Suchergebnisse

Taking its departure in the transactional theory of coping and socialization theories, this questionnaire study investigates how coping with climate change among late adolescents ( N = 705) relates to proenvironmental behavior and communication with significant others about societal problems. Deemphasizing the problem was negatively associated with proenvironmental behavior, whereas problem-focused and meaning-focused coping were positively associated with proenvironmental behavior. Two communication patterns with fathers, mothers, and friends were identified: one solution oriented and supportive, and one dismissive and doom-and-gloom oriented. The positive patterns correlated positively with problem-focused and meaning-focused coping, whereas the negative patterns correlated positively with deemphasizing. Communication with fathers was particularly important in explaining deemphasizing and problem-focused coping. A structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis showed that coping mediates the effects of communication patterns on behavior, whereas problem-focused coping mediates the influence of other coping strategies on behavior. The study demonstrates the importance of considering coping as a factor in the socialization of proenvironmental behavior.

AbstractA sample of 209 children was followed longitudinally to examine the impact of growing perspective‐taking skills on positive and negative emotionality in middle and late childhood. Perspective‐taking skills were assessed through interviews. Teachers rated children's emotional reactivity and capacity to regain a neutral state following emotional arousal. Analyses of contemporaneous data revealed that more developed perspective‐taking skills were associated with moderate levels of emotional reactivity. In addition, in children with high emotional reactivity, good perspective‐taking skills were associated with good capacity to regain a neutral affective state following emotional arousal. Longitudinal analyses revealed that children who made gains in perspective‐taking skills over a two‐year‐period became more moderate in negative emotional reactivity and improved their ability to down‐regulate strong positive emotions. The overall findings support the notion that children use perspective‐taking skills as a tool for optimal regulation of emotional responses.

A sample of 209 children was followed longitudinally to examine the impact of growing perspective-taking skills on positive and negative emotionality in middle and late childhood. Perspective-taking skills were assessed through interviews. Teachers rated children's emotional reactivity and capacity to regain a neutral state following emotional arousal. Analyses of contemporaneous data revealed that more developed perspective-taking skills were associated with moderate levels of emotional reactivity. In addition, in children with high emotional reactivity, good perspective-taking skills were associated with good capacity to regain a neutral affective state following emotional arousal. Longitudinal analyses revealed that children who made gains in perspective-taking skills over a two-year-period became more moderate in negative emotional reactivity and improved their ability to down-regulate strong positive emotions. The overall findings support the notion that children use perspective-taking skills as a tool for optimal regulation of emotional responses.

Personal assistance (PA) has been characterized as a melting pot consisting of, on the one hand, a social rights discourse with its basis among disabled people, and, on the other hand, a consumer directed market discourse increasingly putting its stamp on welfare policy in the Western world. In the realm of welfare politics, these discourses are, in many ways, opposites, but have found common ground in the demand for a more individual and consumer friendly provision of services. Within a shared welfare state model, the application of PA has developed divergently in the Scandinavian countries and relates to the two discourses in different ways. In this article, PA in Denmark, Norway and Sweden is presented and similarities and differences are discussed and analysed. Questions raised include: How can the differences between the countries be understood? What dilemmas within welfare policy do they illustrate? How do the different discourses put their marks on the different PA-models in the Scandinavian countries? How do the PA programmes seem to develop further and what kind of PA will the Scandinavian countries end up with in the future?