Sexual Risk Recognition Deficits: The Role of Prior Victimization and Emotion Dysregulation

Recent theoretical writings suggest that the ineffective regulation of negative emotional states may reduce the ability of women to detect and respond effectively to situational and interpersonal factors that increase risk for sexual assault. However, little empirical research has explored this hypothesis. In the present study, it was hypothesized that prior sexual victimization and negative mood state would each independently predict poor risk recognition and less effective defensive actions in response to an analogue sexual assault vignette. Further, these variables were expected to interact to produce particularly impaired risk responses. Finally, that the in vivo emotion regulation strategy of suppression and corresponding cognitive resource usage (operationalized as memory impairment for the vignette) were hypothesized to mediate these associations. Participants were 668 female undergraduate students who were randomly assigned to receive a negative or neutral film mood induction followed by an audiotaped dating interaction during which they were instructed to indicate when the man had “gone too far” and describe an adaptive response to the situation. Approximately 33.5% of the sample reported a single victimization and 10% reported revictimization. Hypotheses were largely unsupported as sexual victimization history, mood condition, and their interaction did not impact risk recognition or adaptive responding. However, in vivo emotional suppression and cognitive resource usage were shown to predict delayed risk recognition only. Findings suggest that contrary to hypotheses, negative mood (as induced here) may not relate to risk recognition and response impairments. However, it may be important for victimization prevention programs that focus on risk perception to address possible underlying issues with emotional suppression and limited cognitive resources to improve risk perception abilities. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Showing that Early Childhood Education Works: Lessons from Italy, China, and the USA

Lessons from around the world; What does it matter about early childhood education? Why the controversy about public support for early childhood education? What process or system should be used to determine what works in early education? Can the same process be used to improve services? What is the role of government? Alternatives: 1. Consumers should determine… (What happens when private choices drive the market for early childhood services?) Observed quality of care in four Midwestern states; Parent data: “All things considered, how would you grade the quality of the care your child is receiving from his/her current caregiver?” Role of government What is a Quality Rating System? Ten states have implemented statewide systems (e.g. Colorado, Kentucky, Oklahoma, North Carolina) Findings 2. Objective science should determine… Firm findings from empirical research 3. Something else is needed: Some differences between Italian and American models. Teacher action research (and documentation) from a Reggio-inspired preschool in South Korea by Misuk Kim. Teacher Action Research at the Ruth Staples CDL. Can we now answer our opening questions? What process or system should be used to determine what is best for young children? Can the same process be used to improve the quality of services? Conclusions: The free market does not work well to determine quality in early education and care; Licensing, accreditation, and quality rating systems can help improve the market; Empirical research is useful for measuring what works; Teacher action research (reflective practice) is necessary for fostering continuous quality improvement. The tower of quality.