To "do the right thing" or to "just do it": locomotion and assessment as distinct self-regulatory imperatives.

An integrated series of studies investigated 2 functional dimensions of self-regulation referred to as assessment and locomotion (E. T. Higgins and A. W. Kruglanski, 1995). Assessment constitutes the comparative aspect of self-regulation that critically evaluates alternative goals or means to decide which are best to pursue and appraises performance. Locomotion constitutes the aspect of self-regulation concerned with movement from state to state, including commitment of psychological resources to initiate and maintain such movement. Two separate scales were developed to measure individual differences in these tendencies. Psychometric work attested to the scales' unidimensionality, internal consistency, and temporal stability. The authors found that (a) locomotion and assessment are relatively independent of each other, (b) both are needed for self-regulatory success, and (c) each relates to distinct task orientations and motivational emphases.

Membership has its (epistemic) rewards: need for closure effects on in-group bias.

Three studies examined the impact of the need for cognitive closure on manifestations of in-group bias. All 3 studies found that high (vs. low) need for closure increased in-group favoritism and outgroup derogation. Specifically, Study 1 found a positive relation between need for cognitive closure and both participants' ethnic group identification and their collective self-esteem. Studies 2 and 3 found a positive relation between need for closure and participants' identification with an in-group member and their acceptance of an in-group member's beliefs and attitudes. Studies 2 and 3 also found a negative relation between need for closure and participants' identification with an out-group member and their acceptance of an out-group member's beliefs and attitudes. The implications of these findings for the epistemic function of in-groups are discussed.

Enalapril in hypertension.

Twenty five patients of mild to moderate uncomplicated essential hypertension and five with severe hypertension were treated with long acting converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril for six weeks. Diuretic was added in those patients who did not respond satisfactorily. Twenty one patients of mild to moderate hypertension had their diastolic blood pressure controlled at the end of the study; fifteen with enalapril alone and six with the help of diuretic. Remaining four showed a relative fall but not to level below 150/90 mm Hg. Only one patient with severe hypertension showed fall to normal levels. Four showed a relative fall but not to the normal level even with the addition of a diuretic. Enalapril is an effective anti hypertensive drug in mild to moderate essential hypertension.