Russian Formalism

Russian Formalism, one of the twentieth century's most important movements in literary criticism, has received far less attention than most of its rivals. Examining Formalism in light of more recent developments in literary theory, Peter Steiner here offers the most comprehensive critique of Formalism to date. Steiner studies the work of the Formalists in terms of the major tropes that characterized their thought. He first considers those theorists who viewed a literary work as a mechanism, an organism, or a system. He then turns to those who sought to reduce literature to its most basic element.<p

Cultural influences on spontaneous trait inferences

This work explores the effect of culture in the inference of personality traits from people’s behaviours (spontaneous trait inference - STI). Specifically, it explores the effect of the individualism/collectivism cultural dimension. In Study 1 we manipulated the independent/interdependent self-construal to explore whether it would mimic the differences found between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Study 2 explored the impact of the horizontality/verticality distinction of individualism/collectivism. Shimizu, Lee, and Uleman’s (2017) adaptation of the false recognition paradigm was used in both studies to measure STIs. Despite independents making more STIs on average than interdependents, as theoretically expected, Study 1 fell short of statistical significance possibly due to having a small sample size. Study 2 was unable to find a statistically significant difference between horizontal individualists (HI) and horizontal collectivists (HC) on STI. We discuss the relevance of these null results and their implications in the context of STI differences between individualists and collectivists.O presente trabalho explora o efeito da cultura na inferência de traços de personalidade a partir de comportamentos (inferência espontânea de traços - STI). Especificamente, o efeito da dimensão cultural do individualismo/coletivismo. No Estudo 1 manipulou-se a independência/interdependência dos participantes para se explorar se obteria resultados similares aos encontrados entre culturas individualistas e coletivistas. O Estudo 2 explorou o impacto da distinção horizontal/vertical do individualismo/coletivismo. A adaptação de Shimizu, Lee, e Uleman (2017) do paradigma do falso reconhecimento foi usada em ambos os estudos para medir STIs. Apesar de independentes fazerem em média mais STIs do que interdependentes tal como era teoricamente esperado, o Estudo 1 não obteve significância estatística possivelmente devido à amostra ser pequena. O Estudo 2 também não encontrou diferenças significativas entre individualistas horizontais (HI) e coletivistas horizontais (HC) nas STIs. A relevância destes resultados nulos e as suas implicações para o estudo das diferenças entre individualistas e coletivistas em STIs são discutidos