Response error and processing biases in confidence judgment

Previous studies showed that random error can explain overconfidence effects typically observed in the literature. One of these studies concluded that, after accounting for random error effects in the data, there is little support for cognitive‐processing biases in confidence elicitation. In this paper, we investigate more closely the random error explanation for overconfidence. We generated data from four models of confidence and then estimated the magnitude of random error in the data. Our results show that, in addition to the true magnitude of random error specified in the simulations, the error estimates are influenced by important cognitive‐processing biases in the confidence elicitation process. We found that random error in the response process can account for the degree of overconfidence found in calibration studies, even when that overconfidence is actually caused by other factors. Thus, the error models say little about whether cognitive biases are present in the confidence elicitation process. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Defining, Measuring, and Comparing Organisational Cultures

La littérature portant sur la culture des organisations souffre d'un manque manifeste d'enquêtes extensives débouchant sur des études comparatives. Afin de rendre plus comparables les cultures organisationnelles, nous proposons une définition et une série de dimensions. La culture organisationnelle renverrait aux perceptions communes des pratiques de travail dans le cadre des unités constitutives des organisations. A l'examen d'études empiriques, les cinq dimensions suivantes nous sont apparues: autonomie, orientation externe, coordination interdépartementale, orientation vers les ressources humaines et orientation vers le développement. L'utilisation de cette définition et de ces dimensions générales devrait faciliter la comparaison des cultures organisationnelles et l'accumulation de résultats.
Within the body of organisation culture literature, there is a conspicuous absence of large-scale studies reporting on comparative studies. In order to increase comparability of organisational cultures we propose a definition and a set of dimensions. Organisational culture is defined as shared perceptions of organisational work practices within organisational units. On the basis of empirical studies we discerned the following five dimensions: autonomy, external orientation, interdepartmental coordination, human resource orientation, and improvement orientation. Use of this definition and a set of such generic dimensions would facilitate the comparison of organisational cultures and the accumulation of research findings.     

The (Dis)Pleasures of Creativity: Spontaneous Eye Blink Rate during Divergent and Convergent Thinking Depends on Individual Differences in Positive and Negative Affect

Previous research has demonstrated that individual differences in affect and motivation predict divergent and convergent thinking performance, two thinking processes involved in creative idea generation. Individual differences in affect and motivation also predict spontaneous eye blink rate (sEBR) during divergent and convergent thinking; and sEBR predicts divergent and convergent thinking performance. This study investigates experimentally whether the relationship between sEBR and divergent and convergent thinking depends on individual differences in affect and motivation. Eighty-two participants completed the Emotion/motivation-related Divergent and Convergent thinking styles Scale (EDICOS; G. Soroa et al., 2015), performed the alternative uses task (AUT; divergent thinking) or the remote associates task (RAT; convergent thinking), while their sEBR was captured with an eye-tracker. The results showed that individual differences in positive affect positively correlated with sEBR for the AUT, whereas individual differences in negative affect positively correlated with sEBR for the RAT. Furthermore, the interaction between individual differences in positive and negative affect and sEBR predicted divergent and convergent thinking performance. The contribution of our study is therefore that individual differences in positive and negative affect can both positively correlate with sEBR during divergent and convergent thinking; and that this predicts divergent and convergent thinking performance.     

Is I Guaranteed to Refer?

Abstract: One claim about I , regularly made and almost universally endorsed, is that uses of the term are logically guaranteed to refer successfully (if they refer at all). The claim is only rarely formulated perspicuously or argued for. Such obscurity helps disguise the fact that those who profess to advance the claim actually turn out to support not a logical guarantee at all but merely high security through fortunate coincidence. This is not surprising. For we have no good reason to accept the claim – granted, any use of I is apt to refer successfully; but that can be explained by pragmatic features of its use. And we have some reason to reject the claim – it is notoriously difficult to see how genuine reference and guaranteed success do not exclude each other when considered as properties of the logic of any term.     

Intercessory Prayer on Spiritual Distress,Spiritual Coping,Anxiety, Depression and Salivary Amylase in Breast Cancer Patients During Radiotherapy: Randomized Clinical Trial

The goal of this study was to assess the effect of intercessory prayer in the psychological, spiritual and biological scores of breast cancer patients who are undergoing radiotherapy. Double-blind RCT comprising a sample of 31 participants (15 in the Control Group and 16 in the Intervention Group). Data collection was performed in three time points (T₀, T₁ and T₂). Significant changes have been identified in the intra-group analysis, concerning the decrease in spiritual distress score; negative religious/spiritual coping prevailed, while the total religious/spiritual coping increased between the posttest T₂ to T₀. Intercessory prayer was effective in religious and spiritual scores.

     

Training Observers to Detect Deception Effects of Self-Monitoring and Rehearsal

It was predicted that trained observers would detect deception more accurately than untrained observers. More specifically, it was predicted that the highest deception detection accuracy would be found among trained observers judging the veracity of low self-monitors and unrehearsed liars, whereas the lowest detection accuracy would be found among untrained observers judging the veracity of high self-monitors and rehearsed deceivers. It also was hypothesized that the discrepancy between observers‘actual ability to detect deception and their certainty in the accuracy of their judgments would be smaller for trained observers than for untrained observers. Observers trained to detect deception used six behavioral cues based on research by deTurck and Miller (1985): (a) message duration, (b) response latency, (c) adaptors, (d) pauses, (e) nonfluencies, and (f) hand gestures. Results confirmed both hypotheses.     

A comparison of isolated and synthesized contingencies in functional analyses

Recently, researchers have compared the utility of isolated versus synthesized contingencies in functional analysis (FA) methodology (e.g., Fisher et al., 2016; Slaton et al., 2017). A limitation of these studies is that there were other differences across FA methodologies (e.g., design, contingency) that did not allow for isolation of the influence of isolated versus synthesized contingencies. Therefore, the current study compared outcomes of FAs that involved isolated versus synthesized contingencies for problem behavior of 5 children while controlling for these other differences across FAs (Experiment 1). Next, the current study compared the effects of interventions based on the functions identified in the isolated and synthesized contingencies for each participant (Experiment 2). Results indicated isolated contingency FAs produced differentiated responding for 1 or both functions for all 5 participants, and there were little to no differences between treatments informed by isolated and synthesized contingency FAs.