909, was one of the world's leading students of the psychology of propaganda and of conflict resolution. Following a B.A. at Dartmouth College (1929) and an M.A. at Duke University (1930), Doob studied at the University of Frankfurt in Germany, where his interest in news propaganda led to a dissertation on the topic and a Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1934. Beginning in 1935 he had a distinguished career at Yale University until his retirement in 1977, and subsequently continued as Sterling Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Yale.