Rational Thinking and Belief in Psychic Abilities: It Depends on Level of Involvement

Previous research has shown that lay believers in psychic abilities are more prone to intuitive thinking, less inclined to rational thinking, and have an external locus of control, compared to non-believers. Psychic practitioners, however, may have different characteristics. Psychic practitioners (N=31; mean age = 42.7 years, s.d.=13.1), lay believers (N=33; mean age = 33.0 years, s.d.=10.3), and non-believers (N=31; mean age = 34.4 years, s.d.=15.4) completed questionnaires measuring thinking styles, locus of control, and psychic belief. Comparisons of lay believers with non-believers confirmed previous observations; believers had a higher propensity for intuitive thinking, lower propensity for rational thinking, and more external locus of control. In contrast, practitioners were equivalent to non-believers in rational thinking and had the highest internal locus of control. This highlights the importance of considering level of involvement with psychic practice in understanding the thinking styles of believers. Results suggested that practitioners may have rationalised their beliefs and constructed a coherent model of psychic phenomena that satisfies a propensity for rational thinking within a community of belief.

‘It's been hell.’ Italian and British practice educators’ narratives of working with struggling or failing social work students in practice learning settings

Periods of assessed learning in practice settings are common requirements for social work students world wide. The ‘practice learning opportunity’ as it is known in the UK, and ‘tirocinio di servizio sociale’ as it is referred to in Italy, are important sites of gatekeeping in preventing unsuitable people from becoming social workers. The experience of assessing failing students in practice learning settings however, has been found to be particularly stressful and challenging for practice educators. This article documents findings from two qualitative studies that explored field educators’ experiences of working with struggling or failing social work students in Italy and England. The study finds both similarities and differences in the narratives of the assessors from the two countries Similarities include, unpleasant emotional experience of working with a failing student, internalisation of the students failing as the practice educators’ own failing, perceptions that the universities may hide negative information about students and lack of acknowledgement of the gatekeeping function inherent in the practice educator role. Differences include the level of emotionality experienced by educators, the way students are spoken about and the perceived role and responses of the university. Further comparative European research which focuses on practice education is indicated.