In life, people experience the loss of people they cherish, possessions, familiar environments, health, and of other things. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the psychological recovery process from loss, focusing on the differences among recovery processes by the type of loss, and the determinants of the length of recovery. Three hundred and ninety-seven participants (162 males, 235 females) who lived in Nishinomiya City were asked to complete a questionnaire by the mail-survey method. The main findings were as follows: (1) The differences among the recovery processes and the number of stages in the recovery process depended on the type of loss. (2) The recovery length was mainly affected by the type of loss, the existence of anticipatory grief, and the difference in age. It was indicated that people (especially elderly people) who did not have any anticipatory grief needed more time to recover. Furthermore, people needed more time to recover from physical loss and separation compared to other types of loss.
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of treatments by authority in procedure. On the basis of a group-value model and the models that derive from them about procedural justice, group members are interested in group procedure to confirm their identity based on the group. We asked office employees working in a university to rate their superiors fairness and their group-oriented attitude in their organization. We found that a superior's appropriate treatment promotes employees'perception of procedural justice when the employees firmly expected to derive long-term profit in organization, while it promoted the employees' group identity in general. The evidence indicates that people are interested in group procedure because they are not only motivated to confirm their membership but also wish to maintain their group which offers them long-term profit.
In this study, we focused on the effect of the information of others' memories and of the delay of recognition on conformable eyewitness memories to others. A2 (delay: no delay vs. one week) ×2 (experimental group vs. control group) experimental design was employed (both factors were between-subjects variables), and experiments were carried out by four participants per session (a total of 85 participants). First, in a recognition task about a video clip, participants in the experimental group were shown "false responses by others." After that, participants undertook a similar recognition task and a Remember/Know judgment task about these items. As a result, the participants that took the task after one week showed a higher conformity response rate to the false responses others' than participants that took the task immediately after encoding. Moreover, the participants in the experimental group showed a higher Remember-judgment rate in wrong answers than participants in the control group. These results suggest that even though testimony taken from an eyewitness group may be concrete and clear, it is possible that it does not reflect his/her true experience exactly.
In intergroup conflict a third party sometimes intervenes aggressively into the interactions between the concerned parties, escalating the conflicts. We hypothesized that the third party will become aggressive if they perceive that a fellow member of their group, with whom they strongly identified themselves, is harmed by the other group and that the perception of harm is more definitely determined by unfairness than by the objective severity of the harm. Group identification was manipulated by cooperative ingroup activities. Half of the participants observed that an ingroup fellow member was harmed by an outgroup member based on unfair evaluation, while the others observed that the harm was given based on fair evaluation. They were then given a chance to retaliate against the harm-doer by creating unpleasant noises. The results indicated that both aggressive motivation and behaviors were increased by unfair harm only when participants strongly identified with the ingroup. The group identification did not affect the perception of unfairness. These results suggest that symbolic or psychological harm affects third-party aggression.
In distinguishing internal forgiveness and forgiving behavior, we attempted to identify different motives for these two modes of forgiveness and to examine the effects of interpersonal relationships with offenders and the motives behind forgiveness. Participants recalled personal episodes in which someone hurt them and rated the episodes in terms of the closeness between them and the offender, forgiveness, and the motives for forgiveness. A factor analysis of the motives produced 6 dimensions: need for acceptance, maintenance of relationship, pervasiveness of negative event, maintenance of social harmony, non-commitment, and consideration. We regarded consideration and pervasiveness of negative events as altruistic and the others as egocentric motives. Noncommitment did not correlate with either forgiveness or forgiving behavior. Need for acceptance correlated only with forgiving behavior. Other motives were positively correlated with both internal forgiveness and forgiving behavior. Our results showed that the maintenance of a relationship was highest in conflicts with high-close others. They also showed that need for acceptance, pervasiveness of a negative event, and maintenance of social harmony were higher in conflict with high-close and middle-close others than with low-close others.
The purpose of this study was to develop the Teamwork Measure for Nursing Teams and to examine its reliability and validity. Based on the theoretical model of teamwork components proposed by Dickinson and McIntyre (1997), initial pools of items to measure three components (team orientation, team leadership, and team process) were generated. A questionnaire was administered to two different samples of nurses (study 1:N=568, study 2:N=650). The results of factor analyses revealed that every component of teamwork had subcomponents. Team orientation consisted of two-factors ("orientation for completing tasks" and "orientation for interpersonal relations"). Team leadership also consisted of two-factors ("job directions" and "concern for interpersonal relations"). The team process consisted of four-factors ("monitoring and coordination", "clarification of task", "information sharing", and "mutual feedback"), Scores on these subscales revealed acceptable levels of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). Teamwork components positively related to group identification and job satisfaction, and negatively related to incident rates. These results confirmed the validity of the scales. Finally, potential applications of this teamwork measure and the implications for team management practice are discussed.
Arakawa & Murakami (2006) reported that some people keep "lucky charms" not because they have faith in them, but because the lucky charms were gifts from people close to them. This indicates that lucky charms are used as a communication tool, through gift-giving, rather than as goods. To examine why lucky charms are given between parents and children, 89 pairs (students and their parents, the relatives who most commonly give lucky charms) completed questionnaires. The results showed that parents gave children lucky charms more often than vice versa. The lucky charms were given by parents to their children as a token to ward off danger or for luck in an exam. The parents thereby sought to reduce their own anxiety, as well as that of the children, and to relay the message that they were supportive as the child grew up. In addition, the children sometimes looked at the lucky charm and were reminded of their parents. It is clear from these results that, despite there being a difference of understanding in the purpose of the gift between the giver and the receiver, gift giving results in the mutual extraction of meaning from the act. The result is discussed in terms of "goods-mediated communication" through gift-giving, focusing on this ambiguity.