scholarly journals Patterns in Cognitive Phenomena and Pluralism of Explanatory Styles

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 1306-1320
Author(s):  
Angela Potochnik ◽  
Guilherme Sanches de Oliveira
Keyword(s):  
Explanatory Styles

scholarly journals Explanatory Styles of Counsellors in Training

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wanda Boyer ◽  
Paul Jerry ◽  
Gwen R. Rempel ◽  
James Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Positive Relationship ◽  
Research Study ◽  
Explanatory Style ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
First Year ◽  
Client Outcomes ◽  
Counsellor Training ◽  
Training Time ◽  
Positive Expectancy ◽  
Explanatory Styles

AbstractExplanatory style is based on how one explains good and bad events according to three dimensions: personalization, permanence, and pervasiveness. With an optimistic explanatory style, good events are explained as personal, permanent, and pervasive, whereas bad events are explained as external, temporary, and specific. For counsellors, an optimistic explanatory style creates positive expectancy judgments about the possibilities and opportunities for successful client outcomes. In this research study, we explored the explanatory styles expressed in 400 events (200 good events and 200 bad events) extracted from 38,013 writing samples of first year and final year graduate level counsellors in training. Across the three optimism dimensions and within good and bad events, there was one occurrence of a positive relationship between counsellor training time and the amount of expressed optimism. The implications of this study include the need to cultivate optimistic explanatory styles of counsellors in training and practicing counsellors.

scholarly journals Coping strategies as mediator variables between explanatory styles and depressive symptoms

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pilar Sanjuan ◽  
Alejandro Magallares
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Coping Strategies ◽  
Indirect Effect ◽  
Explanatory Style ◽  
Cognitive Restructuring ◽  
Positive Outcomes ◽  
Path Analyses ◽  
Positive Direct ◽  
Explanatory Styles

<p>The main goal of this study was to analyze the relationships among explanatory styles, coping strategies and depressive symptoms. Path analyses conducted with data of 234 individuals showed that Negative Explanatory Style (tendency to explain negative outcomes through internal, stable, and global causes) had both a positive direct effect on depressive symptoms, and an indirect effect on them through the use of avoidant strategies. On the contrary, Enhancing Explanatory Style (tendency to explain positive outcomes through internal, stable, and global causes) had negative direct and indirect effects on these symptoms, but in this case, the indirect effect occurs through the use of problem solving and positive cognitive restructuring coping and the non-use of avoidant strategies. As a whole, the results suggest that to prevent the onset of depressive symptoms or to reduce them once they appear, enhancing explanatory style and problem solving and positive cognitive restructuring strategies should be promoted.</p>

scholarly journals Ketangguhan Pribadi Orang tua Tunggal : Studi Kasus pada Perempuan Pasca Kematian Suami

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
Dara Nurfitri ◽  
Siti Waringah
Keyword(s):  
Critical Period ◽  
Case Study Research ◽  
Single Parents ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Single Parent ◽  
The Status ◽  
Mastery Experiences ◽  
Time Required ◽  
Internal And External Factors ◽  
Explanatory Styles

Losing a husband due to death causes feelings of griefs and raises some problems. It changes the status of women became a single parent. The aims of this study are to understand what causes single parents to own hardiness and how the hardiness is able to help them rise from the critical period after their husband died. This study uses a qualitative method with a case study research. Informants are three single parents and three significant others. This study uses an in-depth semi-structured interview for data collection. The results show that the three informants were able to rise above the critical period after their husband died and survived as a single parent until now. This happens because all the informants have hardiness. The effort and time required for the informants to rise are different. Three factors that gave contribution to increasing hardiness are mastery experiences, feelings of positivity, and parental explanatory styles. In the other hand, the researcher found another factor that categorized as internal and external factors.

Interdisciplinary lessons for contemporary challenges

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 262-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram Murthy
Keyword(s):  
Meaningful Work ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Adaptive Responses ◽  
Complex Environments ◽  
Leadership Practice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Signature Strengths ◽  
Practitioner Knowledge ◽  
Organisational Behaviour ◽  
Explanatory Styles

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a rich and textured narrative that utilises scholarly evidence, empirical research, and practitioner knowledge to shape, inform, and extend understanding of the leadership practice of “excelling at work” as it is enacted for zeitgeist organisational challenges. Design/methodology/approach – In order to achieve this, it traverses a temporal timeline from circa 350 BC to the present millennium, to examine extant theories and concepts and emerging wisdom at the intersection of domains as seemingly diverse as neuroscience, cognitive and social psychology, contemplative practice, positive psychology, and organisational behaviour and leadership. Findings – Complex environments require individual and collective agency for efficacious and adaptive responses. Extant theories and new insights on effectance, meaningful work, signature strengths, purposeful attention, self-control, deliberate practice, grit, explanatory styles, and mindsets amongst others, interconnect and at times intersect to form an empirically validated narrative on the augmented leadership practice of excelling at work in challenging times. Originality/value – Overcoming zeitgeist challenges adaptively, requires organisations and their people to excel at work. Innovative combinations and connections of key constructs and concepts, underpinned by empirical evidence from a variety of disciplines, explicate the nature and enactments of this vital leadership practice of excelling at work.

scholarly journals Attachment Security Balances Perspectives: Effects of Security Priming on Highly Optimistic and Pessimistic Explanatory Styles

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanhe Deng ◽  
Mengge Yan ◽  
Henry Chen ◽  
Xin Sun ◽  
Peng Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Attachment Security ◽  
Explanatory Styles

scholarly journals Style of psychological explanation and perception of explanation’s scientificity by people without specialized psychological education

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Chistyakov ◽  
Andrey Bystrov
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Explanatory Models ◽  
Psychological Explanation ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Psychological Phenomena ◽  
Psychological Education ◽  
Scientific Results ◽  
Explanatory Styles

Psychology is criticized for non-replicability of results, practical non-significance and proximity to common sense. Public skepticism towards psychology is linked to underfinancing of academic research and impeding of solving social problems. Explanatory model used by psychologists can make a contribution to the problem. S. Hayes describes two most common explanatory models – mentalistic (behavior of organism explained by hypothetical processes inside organism) and contextual (behavior of organism explained by events outside the organism). Mentalistic and contextual explanations corresponds to methodological and radical behaviorisms, two most common philosophies of science among psychologists, according to S. Leigland. Literature review suggests lack of papers about discrimination between explanatory styles in terms of scientificity among people without specialized psychological education. We hypothesized that majority of participants discriminate mentalistic and contextual explanations of psychological phenomena and rate contextual explanations as more scientific. We tested hypotheses and replicated results with additional samples and stimuli. The overall sample consisted of 57 people who are not enrolled in or graduated from any Department of Psychology, average age – 22 года, 36 out of 57 (63%) – undergraduate students. Respondents filled in an online survey, which was made up of a number of sociodemographic questions and 24 explanations of psychological phenomena (12 mentalistic / 12 contextual). Participants rated scientificity of explanations via Likert Scale from 1 (completely unscientific) to 10 (completely scientific). Results oppose hypotheses: less than 50% of respondents discriminate explanatory styles (8 out of 54, 16%, 95% HDI 8-26%) and those who discriminate rate contextual explanations as less scientific (8 из 8, 93%, 95% HDI 71-100%%). Possible confounding variables: syntax, sentence length, use of psychological terms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document