Joao Viana

In the Christian world picture of early modern Europe Truth was absolute and enjoyed rights of its own. Protestantism shattered the unity of Christianity but did not fester any ideal of religious tolerance. Instead, closely interwoven with the Henrician Reformation and consequent break with Roman Catholicism, and with the establishment of the Elizabethan state, Protestantism led to a widespread millenarian belief in the leading role God had chosen for England, thus sharpening the opposition between Good and Evil, Christ and Antichrist. In the heady atmosphere of the 1640’s Milton, Cromwell, and the Independents stood for liberty of conscience, while the Levellers and radical separatists argued for toleration and religious liberty. Toleration emerged and thrived in the Puritan Revolution, not as an ideal, but as a temporary, pragmatic measure in the long path to achieve cherished but elusive religious unity.

In the last 10 years, emotional intelligence has become a current issue of research in psychology, and there are indicators to consider that emotional intelligence should be analyzed to help the coach to behave effectively during competitions. According to Boardley’s (2018) revised model of coaching efficacy, coaches’ emotional intelligence is predictive of their efficacy beliefs, which, in turn, is predictive of coaching behavior. However, little is known about the mediating effects of coaching efficacy dimensions on the relationships between coach’s emotional intelligence and reactive behaviors in competitive settings. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine mediating effects of coaching efficacy dimensions on the relationship between emotional intelligence and coaches’ reactive behaviors during a game using a multimethod approach. Participants were 258 coaches of youth football players aged 9 to 17 years old. Observations in situ using Coaching Behavior Assessment System were carried on 258 football games during two seasons. At the end of each game, coaches completed the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale and the Coaching Efficacy Scale. Structural equation modelling analyses revealed that motivation efficacy and character building mediated the relationship between regulation of emotion and positive and negative coaches’ reactions during game. Specifically, motivation efficacy mediated the association between regulation of emotion and positive coaches’ reactions, and the relationship between regulation of emotion and negative coaches’ reactions were mediated by motivation efficacy and character building. In addition, coaching level moderated the relationships between emotional intelligence, self-efficacy and coaches’ reactive behaviors. Findings of the present study showed that coaching efficacy dimensions (i.e., motivation efficacy and character building) that have the capacity to influence their confidence in ability to affect the psychological mood and positive attitude of athletes, transfer the effects of emotional intelligence (i.e., regulation of emotion) on coaches’ verbal reactions during a youth soccer game. Specifically, a coach who feels competent to regulate their own emotions would perceive high beliefs of efficacy to motivate and to build character of their athletes, and this insight has an impact on their positive verbal reactions in response to athletes’ performances.

The idea that deep brain stimulation (DBS) induces changes to personality, identity, agency, authenticity, autonomy and self (PIAAAS) is so deeply entrenched within neuroethics discourses that it has become an unchallenged narrative. In this article, we critically assess evidence about putative effects of DBS on PIAAAS. We conducted a literature review of more than 1535 articles to investigate the prevalence of scientific evidence regarding these potential DBS-induced changes. While we observed an increase in the number of publications in theoretical neuroethics that mention putative DBS-induced changes to patients’ postoperative PIAAAS, we found a critical lack of primary empirical studies corroborating these claims. Our findings strongly suggest that the theoretical neuroethics debate on putative effects of DBS relies on very limited empirical evidence and is, instead, reliant on unsubstantiated speculative assumptions probablyin lieuof robust evidence. As such, this may reflect the likelihood of a speculative neuroethics bubble that may need to be deflated. Nevertheless, despite the low number of first-hand primary studies and large number of marginal and single case reports, potential postoperative DBS changes experienced by patients remain a critical ethical concern. We recommend further empirical research in order to enhance theoretical neuroethics work in the area. In particular, we call for the development of better instruments capable of capturing potential postoperative variations of PIAAAS.