Search

Introduction: the normal process of blood coagulation takes place under the control of protein coagulation molecules or coagulation factors, which are encoded by the corresponding protein-coding genes. The abnormal coagulation course, often cause of thromboembolic pathological conditions. Detection of pathological mutations of these genes has high importance in clinical medicine. Aim: The prevalence determination of specific coagulation gene mutations, important for timely anticoagulation therapy in personalized clinical medicine. Materials and methods: specimens of peripheral blood, taken from clinically selected patients, were analyzed to presence of specific gene mutations, by PCR and DNA sequencing methods. Results: after analysis of a total 121 specimens, determined total percentage mutation values were: 71%PAI-1(4G/5G); 23,6% MTHFR (C677T); 19% MTHFR (A1298C); 12,7% F13(G100T); 9,9% F5(G1691A); 1,6% F2(G20210A). Conclusion: the determination of these mutations is very important predictive molecular anticoagulant biomarkers for pregnant women and patients with autoimmune disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While considering the role of group-level factors as predictors of collective action, research has overlooked the role of group prototypes in determining willingness to engage in collective action. To begin to investigate this area, we conducted two correlational studies (N s = 141 and 98) in high schools examining the association between prototypical ingroup members' desire to engage in collective action and participants' collective action on behalf of a disadvantaged group (immigrants). Results showed a positive association between these two variables. We also investigated boundaries of this effect, finding that the association emerged when participants lacked personal experiences with the disadvantaged group (cross-group friendships; Study 1) or identified more with their ingroup, an effect also found when including a behavioral measure of collective action (Study 2). Intentions to follow the prototypical ingroup member emerged as the mediator (Study 2). It is worth noting that our methodology allowed us to assess prototypicality in a naturalistic context by calculating a metacontrast ratio for each group member, in line with self-categorization theory's conceptualization of prototypicality. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications, with reference to the role of prototypicality as a means of social influence and to developing social norms in the context of collective action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Leadership is central to understanding social continuity and change, though rarely features in the study of collective action. Across three experiments (total N = 687), we examine how followers' support for pro‐change leaders (Experiments 1–3) and pro‐status quo leaders (Experiments 1–2) varies as a function of leader alignment with group normative trajectory, the presence (vs. absence) of competing leaders, and shared group membership with followers. When pro‐change leaders were aligned with the normative trajectory of the group, they elicited higher collective action and voting intentions compared to pro‐status quo leaders (Experiments 1–2). When change leaders were non‐aligned, participants instead supported the pro‐status quo alternative (Experiment 1–2). Finally, the presence of leadership contests with aligned change leaders (Experiment 2) and pro‐status quo leaders (Experiments 2–3) reduced collective action and support for non‐aligned change leaders or those facing a polarised followership. Implications for research at the nexus of leadership and collective action are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The responsibility for addressing gender inequality typically falls on women. More recently, evidence has shown that solidarity-based framing is a starting point for increasing men's support of gender equality efforts. This paper moves beyond these women's issue and solidarity approaches to examine whether positioning men as being either responsible for addressing inequality (Experiment 1; N = 258) or being directly affected by inequality themselves (Experiment 2; N = 543), shapes men's (and women's) attitudes toward male and female leaders promoting gender equality and their mobilization toward this cause. In Experiment 1, men evaluated male and female leaders as more prototypical and higher in leadership identification under common cause compared to women's issue frames (and also compared to men's responsibility frames for leadership identification). In Experiment 2 all participants evaluated (male) leaders more positively under common cause and covictimization framing compared to men's victimization framing. Contrary to predictions, men's (Experiments 1-2) and women's (Experiment 2) collective action intent remained stable across message frames. Yet when it comes to mobilization, in Experiment 2 women showed solidarity more readily (i.e., were committed to gender equality across frames) while men's mobilization was dependent on men being directly victimized. We discuss practical and theoretical implications of mobilizing support for gender equality, and important caveats of increasing male allies' involvement in the movement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The social psychology of intergroup relations has emerged largely from studies of how one group of people (e.g., whites) think and feel about another (e.g., blacks). By reducing the social world to binary categories, this approach has provided an effective and efficient methodological framework. However, it has also obscured important features of social relations in historically divided societies. This paper highlights the importance of investigating intergroup relationships involving more than two groups and of exploring not only their psychological but also their political significance. Exemplifying this argument, we discuss the conditions under which members of disadvantaged groups either dissolve into internecine competition or unite to challenge the status quo, highlighting the role of complex forms of social comparison, identification, contact, and third-party support for collective action. Binary conceptualizations of intergroup relations, we conclude, are the product of specific sociohistorical practices rather than a natural starting point for psychological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study investigated the mediating role of sense of belonging in the relations between workplace sexism and (a) mental health and (b) job satisfaction. Participants were 190 women from a large Australian trade union that represented mainly male‐dominated jobs. They completed an online survey that contained measures of sexism, sense of belonging in the industry, mental health, and job satisfaction. As predicted, sense of belonging mediated the associations between organizational sexism and both mental health and job satisfaction. In addition, sense of belonging mediated the association between interpersonal sexism and mental health. These results are discussed in relation to strategies for supporting women and mitigating the effects of sexism in male‐dominated workplaces. The Open Science Framework webpage for this project is at: https://osf.io/a3yqc/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender (in)equality is typically studied as a women’s issue to be addressed via systemic measures (e.g., government policy). As such, research focusing on mobilising men (and women) towards achieving gender equality is rare. In contrast, this paper examines the mobilisation of both men and women towards gender equality as common cause. Experiment 1 shows that men’s collective action intentions increase after reading messages that position men as agents of change towards gender equality, compared to messages that frame this issue as stemming from inadequate government policy. Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrate that messages framing gender equality as an issue for both men and women increase men’s collective action intentions, compared to when gender inequality is framed as primarily concerning women. However, this effect emerges primarily under conditions where the source of message is male (Experiment 3). Practical and theoretical implications for mobilising political solidarity in gender equality contexts are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social norms are of increasing interest to public policy experts and those conducting behaviour change interventions (e.g. safe driving, recycling). While there is agreement that social norms play a central role in explaining behaviour, such consensus is lacking when it comes to explaining the process through which this occurs. Economics, social marketing and political science focus on individual self-interest and goal satisfaction and social (dis)approval. In contrast social psychology also incorporates collective interests through its analysis of social identity and ingroup processes. To fully understand behaviour change, it is argued that greater engagement is needed with the links between shifts in social identity, and ingroup norms. As definitions of who 'we' are shift, so too does what 'we' do. Implications for behaviour change interventions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In both personality psychology and social psychology there is a trajectory of theory and research that has its roots in Gestalt psychology and interactionism. This work is outlined in this paper along with an exploration of the hitherto neglected points of connection it offers these two fields. In personality psychology the focus is on dynamic interactionism and in social psychology, mainly through social identity theory and self-categorization theory, it is on the interaction between the individual (‘I’) and group (‘we’) and how the environment (that includes the perceiver) is given meaning. What emerges is an understanding of the person and behaviour that is more integrated, dynamic and situated. The aim of the paper is to stimulate new lines of theory and research consistent with this view of the person. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a response to commentaries on a paper on points of connection between personality and social psychology. The paper aimed to investigate whether the self-categorization theory of the self-process, and related work in personality psychology on dynamic interactionism, may be used to explain the person and behaviour. The themes that emerged across the commentaries are examined.

The article presents a political solidarity model of social change that explores the process by which members of the majority challenge the authority in solidarity with the minority. It is argued that political solidarity as a social change process involves a contest between the authority and the minority over the meaning of a shared identity with the majority. Social and political change involves a contest between social power and those who collectively challenge the intergroup relations.

Social psychologists have not fully investigated the role of leadership in mobilizing widespread support for social change, particularly gender equality. The burden of achieving gender equality is typically placed on women (particularly female leaders) - the main targets of such inequality. Traditional approaches frame workplace gender equality as either a women's issue , which limits men's (non-target's) involvement in the movement, or a meritocratic non-issue that exists due to women's (target's) tendency to pursue less intensive careers. In contrast to such work focusing on women's experiences as targets of discrimination or men's role in preserving inequality, we propose a solidarity-based approach that positions men and women as agents of change . This approach relies on two processes: leadership processes - particularly leadership as a form of influence based on shared identities among leaders and followers (e.g., their gender group); and political solidarity as a way to mobilize the silent majority (men) to work as allies beside a minority (women) and embrace equality as a common cause for both groups. In two experiments ( Ns = 338, 336) we studied how leader gender and message framing affect men's and women's support for equality by contrasting a solidarity-based framing of gender equality as a common cause for men and women, with a women's issue frame (Experiment 1) or a meritocratic frame (Experiment 2). The statement was attributed to a male or female leader (Experiments 1-2) or, additionally, to a government agency (Experiment 1). Women reported higher sense of common cause (Experiment 2) and collective action intentions than men (Experiments 1-2), and higher intentions under common cause compared to meritocracy frames (Experiment 2). Interestingly, male leaders invoked higher sense of common cause and collective action intentions for both men and women regardless of framing (Experiment 2). Irrespective of leader gender however, as predicted common cause framing boosted perceived leader prototypicality, legitimacy, and influence across the board (Experiments 1-2). Yet this was qualified by women (compared to men) rating leaders as more legitimate and influential under common cause compared to meritocracy framing (Experiment 2). Women's reactions to equality messages, and the intersection of leadership and solidarity toward equality are discussed.

Common experience of injustice can be a potent motivator of collective action and efforts to achieve social change - and of such efforts becoming more widespread. In this research, we propose that the effects of co-victimization on collective action are a function of inclusive social identity. Experiment 1 (N= 61) demonstrated that while presence (compared to absence) of co-victimization positively predicted consumer (i.e., participants) willingness to act collectively in solidarity with sweatshop workers, this effect was mediated by inclusive social identity. In Experiment 2 (N= 120), the salience of inclusive social identity was experimentally manipulated and interacted with co-victimization to predict collective action. When inclusive social identity was salient, co-victimization enhanced collective action, including willingness to pay extra for products made ethically and in support of fair wages for workers. In contrast, collective action was attenuated when co-victimization took place in the absence of inclusive social identity. Implications for understanding when co-victimization is transformed into common fate and political solidarity with the disadvantaged are discussed., (©2011 The British Psychological Society.)