Search

The aims of this paper are, on the one hand, to present the differences in the results that may be incurred when working with some automated database functions to obtain scientific production and, on the other hand, to reveal the mistakes made by Aluja et al. (2011) in their considerations and suggestions to the study of Olivas-Avila and Musi-Lechuga (2010a). In this paper, we show that the procedure used to replicate the study is incorrect and, therefore, the authors did not only confuse production with diffusion indicators, but also suggest many indicators that have no discriminative power with the sample studied,-- and the most striking--one hundred percent out of the ten cases analyzed were incorrectly analyzed and, therefore, the results do not correspond to the real record count in the Web of Science (WoS). In some cases, the errors involved items omitted from the WoS. The authors also propose rates like the percentage of articles in journals of Spanish spheres, or the percentage of items as first author. These indexes have no theoretical or empirical justification or previous studies that support them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Every society develops a particular system of beliefs that summarizes its vision of socio-political organization, culture and interpersonal relationships. Each of these three basic dimensions has different forms, depending on the spatial and temporal context of societies. The belief system of the service societies is characterized by a democratic vision of social and political organization, rejection of radical social changes and high levels of interpersonal trust. This paper empirically examines the incorporation and adaptation of the postmodern belief system in a sample of university students. The participants belong to a country that is slowly integrating into the service societies. We used a scale of postmodernity to analyze the incorporation of the postmodern belief system. The results indicate that there is a peculiar combination of the three basic dimensions of the postmodern belief system, where the postmodern conceptions of culture and social relationships have lower acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces the monographic section on Positive Occupational Health Psychology (POHP), presenting eight theoretical and empirical papers about diverse topics. Traditionally, research on occupational health has mainly been focused on causes of diseases and on identifying and preventing work factors related to worker's impaired health. However, this biased view may not provide a complete understanding of the mechanisms that lead to employee well-being and performance. We discuss the differences of POHP with similar constructs, and review reasons for its importance in the development of this field. Overall, the studies included in the monographic section show the usefulness of focusing on positive constructs, and present ideas and questions that we hope may help to further our progress in the field of POHP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although interaction in analysis of variance has an unequivocal theoretical meaning (and so it appears in the statistic literature), frequent misconceptions are found in empirical research, which, in many cases, lead to wrong conclusions. In this paper, 150 articles are reviewed: in 12.7% of them, no attention is paid to the interaction (either because it is not analysed or because it is analysed but not discussed); in 79.1%, interaction is studied through simple effects analysis; and only in 8.2% of the cases, interaction is correctly discussed. It could be that psychology researchers tend to analyse and interpret the interaction between factors incorrectly because the most widespread statistic packages (with SPSS in the lead) do not allow performing the comparisons needed to analyse a significant interaction in factorial designs with randomized groups. In order to contribute to eradicating this problem, we herein show how to design some of the linear comparisons that allow isolating the interaction effect, and we explain how to use SPSS to compute these comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]