No abstract

Through structural equation modeling, this study tested a path of relations in which different levels of empathic responsiveness were posited to be differently associated to bullying and defending behavior. Three hundred and eighteen Italian adolescents (142 girls and 176 boys; mean age = 13.2 years) completed the Davis's Interpersonal Reactivity Index [Davis, 1983] for empathy and the Participant role scales [Salmivalli et al., 1996] for bullying and defending behavior. The results revealed that the model fitted the data adequately, but only in the case of boys. As hypothesized, low levels of empathic responsiveness were associated to students' involvement in bullying others. In contrast, empathy was positively associated with actively helping victimized schoolmates. However, the estimates algorithm did not reach convergence with girls' data. The current findings confirm and extend the literature on the relation between empathy, prosociality and aggressive behavior. Educational implications are also discussed.

The literature on participant roles in bullying lacks empirical studies that seek to explain what differentiates defenders from outsiders (or passive bystanders). The present study tested a conceptual model in which two personal characteristics of early adolescent students (empathy and perceived social self‐efficacy) were considered as possible determinants of their participant behavior in bullying episodes. A total of 294 Italian early adolescents (mean age=13.3 years, range: 12–14) participated in the study. The structural equation modeling showed that high levels of empathic responsiveness were positively associated with both active defending and passive bystanding behavior, as assessed through peer nominations. In contrast, high levels of social self‐efficacy were associated with helping behavior, whereas low levels of social self‐efficacy were associated with passive bystanding behavior. Results are discussed in terms of theoretical and practical implications for researchers and educational practitioners.

No abstract

Objects can be grasped in several ways due to their physical properties, the context surrounding the object, and the goal of the grasping agent. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the prior-to-contact grasping kinematics of the same object vary as a result of different goals of the person grasping it. Subjects were requested to reach toward and grasp a bottle filled with water, and then complete one of the following tasks: (1) Grasp it without performing any subsequent action; (2) Lift and throw it; (3) Pour the water into a container; (4) Place it accurately on a target area; (5) Pass it to another person. We measured the angular excursions at both metacarpal-phalangeal (mcp) and proximal interphalangeal (pip) joints of all digits, and abduction angles of adjacent digit pairs by means of resistive sensors embedded in a glove. The results showed that the presence and the nature of the task to be performed following grasping affect the positioning of the fingers during the reaching phase. We contend that a one-to-one association between a sensory stimulus and a motor response does not capture all the aspects involved in grasping. The theoretical approach within which we frame our discussion considers internal models of anticipatory control which may provide a suitable explanation of our results.