Versatility and exploratory psychometric properties of the Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale (IPAS): A review

Aggression has different conceptualizations and can be behaviorally expressed in diverse ways. Designed to evaluate impulsive and premeditated forms of aggression, the Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale (IPAS; Stanford et al., 2003) is a 30 item self-report questionnaire. The aim of the present study was to explore IPAS versatility in different psychological settings by reviewing and examining the exploratory psychometric prop- erties of the IPAS impulsive and premeditated subscales, across different samples and cultural backgrounds. Fifty-two articles including demographic or psychometric information (internal consistency, factor analysis, validity, reliability) were retrieved. It is suggested that the IPAS is reliable across different cultures, samples and scoring techniques. The two subscales (Impulsive and Premeditated) show acceptable internal consistency. Also, IPAS factors seem to be constant both in clinical and non-clinical samples. The IPAS appears to be a clinically useful instrument for differentiating between subtypes of aggressive behavior, to support risk assessment eva- luations, pretrial decisions and better treatment and rehabilitation strategies in offenders and clinical relevant samples.This work was supported by The Foundation for Science and Technology (Grant number SFRH/BD/76062/2011), and the Portuguese Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education through national funds and co-financed by FEDER and COMPETE2020 under the PT2020 Partnership Agreement (POCI-01-0145-FEDER007653) - Psychology Research Centre (UID/PSI/01662), awarded to the first author. The study was also supported by Grant SFRH/BPD/108602/2015 from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology awarded to Andreia de Castro-Rodrigues

Personality psychology: Lexical approaches, assessment methods, and trait concepts reveal only half of the story—Why it is time for a paradigm shift

This article develops a comprehensive philosophy-of-science for personality psychology that goes far beyond the scope of the lexical approaches, assessment methods, and trait concepts that currently prevail. One of the field’s most important guiding scientific assumptions, the lexical hypothesis, is analysed from meta-theoretical viewpoints to reveal that it explicitly describes two sets of phenomena that must be clearly differentiated: 1) lexical repertoires and the representations that they encode and 2) the kinds of phenomena that are represented. Thus far, personality psychologists largely explored only the former, but have seriously neglected studying the latter. Meta-theoretical analyses of these different kinds of phenomena and their distinct natures, commonalities, differences, and interrelations reveal that personality psychology’s focus on lexical approaches, assessment methods, and trait concepts entails a) erroneous meta-theoretical assumptions about what the phenomena being studied actually are, and thus how they can be analysed and interpreted, b) that contemporary personality psychology is largely based on everyday psychological knowledge, and c) a fundamental circularity in the scientific explanations used in trait psychology. These findings seriously challenge the widespread assumptions about the causal and universal status of the phenomena described by prominent personality models. The current state of knowledge about the lexical hypothesis is reviewed, and implications for personality psychology are discussed. Ten desiderata for future research are outlined to overcome the current paradigmatic fixations that are substantially hampering intellectual innovation and progress in the field

Long-term yield trend and sustainability of rainfed soybean–wheatsystem through farmyard manure application in a sandy loam soil of the Indian Himalayas

A long-term (30 years) soybean–wheat experiment was conducted at Hawalbagh, Almora, India to study the effects of organic and inorganic sources of nutrients on grain yield trends of rainfed soybean (Glycine max)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) system and nutrient status (soil C, N, P and K) in a sandy loam soil (Typic Haplaquept). The unfertilized plot supported 0.56 Mg ha−1 of soybean yield and 0.71 Mg ha−1 of wheat yield (average yield of 30 years). Soybean responded to inorganic NPK application and the yield increased significantly to 0.87 Mg ha−1 with NPK. Maximum yields of soybean (2.84 Mg ha−1) and residual wheat (1.88 Mg ha−1) were obtained in the plots under NPK + farmyard manure (FYM) treatment, which were significantly higher than yields observed under other treatments. Soybean yields in the plots under the unfertilized and the inorganic fertilizer treatments decreased with time, whereas yields increased significantly in the plots under N + FYM and NPK + FYM treatments. At the end of 30 years, total soil organic C (SOC) and total N concentrations increased in all the treatments. Soils under NPK + FYM-treated plots contained higher SOC and total N by 89 and 58% in the 0–45 cm soil layer, respectively, over that of the initial status. Hence, the decline in yields might be due to decline in available P and K status of soil. Combined use of NPK and FYM increased SOC, oxidizable SOC, total N, total P, Olsen P, and ammonium acetate exchangeable K by 37.8, 42.0, 20.8, 30.2, 25.0, and 52.7%, respectively, at 0–45 cm soil layer compared to application of NPK through inorganic fertilizers. However,the soil profiles under all the treatments had a net loss of nonexchangeable K, ranging from 172 kg ha−1 under treatment NK to a maximum of 960 kg ha−1 under NPK + FYM after 30 years of cropping. Depletion of available P and K might have contributed to the soybean yield decline in treatments where manure was not applied. The study also showed that although the combined NPK and FYM application sustained long-term productivity of the soybean– wheat system, increased K input is required to maintain soil nonexchangeable K level