The Goldwater Rule: Perspectives From, and Implications for, Psychological Science

Past, present and imaginary: Pathography in all its forms

Diagnosis is a profoundly social phenomenon which, while putatively identifying disease entities, also provides insights into how societies understand and explain health, illness and deviance. In this paper, we explore how diagnosis becomes part of popular culture through its use in many non-clinical settings. From historical diagnosis of long-deceased public personalities to media diagnoses of prominent politicians and even diagnostic analysis of fictitious characters, the diagnosis does meaningful social work, explaining diversity and legitimising deviance in the popular imagination. We discuss a range of diagnostic approaches from paleopathography to fictopathography, which all take place outside of the clinic. Through pathography, diagnosis creeps into widespread and everyday domains it has not occupied previously, performing medicalisation through popularisation. We describe how these pathographies capture, not the disorders of historical or fictitious figures, rather, the anxieties of a contemporary society, eager to explain deviance in ways that helps to make sense of the world, past, present and imaginary.

The Goldwater Rule: a bastion of a bygone era?

In tandem with the changing political landscape in recent years, interest in the Goldwater Rule has re-emerged within psychiatric discourse. Initiated in 1973, the Goldwater Rule is an ethical code specific to psychiatry created by the American Psychiatric Association in response to events surrounding the USA presidential election of 1964, in which the integrity of the psychiatric profession was challenged. Current detractors view the rule as an antiquated entity which obfuscates psychiatric pragmatism and progression. Proponents underscore its role in maintaining both respectful objectivity and diagnostic integrity within the psychiatric assessment process. This essay aims to explore the origin of the rule, and critique its applicability to modern-day psychiatric practice.

Personality Psychology

Personality psychology, which seeks to study individual differences in thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that persist over time and place, has experienced a renaissance in the last few decades. It has also not been reviewed as a field in the Annual Review of Psychology since 2001. In this article, we seek to provide an update as well as a meta-organizational structure to the field. In particular, personality psychology has a prescribed set of four responsibilities that it implicitly or explicitly tackles as a field: (a) describing what personality is-i.e., what the units of analysis in the field are; (b) documenting how it develops; (c) explaining the processes of personality and why they affect functioning; and (d) providing a framework for understanding individuals and explaining their actions, feelings, and motivations. We review progress made over the last 20 years to address these four agendas and conclude by highlighting future directions and ongoing challenges to the field. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 73 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Political events and mood among young physicians: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To study the effects of recent political events on mood among young physicians.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

United States medical centres.

PARTICIPANTS

2345 medical interns provided longitudinal mood data as part of the Intern Health Study between 2016 and 2018.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mean mood score during the week following influential political and non-political events as compared with mean mood during the preceding four week control period.

RESULTS

We identified nine political events and eight non-political events for analysis. With the start of internship duties in July, the mean decline in mood for interns was -0.30 (95% confidence interval -0.33 to -0.27, t=-17.45, P<0.001). The decline in mood was of similar magnitude following the 2016 presidential election (mean mood change -0.32, 95% confidence interval -0.45 to -0.19, t=-4.73, P<0.001) and subsequent inauguration (mean mood change -0.25, 95% confidence interval -0.37 to -0.12, t=-3.93, P<0.001). Further, compared with men, women reported greater mood declines after both the 2016 election (mean gender difference 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.58, t=2.33, P=0.02) and the inauguration (mean gender difference 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.01 to 0.49, t=2.05, P=0.04). Overall, there were statistically significant changes in mood following 66.7% (6/9) of political events assessed. In contrast, none of the non-political events included in the analysis were statistically significantly associated with a change in mood.

CONCLUSIONS

Macro level factors such as politics may be correlated with the mood of young doctors. This finding signals the need for further evaluation of the consequences of increasing entanglement between politics and medicine moving forward for young physicians and their patients.

The electoral success of angels and demons: Big Five, Dark Triad, and performance at the ballot box

The article tests whether the personality of candidates – in terms of their Big Five (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness) and Dark triad (narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism) – is associated with their electoral results. Via a novel dataset based on expert ratings for 122 candidates having competed in 55 recent national elections worldwide, and controlling for several covariates, results show that a better performance at the ballot box is associated with high conscientiousness, openness to experience and psychopathy. Extraversion is negatively associated with better results. Analyses also reveal profile effects; extraversion is linked to worse results especially for incumbents and younger candidates, conscientiousness and narcissism are associated with better results especially for candidates on the right-hand side of the ideological spectrum, and openness is associated with better results for male candidates.

Beyond the Boundaries: Ethical Issues in the Practice of Indirect Personality Assessment in Non-Health-Service Psychology

This article focuses on ethical quandaries in the practice of indirect personality assessment in non-health-service psychology. Indirect personality assessment methods do not involve face-to-face interaction. Personality assessment at a distance is a methodological development of personality and social psychology, psychobiography, and psychohistory. Indirect personality methods are used in clinical, forensic, law enforcement, public safety, and national security settings. Psychology practice in non-health-service settings creates tensions between principles of beneficence and duty to society. This article defines methods of indirect personality assessment and some ethical ramifications. Their application in non-health-service settings occurs in the context of intense controversy over the ethics of psychologists' participation in work settings where there are third-party loyalties, absence of voluntary informed consent, presence of nonstipulated harms, and absence of legal and ethical accountability. A hypothetical case example illustrates typical quandaries encountered in a national security assessment. This article provides a framework for critically examining ethical quandaries, a contemporary conceptual and process model for integrative moral cognition, and parameters for ethical reasoning by the individual practitioner under the exigencies of real-world practice.

Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde? President Donald Trump’s Personality Profile as Perceived from Different Political Viewpoints

The present research used an empirical, crowdsourced trait profiling approach to describe the personality of President Donald Trump (hereafter Trump) that accounts for political views. We recruited participants who voted for Hillary Clinton (N = 120; hereafter Clinton) and Trump (N = 118), and asked them to rate Trump’s personality on the 30 facets of the Five Factor Model. Participants also provided perceived helpfulness and harmfulness ratings of the facets before and after the election. We treated these facet level ratings as trait profiles, which were transformed into estimates of personality disorders (PDs) and complex trait-based constructs based on expert profiles. Results suggest only modest agreement between Clinton and Trump voters on Trump’s personality. Clinton voters perceived much greater antagonism, lower conscientiousness, and higher levels of impairment in Trump’s personality than did Trump voters who primarily perceived high levels of extraversion and emotional stability (i.e., low neuroticism). At the level of PDs and complex traits, there was some convergence with both groups seeing Trump as high in narcissism and psychopathy.