What do mind readers know and what do we know about mind readers?

In this commentary, I raise various questions about Kim and Harris's fascinating findings. I ask what kind of knowledge children expect telepathic individuals to have, who children might consider to be good mind readers, why children value telepathy, and how puzzled children are by telepathy. I suggest potential ways to address some of these questions and end by reiterating the importance of probing individual differences in scepticism and credulity.     

What do we know about psycholinguistic effects?

Identifying clear and unequivocal psycholinguistic effects for lexical retrieval tasks has been the aim of a significant proportion of recent research activity. Debates have erupted concerning the existence or otherwise of particular effects on particular lexical tasks. Here, it is suggested that the reason for these debates is that researchers exercise choice in what variables they consider in their analysis. It is further illustrated that methods that have been employed for comparing the size of these effects between tasks can only lead to inconclusive results. It is suggested that psycholinguistic data may be better analysed using structural equation modelling methodologies. An example of such an approach is presented.     

What do infants know about continuous quantity?

We investigated infants' sensitivity to amount of continuous quantity and to change in amount of continuous quantity. Using a habituation procedure, Experiment 1 examined whether 6-month-old infants can distinguish between different amounts of liquid in a container. Infants looked significantly longer at a novel quantity than at the familiar quantity. Using a violation-of-expectation paradigm, Experiment 2 examined whether 9-month-old infants expect a change in amount when liquid is added to a hidden container which is already one-fourth full of liquid. Infants looked significantly longer at the impossible event than at the possible event. These findings indicate that infants are sensitive to amount, calling into question claims that infants have a quantitative mechanism which is exclusive to number.     

What do we know about psycholinguistic effects?

Identifying clear and unequivocal psycholinguistic effects for lexical retrieval tasks has been the aim of a significant proportion of recent research activity. Debates have erupted concerning the existence or otherwise of particular effects on particular lexical tasks. Here, it is suggested that the reason for these debates is that researchers exercise choice in what variables they consider in their analysis. It is further illustrated that methods that have been employed for comparing the size of these effects between tasks can only lead to inconclusive results. It is suggested that psycholinguistic data may be better analysed using structural equation modelling methodologies. An example of such an approach is presented.     

What do we really know about witness preparation?

Witnesses often meet with an attorney or witness preparation specialist before trial to review, discuss, and sometimes modify the substance and delivery of their anticipated testimony. This process is commonly referred to as witness preparation. During witness preparation, witnesses are taught to use effective testimony delivery skills (e.g., verbal and nonverbal communication skills) so that they will be perceived as being credible and persuasive in the courtroom. Although social scientists know much about communication skills, credibility, and persuasion, few published studies have attempted to determine whether or not these factors can be modified through witness preparation training. The present article reviews the psychological literature pertaining to witness preparation and makes recommendations for needed witness preparation research.     

What do the hands externalize in simple arithmetic?

In 4 experiments, the authors examined the use of the hands in simple arithmetic tasks. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that pointing increases both accuracy and speed in counting arrays of items, whether those items are identical or distinctive. Experiment 3 demonstrated that individuals tend to nod their heads when not allowed to point and that nodding is associated with greater accuracy, suggesting that pointing is functional for reasons other than simply providing additional visual information. Experiment 4 examined changes in speech when adding arrays of digits, depending on whether participants were allowed to use their hands to manipulate the tokens on which the digits were presented. Taken together, the results of these experiments are consistent with recent research suggesting that gesture can serve cognitive functions and that the hands can support the binding of representational elements to their functional roles by providing phase markers for cyclic cognitive processes.     

What do children want to know about animals and artifacts? Domain-specific requests for information

Children's questions may reveal a great deal about the characteristics of objects they consider to be conceptually important. Thirty-two preschool children were given opportunities to ask questions about unfamiliar artifacts and animals. The children asked ambiguous questions such as "What is it?" about artifacts and animals alike. However, they were more likely to ask about the functions of artifacts, but about category membership, food choices, and typical locations of animals. They never asked questions about either artifacts or animals that would be considered inappropriate by adults. The results indicate that children hold different expectations about the types of information important for categorizing living and artifact kinds. Young children conceive of artifacts in terms of functions, but conceive of animals in terms of biologically appropriate characteristics. Such results speak to debates about the role of function in children's biological reasoning and to accounts of children's artifact concepts.     

What do we know about how best to assess counsellor competence?

Issues of assessment of counsellor competence are becoming increasingly important as counselling becomes more professionalized and recognizable as a distinct profession. There is, however, a lack of systematic research into competence assessment in this field. The existing literature is discussed in terms of the issues involved in employing different sources of assessment, such as trainers, tutors, managers, supervisors, external assessors, clients, self and peers. Techniques of assessment are reviewed, including questionnaires, video and audiotapes, role play, examinations, learning diaries and computer simulations. Some suggestions are offered for increasing the validity of assessment judgements.     

What do academics know and do about plagiarism? An interview study with Chinese university teachers of English

Previous research on plagiarism has increased awareness and knowledge of the various aspects of this issue, such as contributing factors to plagiarism, students’ and teachers’ perceptions of plagiarism, and institutional policies and regulations on plagiarism. Yet much of this research, especially on the latter two aspects, has been conducted in Anglo-American contexts or English-as-a-second-language (ESL) settings (where English is an official or important language in the larger societal context), while the diversity of English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) contexts (where English as a foreign language is largely used only in the language classroom) remains relatively under-researched. Of those studies that did focus on EFL contexts, the majority were based on survey data that were limited in the depth of information collected. To address this relative lack of in-depth understanding of how plagiarism is understood and acted against in EFL contexts, this paper reports on an interview study with 13 EFL teachers from 12 universities in mainland China. The study focused on the teachers’ knowledge and attitudes concerning plagiarism, plagiarism-related pedagogical practices, as well as perceived stances and expectations of their institutions in plagiarism prevention. Its findings contribute to the current knowledge base of EFL academics’ views and practices regarding plagiarism, add to our understanding of EFL teachers’ experiences concerning plagiarism in specific educational settings, and inform institutions’ efforts to develop and improve strategies and policies for preventing plagiarism.     

What do children know about the universal quantifiers all and each?

Children's comprehension of the universal quantifiers all and each was explored in a series of experiments using a picture selection task. The first experiment examined children's ability to restrict a quantifier to the noun phrase it modifies. The second and third experiments examined children's ability to associate collective, distributive, and exhaustive representations with sentences containing universal quantifiers. The collective representation corresponds to the “group” meaning (for All the flowers are in a vase all of the flowers are in the same vase). The distributive representation implies a pairing (e.g., each flower paired with a vase for Each flower is in a vase). The exhaustive representation exhausts both sets (e.g., for The flowers are in the vases all the flowers are in vases and all the vases have flowers in them). Four- to 10-year-old children had little difficulty restricting the quantifier all to the noun it modified in a task which required them to attend to the group feature of all. In contrast, only 9- and 10-year-olds were able to solve the task when the quantifier was each and the pictures showed entities in partial one-to-one correspondence. Children showed a preference for associating collective pictures with sentences containing all and distributive pictures with sentences containing each. The results suggest that between the ages of 5 and 10 years, children's semantic representations undergo less radical changes than others have proposed. Instead, developmental change may occur gradually as children acquire linguistic cues which map onto existing semantic representations.     

Conceptualization in the pigeon: What do we know?

This article reviews studies on conceptual behaviour in the pigeon that have been conducted over the past four decades. These studies reveal a variety of definitions and procedures employed in the assessment of this behaviour, a reflection of its multifaceted nature. Overall, pigeons have been found capable of categorizing a wide variety of static and moving natural and artificial stimuli. They have also demonstrated learning of abstract or relational concepts, even though such concepts seem to be more challenging. More recently, pigeons have also been shown to be capable of conceptualization as reflected in the ability to form functional or contingency classes (Lea, 1984), and some preliminary findings point to the possibility that pigeons can exhibit the more demanding equivalence classes (Sidman, 1990) that manifest themselves in the formal properties of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity emerging from conditional discriminations, when adequate procedures are employed. Available evidence now seems to suggest that functional and equivalence classes are closely related, but more work is needed to specify the nature of this relationship. At this point, it seems safe to conclude that language may not be necessary for conceptualization, including equivalence learning. Taken together, the findings of this review reveal learning abilities in the pigeon far beyond simple discrimination or categorization, although it is not yet well understood how this learning is achieved. Memorization of individual stimuli, featural analysis, and formation of prototypes have all been suggested as strategies utilized by pigeons in perceptual categorization tasks, while abstraction has been posited in explaining pigeons' relational concept learning. The reinforcement contingency has more recently been offered as a possible mechanism underlying equivalence learning. More broadly, the review illustrates how a hybrid of psychological and biological approaches can be employed in animal experimentation to tackle complex questions and enhance our understanding of behaviour and cognition.     

What do bonobos (Pan paniscus) understand about physical contact?

The present study aimed to test what bonobos (Pan paniscus) understand about contact. The task consisted of a clear horizontal tube containing a piece of food and a stick with a disk attached. The bonobos chose which side to push or pull the stick for the disk to contact the food and make it accessible. There were 9 variations in tube design, which differed in the positions of the stick, disk, and food. All 5 bonobos passed at least 1 configuration. A recent study (A. E. Helme, N. S. Clayton, & N. J. Emery, 2006) found that rooks could learn only tube configurations that provided an asymmetrical stick cue, whereas bonobos did not demonstrate an understanding of contact but showed more individual variation, attending to the positions of the food, disk, and stick.     

What do dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) understand about hidden objects?

Object permanence, the ability to mentally represent and reason about objects that have disappeared from view, is a fundamental cognitive skill that has been extensively studied in human infants and terrestrial animals, but not in marine animals. A series of four experiments examined this ability in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). After being trained on a “find the object” game, dolphins were tested on visible and invisible displacement tasks, and transpositions. In Experiments 1 and 2, dolphins succeeded at visible displacements, but not at invisible displacements or transpositions. Experiment 3 showed that they were able to pass an invisible displacement task in which a person’s hand rather than a container was used as the displacement device. However, follow-up controls suggested they did so by learning local rules rather than via a true representation of the movement of hidden objects. Experiment 4 demonstrated that the dolphins did not rely on such local rules to pass visible displacement tasks. Thus, like many terrestrial animals, dolphins are able to succeed on visible displacement tasks, but seem unable to succeed on tasks requiring the tracking of hidden objects.     

What do rooks (Corvus frugilegus) understand about physical contact?

Rooks (Corvus frugilegus) do not use tools, but rapidly solve tests of physical cognition. The authors tested whether rooks understand the concept of physical contact using a task comprising a clear horizontal tube containing a stick with a disk attached to it and a piece of food. The rooks chose which side to pull the stick from to make the food accessible. Two configurations were used, with either the food or disk central along the tube. All 8 rooks solved the food-central configuration, but failed the disk-central configuration. Although they did not demonstrate an understanding of contact, further tests established that they could learn to solve these tasks provided there were salient stick cues. This result may arise because sticks are ecologically important for rooks.     

Reliance on visual and verbal information across ontological kinds: What do children know about animals and machines?

In two experiments, we systematically examined the reliance on visual (external shape and features) and verbal (origins and internal structure) information in isolation, and together in the identification of animals and machines by 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds, and adults. Experiment 1 examined the use of visual and verbal information independently in a visual classification task, a verbal classification task, and an induction task. Experiment 2 examined the relative weighting of visual and verbal information in an induction task and a categorization task. The three most important findings from Experiment 1 were that (a) children and adults can use either visual or verbal information to distinguish animals from machines; (b) all age groups classified items with mixed visual information as machines, a tendency that increased with age; and (c) with age, children became increasingly able to induce non-obvious properties, especially the non-obvious properties of machines. The findings from Experiment 2 indicate that the youngest and oldest participants relied on both visual and verbal information in the identification of animals and machines in categorization and induction tasks. Five-year-olds, however, relied only on visual information. As in Experiment 1, we observed a tendency to judge items with contrasting information as machines, suggesting that individuals utilize a more strict definition (both visually and verbally) for the category of animals. We discuss the implication of these results with respect to developmental differences in the use of perceptual and conceptual information across the ontological distinction between artifacts and natural kinds.     

Affect and emotions in placebo and nocebo effects: What do we know so far?

Once considered nuisance variance in clinical trials, placebo effects and nocebo effects are now widely recognized as important and mutable psychobiological contributors to mental and physical health. Psychological theory explaining these effects emphasizes associative learning and conscious expectations. It has long been suggested, however, that affective states such as moods, emotions, and distress could play a significant role. In this paper, we draw together and review the empirical data linking affective states to placebo and nocebo effects. To organize this disparate literature, three questions are addressed: (1) Does pre‐existing state and trait affect modulate placebo and nocebo effects? (2) Does administering placebo and nocebo treatments change affective states, and if so, does the resulting affect causally influence placebo and nocebo effects? Finally, (3) Can placebo treatments be successfully employed as a regulation strategy to modulate different affective states? In reviewing the evidence in relation to these three questions, it is clear that affect does play a key role in placebo and nocebo effects in many circumstances, and further, there may be a reciprocal dynamic at play between a treatment event, affect, and placebo/nocebo effects. The paper concludes by discussing implications for theory and intervention and recommends future research priorities.