4-5年级学生的空间表征与几何能力的相关性研究

本研究是“学生空间能力和几何能力关系”研究的一部分,以小学4、5年级学生为被试(共117人),以空问表征能力测验和几何能力测验为测验工具,初步探讨了学生空间表征与几何能力的关系。对数据结果的分析表明:①就总成绩而言,五年级学生的空间表在成绩明显高于四年级学生的成绩,但并不是空间表征的所有方面都存在着显著的年级差异;②就空间测验的总成绩而言,无论是四、五年级分别考察还是总起来考察,空间成绩与几何成绩之间的相关显著,但就各个分项而言,并不是空间测验的各项都与几何测验成绩有显著相关;学生的几何成绩在一定程度上可通过回归方程:Y_i=0.5736X_i+0.7635加以预测。     

A review of the animate-inanimate distinction in infancy: Implications for models of social and cognitive knowing

The ability to distinguish people from things sheds light on an important theoretical question: how is the development of social cognition related to the development of physical cognition? According to Piaget (1954), cognition is unitary and the processes used in dealing with the physical world are the same as those employed in the social world. This statement should be questioned. Although people and objects share certain fundamental properties (size, shape, etc.), only people can communicate, act independently and have feelings and intentions. Thus, people seem much more complex to deal with than things. If all cognitive development derives from the growth of a unitary system, then knowledge about animate objects should lag behind that of inanimate objects. The present paper explores this idea by examining what infants know about the attributes that distinguish people from things. It is concluded that the onset of this distinction begins early in life. Even 2-month-old infants treat people and objects differently when confounding variables of the stimuli are controlled. Rather than lagging behind, the infants' understanding of people appears precocious. The infants' recognition of the crucial distinction between the two classes suggests that a conceptual system is beginning to be formed soon after birth. This conceptual system appears different for social and non-social objects and serves as a foundation from which infants might come to understand the distinctive properties of animate and inanimate objects.     

The choice of constraints in correspondence analysis

A discussion of alternative constraint systems has been lacking in the literature on correspondence analysis and related techniques. This paper reiterates earlier results that an explicit choice of constraints has to be made which can have important effects on the resulting scores. The paper also presents new results on dealing with missing data and probabilistic category assignment.I am most grateful to the following for their helpful comments. Arto Demirjian, Michael Greenacre, Michael Healy, Shizuhiko Nishisato, Roderick Mcdonald, and several anonymous referees.     

Forced classification: A simple application of a quantification method

This study formulates a property of a quantification method, the principle of equivalent partitioning (PEP). When the PEP is used together with Guttman's principle of internal consistency (PIC) in a simple way, the combination offers an interesting way of analyzing categorical data in terms of the variate(s) chosen by the investigator, a type of canonical analysis. The study discusses applications of the technique to multiple-choice, rank-order, and paired comparison data.This study was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant No. A7942). Comments on the earlier drafts from anonymous reviewers and the editor were much appreciated.     

SPIRITUAL INTELLIGENCE: PROCESSING DIFFERENT INFORMATION OR PROCESSING INFORMATION DIFFERENTLY?

This article introduces the concept of spiritual intelligence in terms of a natural human ability to take a different perspective on reality rather than an extraordinary ability to engage with a different/supernatural reality. From a cognitive perspective, spiritual intelligence entails a re-balancing of the two main modes of human cognition, with a prioritization of the holistic-intuitive mind over the conceptual one. From the psychological and phenomenological perspectives, it involves a different kind of engagement with information: slower, more participatory, less objectifying, and not focused entirely on problem solving. The article ends with a reflection on the theological implications of the proposed model and how such an account of spiritual intelligence as knowing differently might relate to theological anthropology and the theology of the spirit and the spiritual.     

Structuring argumentation in a social constructivist framework: A pedagogy with computer support

What we usually think of as higher order skills in argumentation can be profitably viewed as systematic structures for organizing and representing information. Standard terms like line of argument, synthesis, analysis and draft can be viewed as ways of constructing, storing, and accessing data in a social context — data structures for social communication. What makes argument difficult are the multiple structures that arguers have to construct and negotiate when reading and composing. In this paper, we describe the WARRANT project, a project designed to identify data structures of written argument and to design and implement computer tools to aid in the reading and design of argument.     

人类颜色视觉的计算理论

该文有机地结合了计算视觉理论和生态学视觉理论,指出颜色信息处理的根本任务是检测环境中的光不变量。在此基础上,作者提出了颜色视觉的计算理论以及计算理论本身的生物学标准。初级视觉计算是典型的不适定问题,动物的视觉系统则利用视环境中存在的条件将该不适定问题转化为定解问题。本文引入颜色视觉计算的免要条件,客观性约束,以及颜色认知的神经表象,证明了上述约束下颜色算法的存在性。本文给出了构造颜色知觉的基本假设。同时,该文还讨论了与上述问题密切相关的几个基本问题:神经表象的完备性,主观色觉的客观性,明度知觉和颜色知觉的统一,人类主观色觉的实现方式。     

On the processing of arguments

This paper is concerned with the processing of informal arguments, that is, arguments involving probable truth. A model of informal argument processing is presented that is based upon Hample's (1977) expansion of Toulmin's (1958) model of argument structure. The model postulates that a claim activates an attitude, the two components forming a complex that in turn activates reasons. Furthermore, the model holds occurrence of the reason, or possibly the claim and the reason, activates values. Three experiments are described that provide support for the model.This research was supported by the Mellon Foundation and by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement of the Department of Education via an award for the Center for the Study of Learning to the Learning Research and Development Center. The contents of the paper are not necessarily the position of any of these organizations.