A reliable externally fixated murine femoral fracture model that accounts for variation in movement between animals.

Fifty-two CFLP mice had an open femoral diaphyseal osteotomy held in compression by a four-pin external fixator. The movement of 34 of the mice in their cages was quantified before and after operation, until sacrifice at 4, 8, 16 or 24 days. Thirty-three specimens underwent histomorphometric analysis and 19 specimens underwent torsional stiffness measurement. The expected combination of intramembranous and endochondral bone formation was observed, and the model was shown to be reliable in that variation in the histological parameters of healing was small between animals at the same time point, compared to the variation between time-points. There was surprisingly large individual variation in the amount of animal movement about the cage, which correlated with both histomorphometric and mechanical measures of healing. Animals that moved more had larger external calluses containing more cartilage and demonstrated lower torsional stiffness at the same time point. Assuming that movement of the whole animal predicts, at least to some extent, movement at the fracture site, this correlation is what would be expected in a model that involves similar processes to those in human fracture healing. Models such as this, employed to determine the effect of experimental interventions, will yield more information if the natural variation in animal motion is measured and included in the analysis.

Deciding between accounts of the selection task: A reply to Oaksford (2002)

In this paper we report on our attempts to fit the optimal data selection (ODS) model (Oaksford Chater, 1994; Oaksford, Chater, & Larkin, 2000) to the selection task data reported in Feeney and Handley (2000) and Handley, Feeney, and Harper (2002). Although Oaksford (2002b) reports good fits to the data described in Feeney and Handley (2000), the model does not adequately capture the data described in Handley et al. (2002). Furthermore, across all six of the experiments modelled here, the ODS model does not predict participants' behaviour at the level of selection rates for individual cards. Finally, when people's probability estimates are used in the modelling exercise, the model adequately captures only I out of 18 conditions described in Handley et al. We discuss the implications of these results for models of the selection task and claim that they support deductive, rather than probabilistic, accounts of the task.

Secondary Transfer Effects of Intergroup Contact: Alternative Accounts and Underlying Processes

Although intergroup contact is one of the most prominent interventions to reduce prejudice. the generalization of contact effects is still a contentious issue This research further examined the rarely studied secondary transfer effect (STE, Pettigrew, 2009) by which contact with a primary outgroup reduces prejudice toward secondary groups that are not directly involved in the contact Across 3 cross-sectional studies conducted in Cyprus (N = 1.653), Northern Ireland (N = 1,973). and Texas (N = 275) and 1 longitudinal study conducted in Northern Ireland (N = 411). the present research sought to systematically rule out alternative accounts of the STE and to investigate 2 potential mediating mechanisms (ingroup reappraisal and attitude generalization) Results indicated that, consistent with the STE. contact with a primary outgroup predicts attitudes toward secondary outgroups. over and above contact with the secondary outgroup, socially desirable responding. and prior attitudes Mediation analyses found strong evidence for attitude generalization but only limited evidence for ingroup reappraisal as an underlying process Two out of 3 tests of a reverse model, where contact with the secondary outgroup predicts attitudes toward the primary outgroup. provide further evidence for an indirect effect through attitude generalization Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed, and directions for future research are identified

Deconstructing national leadership: Politicians’ accounts of electoral success and failure in the Irish Lisbon Treaty referenda

The Self Categorization approach to national leadership proposes that leaders rhetorically construct national identity as essentialized and inevitable in order to consensualize and mobilize the population. In contrast, discursive studies have demonstrated how national politicians flexibly construct the nation to manage their own accountability in local interactions, though this in turn has neglected broader leadership processes. The present paper brings both approaches together to examine how and when national politicians construct versions of national identity in order to account for their failure as well as success in mobilizing the electorate. Eight semi-structured conversational style interviews were conducted with a strategic sample of eight leading Irish politicians on the subject of the 2008/2009 Irish Lisbon Treaty referenda. Using a Critical Discourse Psychology approach, the hegemonic repertoire of the ‘settled will’
of the informed and consensualized Irish nation was identified across all interviews. Politicians either endorsed the ‘settled will’ repertoire as evidence of their successful leadership, or rejected the repertoire by denying the rationality or unity of the populace to account for their failure. Our results suggest national identity is only constructed as essentialized and inevitable to the extent that it serves a strategic political purpose.

Socio-political context and accounts of national identity in adolescence

Psychological research into national identity has considered both the banal quality of nationalism alongside the active, strategic construction of national categories and boundaries. Less attention has been paid to the conflict between these processes for those whose claims to national identity may be problematic. In the present study, focus groups were conducted with 36 Roman Catholic adolescents living in border regions of Ireland, in which participants were asked to talk about their own and others’ Irish national identity. Discursive analysis of the data revealed that those in the Republic of Ireland strategically displayed their national identity as obvious and ‘banal’, while those in Northern Ireland proactively claimed their Irishness. Moreover, those in Northern Ireland displayed an assumption that their fellow Irish in the Republic shared their imperative to assert national identity, while those in the Republic actively distanced themselves from this version of Irishness. These results suggest that for dominant ethnic groups, ‘banality’ may itself provide a marker of national identity while paradoxically the proactive display of national identity undermines minority groups claims to national identity.