
| Pengarang | : | Rusman Effendi |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Ilmu dan Budaya |
| Volume / Edisi | : | X-3, DESEMBER (No. 3) |
| Halaman | : | 206-212 |
| Abstrak | : | - |
| Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Ilmu dan Budaya |
| Volume / Edisi | : | X-3, DESEMBER (No. 3) |
| Halaman | : | 194-205 |
| Abstrak | : | - |
| Pengarang | : | Schick, Melissa R.; McClure, Erin A.; Tomko, Rachel L. |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | American Psychologist |
| Volume / Edisi | : | 79 (No. 2) |
| Halaman | : | 312-314 |
| Abstrak | : | Peer review represents the foundation and gatekeeper to scientific dissemination, making it among the most important points to improve the representation of members of diverse gender, racial/ethnic, and other sociodemographic groups. The American Psychological Association (APA) highlights equity, diversity, and inclusion among its guiding principles. APA journals publish a large volume of cutting-edge psychological research (processing 20,000 + submissions per year) and reach a wide audience and have the unique opportunity to contribute to APA’s mission by disseminating data on the diversity of those involved in the production of psychological science. In this commentary, we highlight recommendations for actionable steps to promote greater equity in the peer review process. While our recommendations are not exhaustive, we hope that they are steps in the right direction and will contribute to conversations that have already begun regarding actions to address underrepresentation in the scientific process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) |
| Pengarang | : | Muhammad Resky |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Ilmu dan Budaya |
| Volume / Edisi | : | X-3, DESEMBER (No. 3) |
| Halaman | : | 184-193 |
| Abstrak | : | - |
| Pengarang | : | Eko Baroto Waluyo |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Ilmu dan Budaya |
| Volume / Edisi | : | X-3, DESEMBER (No. 3) |
| Halaman | : | 181-183 |
| Abstrak | : | - |
| Pengarang | : | Cobb, Cory L.; Crumly, Brianna; Montero-Zamora, Pablo; Schwartz, Seth J.; MartÃnez Jr., Charles R. |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | American Psychologist |
| Volume / Edisi | : | 79 (No. 2) |
| Halaman | : | 299-311 |
| Abstrak | : | Scholarly citation represents one of the most common and essential elements of psychological science, from publishing research, to writing grant proposals, to presenting research at academic conferences. However, when authors mischaracterize prior research findings in their studies, such instances of miscitation call into question the reliability and credibility of scholarship within psychological science and can harm theory development, evidence-based practices, knowledge growth, and public trust in psychology as a legitimate science. Despite these implications, almost no research has considered the prevalence of miscitation in the psychological literature. In the largest study to date, we compared the accuracy of 3,347 citing claims to original findings across 89 articles in eight of top psychology journals. Results indicated that, although most (81.2%) citations were accurate, roughly 19% of citing claims either failed to include important nuances of results (9.3%) or completely mischaracterized findings from prior research altogether (9.5%). Moreover, the degree of miscitation did not depend on the number of authors on an article or the seniority of the first authors. Overall, results indicate that approximately one in every 10 citations completely mischaracterizes prior research in leading psychology journals. We offer five recommendations to help authors ensure that they cite prior research accurately. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) |
| Pengarang | : | Huang, Tsung-Ren; Cheng, Yu-Lan; Rajaram, Suparna. |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | American Psychologist |
| Volume / Edisi | : | 79 (No. 2) |
| Halaman | : | 285-298 |
| Abstrak | : | Many of us interact with voice- or text-based conversational agents daily, but these conversational agents may unintentionally retrieve misinformation from human knowledge databases, confabulate responses on their own, or purposefully spread disinformation for political purposes. Does such misinformation or disinformation become part of our memory to further misguide our decisions? If so, can we prevent humans from suffering such social contagion of false memory? Using a social contagion of memory paradigm, here, we precisely controlled a social robot as an example of these emerging conversational agents. In a series of two experiments (ΣN = 120), the social robot occasionally misinformed participants prior to a recognition memory task. We found that the robot was as powerful as humans at influencing others. Despite the supplied misinformation being emotion- and value-neutral and hence not intrinsically contagious and memorable, 77% of the socially misinformed words became the participants’ false memory. To mitigate such social contagion of false memory, the robot also forewarned the participants about its reservation toward the misinformation. However, one-time forewarnings failed to reduce false memory contagion. Even relatively frequent, item-specific forewarnings could not prevent warned items from becoming false memory, although such forewarnings helped increase the participants’ overall cautiousness. Therefore, we recommend designing conversational agents to, at best, avoid providing uncertain information or, at least, provide frequent forewarnings about potentially false information. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) |
| Pengarang | : | Soedjatmoko |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Ilmu dan Budaya |
| Volume / Edisi | : | X-3, DESEMBER (No. 3) |
| Halaman | : | 172-180 |
| Abstrak | : | - |
| Pengarang | : | Alisjahbana, S. Takdir |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Ilmu dan Budaya |
| Volume / Edisi | : | X-3, DESEMBER (No. 3) |
| Halaman | : | 162-171 |
| Abstrak | : | - |
| Pengarang | : | Vebriansyah, Riefza |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | American Psychologist |
| Volume / Edisi | : | 79 (No. 2) |
| Halaman | : | 268-284 |
| Abstrak | : | It is a common understanding that the 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) significantly harmed mental health. However, findings on changes in overall life satisfaction have been mixed and inconclusive. To address this puzzling phenomenon, we draw upon the domain-specific perspective of well-being and research on catastrophe compassion and propose that the pandemic can have opposing effects on mental health and communal satisfaction, which then differently relate to people’s overall life satisfaction. Longitudinal analyses of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics (HILDA) Survey of Australia (N = 12,093) showed that while there was a greater decrease in mental health in the first COVID-19 pandemic year (2019–2020) than in the previous years (2017–2019), an increase in communal satisfaction also occurred, demonstrating a potential silver lining effect of the pandemic on people’s satisfaction with family, community, and neighborhood. Moreover, consistent with socioemotional selectivity theory, changes in mental health, communal satisfaction, and life satisfaction were related to age, such that older adults generally reported less harmful and more beneficial psychological changes. We further found that age was associated with stronger associations of mental health and communal satisfaction with life satisfaction during the pandemic year. Overall, our findings speak to the importance of communal life in life satisfaction during the pandemic and age-related differences in the process, shedding light on the need to devise customized support to address inequalities in pandemic effects on public well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) |