When COVID-19 exacerbates inequities: The path forward for generating wellbeing

None

Building a global psychological science through research in the Pacific Island nation of Fiji: a systematic review of the literature

There is increasing globalisation of psychological science through cross-cultural research, international conferences, and funding initiatives. However, it is important to understand the nature of this globalisation in a more nuanced way and for research to include both etic (universal comparisons) and emic (distinctive cultural understanding) approaches and to incorporate the needs and expertise of the Indigenous populations being studied. The present systematic review aimed to identify the psychological research undertaken in the culturally diverse Pacific Island Country of Fiji and explore how this has added to the general knowledge base in psychological science. Furthermore, the review aimed to use the Fiji research literature to evaluate the extent of globalisation in psychology from an etic, emic and Indigenous psychology perspective. A total of 131 peer-reviewed publications were identified on electronic databases of which 80% reported primary research studies in some form. The literature suggests a growing interest in Pacific-inclusive research that has already added substantially to psychological understanding in many core areas. However, the literature continues to be dominated by etic, cross cultural studies driven by western research interests and universal measures. The discussion suggests more needs to be done to incorporate emic approaches and Indigenous methods as well as consider applied themes and research questions that would better serve the local communities alongside scientific knowledge

Challenges and Benefits of Bringing a Partnership Lens to Allyship

Male allyship offers a key opportunity for men to serve as partners in fostering women’s sense of inclusion and belonging. Yet male allyship research rarely takes on a partnership lens to study allyship from the perspectives of both men and women in allyship dyads. In recent research that took a partnership lens to study male allyship in male-dominated environments within academia, severe challenges arose in recruiting dyadic samples. In this article, I explore why women in male-dominated fields within academia may choose not to participate in dyadic research by reviewing personal communications by non-respondents. Content analysis of the personal communications (n=50) revealed five themes: Work Pressure and Lack of Time, Lack of Anonymity, Being Judged for Work Priorities, Absence of Collegiality, and Hostile Workplace. Of note, the work environment of women in male-dominated disciplines of academia may be more challenging than other types of organizations, precipitating low participation in dyadic research. Implications for taking a partnership lens to conduct allyship research with women in male-dominated disciplines within academia are discussed

Highlighting strengths in response to discrimination: Developing and testing an allyship positive psychology intervention

Allyship is gaining popularity as a tool to combat discrimination. We developed and tested a novel allyship positive psychology intervention (PPI). Importantly, we examined observers’ perceptions of intervention effectiveness given that observers represent the majority in many settings. Study 1 (N = 787) tested an intervention that highlighted a female employee’s identity-related strengths following a discrimination episode. Compared to communicating an organization’s diversity policy or confronting the transgressor, highlighting the target’s identity-related strengths was rated higher in terms of inclusion and vitality engendered in the target. Mediation analyses indicated that highlighting strengths was perceived as boosting the target’s vitality by signaling the ally’s sincerity and prompting inclusion. In Study 2 (N = 802), amongst various types of identity-related strengths, highlighting the target’s psychological and intellectual capital was as effective as highlighting all types of identity-related strengths combined, due to perceived sincerity. Thus, this research offers a quick, actionable and non-confrontational allyship PPI.&nbsp

The international landscape of positive psychology research: A systematic review

Since positive psychology originated in 1998 as an organized stream of inquiry in theUnited States, it has inspired new theory and research on human flourishing across the world. The current systematic review presents an overview of (a) the prevalence of scientific research in positive psychology across five continents and 63 countries, (b) the characteristics of the research, including methodology and topics, and (c) the influence of positive psychology in expanding established lines of research in new ways. Through an analysis of 863 peer-reviewed positive psychology articles, this review attempts to map the international landscape of positive psychology research. Further, it responds to relevant critiques of the field, confirming some and dispelling others. Finally, recommendations are shared for future directions to build a more culturally responsive field of positive psychology that is committed to the advancement of flourishing and wellbeing in the global context

Scaling the heights of positive psychology: A systematic review of measurement scales

The volume of empirical research on positive psychology topics has grown substantially over the past two decades.  This review examines how constructs in positive psychology have been operationalized, measured, validated, cited, and applied to build the science. Based on an archive of 972 empirical articles linked to positive psychology, this review found that 762 articles used at least one measurement scale; 312 measures were created or adapted.  Findings reveal a wide range of scales being used to measure a variety of constructs, including scales on both life-enhancing and life-depleting constructs.  Key characteristics such as journals, constructs, and scale development and validation information are discussed.  There are some reliability analyses and validations occurring within the field, but the creation of new measures far outpaces the validation of existing measures.  Weaknesses such as multiple operationalizations may be rooted in inadequate discourse and synthesis.  We call for further cross-pollination for a more scientifically robust scholarship in positive psychology

Positive Psychology Research in the Middle East and North Africa

Since the original call by Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) for a new science of happiness, excellence, and optimal human functioning, there has been considerable momentum in the research in positive psychology (see Donaldson, Dollwet, & Rao, 2014). A systematic review of the literature explicitly linked to the positive psychology movement assessed the extent of authorship, empirical and theoretical publications, and engagement of local samples in the indigenous research emerging from the Middle Eastern and North African regions. An in-depth review of these articles (n = 53) was conducted to examine the trends in publication, author locations, sample locations, key topics, research approaches and findings from exemplary articles that attend to key issues. Highlights from cross-national comparisons, cross-cultural validations and replications, research on positive constructs, and research on issues particular to the Middle East and North Africa are reviewed. Finally, unique trends of the research emerging from the Middle Eastern and North African regions are discussed and future directions for growth are explored

Initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment (INCLUSIVE) trial: update to cluster randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews suggest that multi-component interventions are effective in reducing bullying victimisation and perpetration. We are undertaking a phase III randomised trial of the INCLUSIVE multi-component intervention. This trial aims to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the INCLUSIVE intervention in reducing aggression and bullying victimisation in English secondary schools. This paper updates the original trial protocol published in 2014 (Trials 15:381, 2014) and presents the changes in the process evaluation protocol and the secondary outcome data collection. METHODS: The methods are summarised as follows. DESIGN: cluster randomised trial. PARTICIPANTS: 40 state secondary schools. Outcomes assessed among the cohort of students at the end of year 7 (n = 6667) at baseline. INTERVENTION: INCLUSIVE is a multi-component school intervention including a social and emotional learning curriculum, changes to school environment (an action group comprising staff and students reviews local data on needs to review rules and policies and determine other local actions) and staff training in restorative practice. The intervention will be delivered by schools supported in the first two years by educational facilitators independent of the research team, with a third intervention year involving no external facilitation but all other elements. Comparator: normal practice. OUTCOMES: Primary: Two primary outcomes at student level assessed at baseline and at 36 months: 1. Aggressive behaviours in school: Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime school misbehaviour subscale (ESYTC) 2. Bullying and victimisation: Gatehouse Bullying Scale (GBS) Secondary outcomes assessed at baseline, 24 and 36 months will include measures relating to the economic evaluation, psychosocial outcomes in students and staff and school-level truancy and exclusion rates. SAMPLE SIZE: 20 schools per arm will provide 90% power to identify an effect size of 0.25 SD with a 5% significance level. Randomisation: eligible consenting schools were randomised stratified for single-sex versus mixed-sex schools, school-level deprivation and measures of school attainment. DISCUSSION: The trial involves independent research and intervention teams and is supervised by a Trial Steering Committee and a Data Monitoring Committee. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN10751359 . Registered on 11 March 2014

Professional psychology associations in the GCC: positive institutions whose time has come

Permission to archive article granted by Dr. Louise Lambert, editor of Middle East Journal of Positive PsychologyProfessional associations have a mandate to protect and regulate those members deemed qualified to provide mental health services to the public. This is accomplished through supervision and policing of practitioners’ conduct, informed by an understanding of the application of ethics. Yet, in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, many hurdles preclude the development and maintenance of professional organizations, such as a lack of understanding of the range of services available within psychology, little professional oversight and no legal mandate for it, as well as a disinterest in professionalizing the field. Yet, by adopting a positive psychology framework, the current view from a focus on wrongdoing to an approach that encourages psychologists to reach a state of professional excellence can be accomplished via the notion of positive supervision, positive ethics, and organizational virtuousness. We explore how this can be done in the region.Ye