The Affective Dimensions of Social Controversy

Social controversy is a sustained, mediated debate between at least two oppositional parties which is more than just a difference of opinion; rather it is a persistent conflict over the political and cultural implications that dominant forms of communicative reasoning, practices, and norms have for a public. Simply put, during social controversies the norms guiding public life can be negotiated, reaffirmed, negated, and/or transformed. This can lead to progressive political, cultural, and/or social change in some instances, while establishing or reifying conservative and even oppressive norms, practices, and laws in others. Building upon Olson and Goodnight's (1994) theoretical and methodological framework of social controversy, this dissertation argues that scholars should analyze the role affect plays in this type of conflict as a means to address the regulation of public conduct as well as public discourse. The rhetorical and argumentative significance of the affective dimensions of social controversy have been conceptualized and analyzed via an examination of emotion-based claims and affective states that have become salient, discernable and/or apprehendable during specific public disagreements. Such a conceptualization demonstrates that critical insights regarding the norms that guide public conduct, the role risk and vulnerability play in the regulation of individuals' public behavior, and the relationship between affect and citizenship can be gained by focusing on a controversy's affective dimensions. To highlight the importance of the study of affect in social controversy as well as better understand the larger critical significance affect theory has for rhetorical and argumentation studies, this dissertation has analyzed the affective dimensions of three conflicts. They are: the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse social controversy, the International Freedom Center social controversy, and the controversy over the 2004 French ban on conspicuous religious attire in public schools. The findings from this dissertation that have specific and general implications for future work in the field of controversy as well as rhetoric and argumentation, respectively.

Psychological and Social Perspectives on Malingering and Symptom Exaggeration: Conceptualization and Interventions Using Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

Malingering and the production of false symptoms seen in such disorders as Factitious Disorder are an ongoing mystery to medical and mental health professionals. Historically, these presentations have been difficult to identify and treat. As might be expected, individuals with such symptomology rarely agree to participate in research, possibly because of a reluctance to admit to the feigning or exaggerating behaviors and a fear of reprisals. Many different etiologies have been proposed, including the assumption of roles in order to manage impressions, taking control of symptoms in order to gain attention or other rewards or avoid aversive events, and even the production of symptoms that is largely out of awareness such as is seen in conversion or somatoform presentations. By examining historical and present-day beliefs about etiology and treatment interventions, professionals can explore what new types of effective treatment might look like. The behaviorist philosophy that underlies Acceptance and Commitment Therapy proposes a perspective emphasizing effective working in context. This philosophy also suggests individuals sometimes engage in behavior in order to escape from or avoid aversive experiences. Utilizing case examples and fresh behavioral perspectives provides insight and ideas for conceptualization of these behaviors of interest. Using the above conceptualizations, an ACT based treatment of those who produce false symptoms is introduced.

Self-Injurious Behavior And Its Relationship To Eating Disorder Symptom Severity

Widely held clinical assumptions about self-harming eating disorder patients were tested in this project. Specifically, the present study had two aims: (1) to confirm research that suggests patients with self-injurious behavior exhibit greater severity in eating disorder symptomology; and (2) to document the treatment course for these patients (e.g. reported change in eating disorder attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors) from admission to discharge. Data from 43 participants who received treatment at a Partial Hospitalization Program (PHP) for Eating Disorders were used in the current study. The length of treatment required for study inclusion reflected mean lengths of stay (Williamson, Thaw, & Varnardo-Sullivan, 2001) and meaningful treatment lengths in prior research (McFarlane et al., 2013; McFarlane, Olmsted, & Trottier, 2008): five to eight weeks. Scores on the Eating Disorder Inventory-III (Garner, 2004) at the time of admission and discharge were compared. These results suggest that there are no significant differences between eating disordered patients who engage in self-injury and those who do not in terms of symptom severity or pathology at admission. The results further suggest that patients in both groups see equivalent reductions in symptoms from admission to discharge across domains and also share non-significant changes in emotional dysregulation over the course of treatment. Importantly, these results also suggest that general psychological maladjustment is higher at discharge for eating disordered patients who engage in self-injury.

A Meta-Analytic Review of Mindfulness-Based Interventions on Symptom Reduction: A Critique and Guide for Future Investigation.

Over the past decade, mindfulness practices have been used with increasing frequency as therapeutic components within cognitive behavioral treatment regimens. As is standard practice, prescriptive uses of mindfulness intervention are incorporated to improve end-state functioning by ameliorating problematic symptoms and conditions. Common change-targets include the control of cognitive and emotional content for purposes of enhancing psychological self-regulation and physical well-being. The term mindfulness applies to a heterogeneous range of practices, methods, and techniques. While there is no singular agreed upon definition for mindfulness, as a process concept, the term connotes an immediate, non-thetic access to events, wherein each occasioning event is experienced in toto within the broader contextual event-field, and distinct from intervening conceptual themes being noticed. Training in mindfulness practices may be conducted using individual, group, or small class formats. The current paper provides a meta-analytic review of 44 treatment outcome studies (extracted 1982 through 2006), which examines the clinical utility of mindfulness as the primary therapeutic approach. Results indicated that average effect sizes for mindfulness based interventions fell within the medium range for construct category variables examined (d = .56). These findings suggest that mindfulness training is a cost-effective treatment for a wide array of contemporary psychological problems and diagnoses, in addition to fostering positive psychology attributes such as quality and satisfaction with life. A critique of the research and recommendations for future research, including a need to examine the role of mindfulness as a tool for cultivating increased psychological acceptance and life satisfaction, is presented.