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.

Preparing for disaster: a comparative analysis of education for critical infrastructure collapse

This article explores policy approaches to educating populations for potential critical infrastructure collapse in five different countries: the UK, the US, Germany, Japan and New Zealand. ‘Critical infrastructure’ is not always easy to define, and indeed is defined slightly differently across countries – it includes entities vital to life, such as utilities (water, energy), transportation systems and communications, and may also include social and cultural infrastructure. The article is a mapping exercise of different approaches to critical infrastructure protection and preparedness education by the five countries. The exercise facilitates a comparison of the countries and enables us to identify distinctive characteristics of each country’s approach. We argue that contrary to what most scholars of security have argued, these national approaches diverge greatly, suggesting that they are shaped more by internal politics and culture than by global approaches.