I have faith in my thing, you know what I mean? Mixed method elements on individual investments on religious markets.

In contemporary society, religious signification and secular systems mix and influence each other. Holistic conceptions of a world in which man is integrated harmoniously with nature meet representations of a world run by an immanent God. On the market of the various systems, the individual goes from one system to another, following his immediate needs and expectations without necessarily leaving any marks in a meaningful long term system. This article presents the first results of an ongoing research in Switzerland on contemporary religion focusing on (new) paths of socialization of modern that individuals and the various (non-) belief systems that they simultaneously develop

"I don't know how you are" or indirect questioning in oncology interviews: an ongoing exploratory study

Background: The exploratory study is part of an evaluation of the pre-graduate teaching of communication skills (Lausanne Medical School). It is based on the data of a project highlighting the impact of individualized vs. group training for medicine students in breaking bad news to simulated patients who are diagnosed with cancer. The analysis of the video-taped interviews of the students (N=63) with the RIAS has shown a current usage of utterances such as I don't know if -you have any plans for the future / you have already heard about chemotherapy / ... or I don't know how -you are feeling today after this surgery / you like that all this stuff takes place / ...Aim: The present study questions the specificity of these assertive utterances used as questions (indirect), the specificity of their content, and their intentionality - specific vs. exploratory.Methods: The mentioned utterances are qualitatively analyzed (content analysis, intentionality analysis, etc).Results: 26 students (41%) used 1 to 6 times I don't know utterances during the interviews that contain 53 of such utterances in total. In contrast, they are atypical in an oncologist sample who conducted similar interviews (N=31; 4 oncologist used them 1 to 2 times). In more than half of the cases (29/53), simulated patients interpret I don't know questions as giving them a space to speak (open responses). Conclusions: The atypicality of the I don't know utterances in the oncologist sample may have linguistic explanations in terms of generational marker, but the specificity of the content suggests psychological explanations in terms of defense mechanism as well (marker of "toning down" or insecurity as regards the discussed topic).Keywords: Breaking bad news, communication skills, oncology, pre-graduate medical education, indirect questioning

Big brother is watching you: eavesdropping to resolve family conflicts

Adult animals can eavesdrop on behavioral interactions between potential opponents to assess their competitive ability and motivation to contest resources without interacting directly with them. Surprisingly, eavesdropping is not yet considered as an important factor used to resolve conflicts between family members. In this study, we show that nestling barn owls (Tyto alba) competing for food eavesdrop on nestmates' vocal interactions to assess the dominance status and food needs of opponents. During a first training playback session, we broadcasted to singleton bystander nestlings a simulated vocal interaction between 2 prerecorded individuals, 1 relatively old (i.e., senior) and 1 younger nestling (i.e., junior). One playback individual, the "responder," called systematically just after the "initiator" playback individual, hence displaying a higher hunger level. To test whether nestlings have eavesdropped on this interaction, we broadcasted the same prerecorded individuals separately in a subsequent playback test session. Nestlings vocalized more rapidly after former initiators' than responders' calls and they produced more calls when the broadcasted individual was formerly a junior initiator. They chiefly challenged vocally juniors and initiators against whom the likelihood of winning a vocal contest is higher. Owlets, therefore, identified the age hierarchy between 2 competitors based on their vocalizations. They also memorized the dynamics of competitors' previous vocal interactions, and used this information to optimally adjust signaling level once interacting with only 1 of the competitor. We conclude that siblings eavesdrop on one another to resolve conflicts over parental resources.