Abstract: In two studies we challenged the well consolidated
position in regret literature according to which the necessary
condition for the emergence of regret is a bad outcome ensuing from
free decisions. Without free choice, and, consequently, personal
responsibility, other emotions, such as disappointment, but not regret,
are supposed to be elicited. In our opinion, a main source of regret is
being obliged by circumstance out of our control to chose an
undesired option. We tested the hypothesis that regret resulting from
a forced choice is more intense than regret derived from a free choice
and that the outcome affects the latter, not the former. Besides, we
investigated whether two other variables – the perception of the level
of freedom of the choice and the choice justifiability – mediated the
relationships between choice and regret, as well as the other four
emotions we examined: satisfaction, anger toward oneself,
disappointment, anger towards circumstances. The two studies were
based on the scenario methodology and implied a 2 x 2 (choice x
outcome) between design. In the first study the foreseen short-term
effects of the choice were assessed; in the second study the
experienced long-term effects of the choice were assessed. In each
study 160 students of the Second University of Naples participated.
Results largely corroborated our hypotheses. They were discussed in
the light of the main theories on regret and decision making.
Abstract: In recent years linguistic research has turned
increasing attention to covert/overt strategies to modulate authorial
stance and positioning in scientific texts, and to the recipients'
response. This study discussed some theoretical implications of the
use of rhetoric in scientific communication and analysed qualitative
data from the authoritative The Cognitive Neurosciences III (2004)
volume. Its genre-identity, status and readability were considered, in
the social interactive context of contemporary disciplinary discourses
– in their polyphony of traditional and new, emerging genres.
Evidence was given of the ways its famous authors negotiate and
shape knowledge and research results – explicitly appraising team
work and promoting faith in the fast-paced progress of Cognitive
Neuroscience, also through experiential metaphors – by presenting a
set of examples, ordered according to their dominant rhetorical
quality.