The child's memory for actional, locational, and serial scenes

Three-, four-, and six-year-old children (N = 180) were tested for recall of a toy missing from a previously seen display of four toys. Toys were displayed initially as a series (StoS), as a unit (UtoU), or moved from a series to a unit as S watched (StoU). There was a significant increase in memory for the missing toy with age. In addition, children viewing StoU displays remembered significantly more toys than did children viewing the other displays, independent of age. Twenty-five percent of the 6-year-olds rehearsed spontaneously while viewing the displays. Results indicated that the nature of a memory unit does not change with age, that memory improves with age, and that separate visual and verbal memories are operative in Ss in this age range.     

A New Logic of Technical Malfunction

Aim of the paper is to present a new logic of technical malfunction. The need for this logic is motivated by a simple-sounding philosophical question: Is a malfunctioning corkscrew, which fails to uncork bottles, nonetheless a corkscrew? Or in general terms, is a malfunctioning F, which fails to do what Fs do, nonetheless an F? We argue that ‘malfunctioning’ denotes the modifier Malfunctioning rather than a property, and that the answer depends on whether Malfunctioning is subsective or privative. If subsective, a malfunctioning F is an F; if privative, a malfunctioning F is not an F. An intensional logic is required to raise and answer the question, because modifiers operate directly on properties and not on sets or individuals. This new logic provides the formal tools to reason about technical malfunction by means of a logical analysis of the sentence “a is a malfunctioning F”.     

Affine representations in psychophysics and the near-miss to Weber’s law

A theoretical account for the near-miss to Weber’s law in the form of a power function, with a special emphasis on the interpretation of the exponent, was proposed by Falmagne [Falmagne, J.-C. (1985). Elements of psychophysical theory. New York: Oxford University Press] within the framework of a subtractive representation, P(x,y)=F(u(x)−g(y)). In this paper, we examine a more general affine representation, P(x,y)=F(u(x)h(y)+g(y)). We first obtain a uniqueness theorem for the affine representation. We then study the conditions that force an affine representation to degenerate to a subtractive one. Part of that study involves the case for which two different affine representations co-exist for the same data. We also show that the balance condition P(x,y)+P(y,x)=1 constrains an affine representation to be a special kind of subtractive representation, a Fechnerian one. We further show that Falmagne’s power law takes on a special form for a so-called weakly balanced system of probabilities, in which case the affine representation is Fechnerian. Finally, following Iverson [Iverson, G.J. (2006a). Analytical methods in the theory of psychophysical discrimination I: Inequalities, convexity and integration of just noticeable differences. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 271-282], we generalize the Fechner method to construct the sensory scales in a weakly balanced affine representation by integrating (derivatives of) just noticeable differences.     

Noticing and responding in a discrimination based on a distinguishing element

In learning a successive go/no-go discrimination between a positive display consisting of the elements A and B, and negative display consisting of A-alone, pigeons first trained to peck A shift to pecking the distinguishing B element. In order to learn whether or not the shift to B is facilitated by B's function as a signal of the reinforcer, apart from the direct reinforcement of B responses, six arrangements of the elements with respect to the food reinforcer were used. Discrete trials were terminated by a single peck or after 4 sec. The A and B elements were dots of different color. The most critical comparison was between two groups, both of which received no reinforcement for a response directed to B. In one case, B signaled the reinforcer: An A response was reinforced when B was present but not when A appeared alone. In the other, B signaled the absence of a reinforcer: An A response was nonreinforced when B was present, while the response to A-alone was reinforced. During training and in extinction many more reponses were made to B when it signaled the reinforcer than when it signaled its absence. It is concluded that in a discrimination between AB positive and A negative the shift from pecking A to pecking B is facilitated by B's role as a signal for the reinforcer even on trials in which the peck is not made to B. Results from certain other groups showed that, unless pecks shifted to B within the positive display, pecks to A continued on the negative, A-alone trials as well as on the positive AB trials.     

Lexicographic additive differences

Several authors have identified sets of axioms for a preference relation ? on a two-factor set A × X which imply that ? can be represented by specific types of numerical structures. Perhaps the two best-known of these are the additive representation, for which there are real valued functions f_A on A and f_X on X such that (a, x) ? (b, y) if and only if f_A(a) + f_X(x) > f_A(b) + f_X(y), and the lexicographic representation which, with A as the dominant factor, has (a, x) ? (b, y) if and only if f_A(a) > f_A(b) or {f_A(a) = f_A(b) and f_X(x) > f_X(y)}. Recently, Duncan Luce has combined the additive and lexicographic notions in a model for which A is the dominant factor if the difference between a and b is sufficiently large but which adheres to the additive representation when the difference between a and b lies within what might be referred to as a lexicographic threshold. The present paper specifies axioms for ? which lead to a numerical model which also has a lexicographic component but whose local tradeoff structure is governed by the additive-difference model instead of the additive model. Although the additive-difference model includes the additive model as a special case, the new lexicographic additive-difference model is not more general than Luce's model since the former has a “constant” lexicographic threshold whereas Luce's model has a “variable” lexicographic threshold. Realizations of the new model range from the completely lexicographic representation to the regular additive-difference model with no genuine lexicographic component. Axioms for the latter model are obtained from the general axioms with one slight modification.     

Additional-delay schedules: A continuum of temporal contingencies by varying food delay

Pigeons performed on discrete-trial, temporally defined schedules in which the food delay (D) was adjusted according to the latency of the key peck (X) and two schedule parameters (t and A). The schedule function was D = A(t − X), where D is the experienced delay between a response and a reinforcer. The schedule parameter t is the maximum value below which the present contingencies occur. A is the additional delay to reinforcement for each second the response latency is shorter than the t value. When A = 0 s, the schedule is a continuous reinforcement schedule with immediate reinforcement. When A = 1 s, the schedule is a conjunctive fixed-ratio 1 fixed-time t-s schedule. When A approaches infinity, the schedule becomes a differential reinforcement of long latency schedule. The latencies for subjects with t = 10 s and t = 30 s were observed with the present schedules having seven values for A between 0 s and 11 s. In addition, the latencies for subjects for which t = 30 s were observed at an A value of 31 s to 41 s. As the A value increased, the latencies approached the t value for subjects for which t = 10 s. The latencies for 30-s-t subjects did not approach t, even when the A value was 41 s. The latencies for 10-s-t subjects at 11-s A value were longer than those under yoked conditions having exactly the same delays/interreinforcement intervals. These results demonstrated a continuum of latency related to the schedule continuum (value of A) at a small t value.     

Nontransitive measurable utility

A new theory of preferences under risk is presented that does not use the transitivity and independence axioms of the von Neumann-Morgenstern linear utility theory. Utilities in the new theory are unique up to a similarity transformation (ratio scale measurement). They key to this generalization of the traditional linear theory lies in its representation of binary preferences by a bivariate rather than univariate real valued function. Linear theory obtains a linear function u on a set P of probability measures for which u(p) > u(q) if and only if p is preferred to q. The new theory obtains a skew-symmetric bilinear function φ on P × P for which φ(p, q) > 0 if and only if p is preferred to q. Continuity, dominance, and symmetry axioms are shown to be necessary and sufficient for the new representation.     

The circumplex: A slightly stronger than ordinal approach

For some proximity matrices, multidimensional scaling yields a roughly circular configuration of the stimuli. Being not symmetric, a row-conditional matrix is not fit for such an analysis. However, suppose its proximities are all different within rows. Calling {{x,y},{x,z}} a conjoint pair of unordered pairs of stimuli, let {x,y}→{x,z} mean that row x shows a stronger proximity for {x,y} than for {x,z}. We have a cyclic permutation π of the set of stimuli characterize a subset of the conjoint pairs. If the arcs {x,y}→{x,z} between the pairs thus characterized are in a specific sense monotone with π, the matrix determines π uniquely, and is, in that sense, a circumplex with π as underlying cycle. In the strongest of the 3 circumplexes thus obtained, → has circular paths. We give examples of analyses of, in particular, conditional proximities by these concepts, and implications for the analysis of presumably circumplical proximities. Circumplexes whose underlying permutation is multi-cyclic are touched.     

Some counterexamples in multidimensional scaling

Given a set X with elements x, y,… which has a partial order < on the pairs of the Cartesian product X², one may seek a distance function ? on such pairs (x, y) which satisfies ?(x₁, y₁) < ?(x₂, y₂) precisely when (x₁, y₁) < (x₂, y₂), and even demand a metric space (X, ?) with some such compatible ? which has an isometric imbedding into a finite-dimensional Euclidean space or a separable Hilbert space. We exhibit here systems (X, <) which cannot meet the latter demand. The space of real m-tuples (ξ₁,…,ξ_m) with either the “city-block” norm Σ_i ∥ξ_i∥ or the “dominance” norm max_i, ∥ξ_i∥ cannot possibly become a subset of any finite-dimensional Euclidean space. The set of real sequences (ξ₁, ξ₂,…) with finitely many nonzero elements and the supremum norm sup_i, ∥ξ_i∥ cannot even become a subset of any separable Hilbert space.     

Comparing the meanings of “if” and “all”

In this study, we compared the everyday meanings of conditionals (“if p then q”) and universally quantified statements (“all p are q”) when applied to sets of elements. The interpretation of conditionals was predicted to be directly related to the conditional probability, such that P(“if p then q”) = P(q|p). Quantified statements were assumed to have two interpretations. According to an instance-focused interpretation, quantified statements are equivalent to conditionals, such that P(“all p are q”) = P(q|p). According to a set-focused interpretation, “all p are q” is true if and only if every instance in set p is an instance of q, so that the statement would be accepted when P(q|p) = 1 and rejected when this probability was below 1. We predicted an instance-focused interpretation of “all” when the relation between p and q expressed a general law for an infinite set of elements. A set-focused interpretation of “all” was predicted when the relation between p and q expressed a coincidence among the elements of a finite set. Participants were given short context stories providing information about the frequency of co-occurrence of cases of p, q, not-p, and not-q in a population. They were then asked to estimate the probability that a statement (conditional or quantified) would be true for a random sample taken from that population. The probability estimates for conditionals were in accordance with an instance-focused interpretation, whereas the estimates for quantified statements showed features of a set-focused interpretation. The type of the relation between p and q had no effect on this outcome.     

Alternative measures of fit for the Schönemann-carroll matrix fitting algorithm

In connection with a least-squares solution for fitting one matrix,A, to another,B, under optimal choice of a rigid motion and a dilation, Schönemann and Carroll suggested two measures of fit: a raw measure,e, and a refined similarity measure,e _s , which is symmetric. Both measures share the weakness of depending upon the norm of the target matrix,B,e.g.,e(A,kB) ≠e(A,B) fork ≠ 1. Therefore, both measures are useless for answering questions of the type: “DoesA fitB better thanA fitsC?”. In this note two new measures of fit are suggested which do not depend upon the norms ofA andB, which are (0, 1)-bounded, and which, therefore, provide meaningful answers for comparative analyses.     

The parameters in the near-miss-to-Weber's law

Many empirical data support the hypothesis that the sensitivity function grows as a power function of the stimulus intensity. This is usually referred to as the near-miss-to-Weber's law. The aim of the paper is to examine the near-miss-to-Weber's law in the context of psychometric models of discrimination. We study two types of psychometric functions, characterized by the representations P_a(x)=F(ρ(a)x^γ(a)) (type A), and P_a(x)=F(γ(a)+ρ(a)x) (type B). A central result shows that both types of psychometric functions are compatible with the near-miss-to-Weber's law. If a representation of type B exists, then the exponent in the near-miss is necessarily a constant function, that is, does not depend on the criterion value used to define “just noticeably different”. If, on the other hand, a representation of type A exists, then the exponent in the near-miss-to-Weber's law can vary with the criterion value. In that case, the parameters in the near-miss co-vary systematically.     

Analyzing proximity matrices: The assessment of internal variation in combinatorial structure

A data analysis strategy is discussed for evaluating the degree to which a subset D of a larger object set S satisfies a particular algebraic property. Based on a set measure f(D) and a proximity function on S × S, two separate evaluation tasks, referred to as confirmatory and exploratory, are considered. In a confirmatory task the subset D is identified a priori and f(D) is compared against the distribution of f(·) over all subsets containing the same number of objects. The exploratory task, on the other hand, treats f(·) as an objective function to be optimized over all subsets of a given size. Examples of these two notions include the assessment of symmetry, cluster compactness, and the extent to which D satisfies the error-free conditions for a hierarchical model or a unidimensional scale.     

On the extension of additive utilities to infinite sets

Independence condition C is known as necessary and sufficient for the existence of an additive utility on a finite subset X of a Cartesian product. A stronger necessary condition, H, interpreted as both an independence and Archimedean condition, is derived. It is shown to be sufficient when X is countable by constructing an additive utility as the limit of a sequence of additive utilities on finite subsets of X. When X is not countable, but is a Cartesian product, another necessary condition, the existence of A, a countable perfectly (order-) dense subset of X, is added to H; an additive utility is constructed by extension to X of an additive utility on a countable set linked to A. An application to a no-solvability case is given.     

Strategies used by children when solving simple subtractions

Ten children, 9–11 years old, solved all subtraction problems in the form of M?N=…, where 0 ? M ? 13, 0 ? N ? 13 and M ? N. The solution times were analysed and used for the formulation of a process model for subtraction. The model involves memory processes on two different levels, called reproductive and reconstructive respectively. When M=N, N=1, and M=2N the answers were quickly retrieved in reproductive memory processes. The reconstructive processes were found to be analogous to one of two counting procedures, viz. counting up and counting down. In general, the counting process starts either on N (when M < 2N) and counts up to reach the answer, or on M (when M > 2N) and counts down to reach the answer. This may reflect an effort to minimize the number of steps to be counted. However, when M > 10 and N < 10 a problem is always solved in a decrementing counting process. When M=10 many subtractions are solved in a reproductive memory process and the number 10 is also important as a point of reference for solving subtractions when M > 10 and N < 10.     

Interdependent preferences on finite sets

The degree of interdependence of a preference relation ? on a finite subset X of a product set X₁ × X₂ × … × X_n is defined in terms of the highest order of preference interaction among the X_i that must be taken into account in a real-valued, interdependent additive representation for ?. The degree is zero when indifference holds throughout X, and zero or one in the additive conjoint measurement case. A degree of n signifies complete preference interdependence among the X_i.     

Blockage Contraction

Blockage contraction is an operation of belief contraction that acts directly on the outcome set, i.e. the set of logically closed subsets of the original belief set K that are potential contraction outcomes. Blocking is represented by a binary relation on the outcome set. If a potential outcome X blocks another potential outcome Y, and X does not imply the sentence p to be contracted, then Y?≠?K ÷ p. The contraction outcome K ÷ p is equal to the (unique) inclusion-maximal unblocked element of the outcome set that does not imply p. Conditions on the blocking relation are specified that ensure the existence of such a unique inclusion-maximal set for all sentences p. Blockage contraction is axiomatically characterized and its relations to AGM-style operations are investigated. In a finite-based framework, every transitively relational partial meet contraction is also a blockage contraction.     

Typical delay determines waiting time on periodic-food schedules: Static and dynamic tests

Pigeons and other animals soon learn to wait (pause) after food delivery on periodic-food schedules before resuming the food-rewarded response. Under most conditions the steady-state duration of the average waiting time, t, is a linear function of the typical interfood interval. We describe three experiments designed to explore the limits of this process. In all experiments, t was associated with one key color and the subsequent food delay, T, with another. In the first experiment, we compared the relation between t (waiting time) and T (food delay) under two conditions: when T was held constant, and when T was an inverse function of t. The pigeons could maximize the rate of food delivery under the first condition by setting t to a consistently short value; optimal behavior under the second condition required a linear relation with unit slope between t and T. Despite this difference in optimal policy, the pigeons in both cases showed the same linear relation, with slope less than one, between t and T. This result was confirmed in a second parametric experiment that added a third condition, in which T + t was held constant. Linear waiting appears to be an obligatory rule for pigeons. In a third experiment we arranged for a multiplicative relation between t and T (positive feedback), and produced either very short or very long waiting times as predicted by a quasi-dynamic model in which waiting time is strongly determined by the just-preceding food delay.     

A generalization of comparative probability on finite sets

Let ? be a binary relation on a finite algebra $\text{A}$ of events A, B,…, where A ? B is interpreted as “A is more probable than B.” Conventional subjective probability is concerned with the existence of a probability measure P on $\text{A}$ that agrees with ? in the sense that A ? B ? P(A) > P(B). Because evidence suggests that some people's comparative probability judgments do not admit an agreeing probability measure, this paper explores a more flexible scheme for representing ? numerically. The new representation has A ? B ? p(A, B) > 0, where p is a monotonic and normalized skew-symmetric function on $\text{A}$ × $\text{A}$ that replaces P's additivity by a conditional additivity property. Conditional additivity says that $\text{p(A ? B, C) + p(?, C) = p(A, C) + p(B, C)}$ whenever A and B are disjoint. The paper examines consequences of this representation, presents examples of ? that it accommodates but which violate the conventional representation, formulates axioms for ? on $\text{A}$ that are necessary and sufficient for the representation, and discusses specializations in which p in separable in its arguments.     

Illegitimate concept equating in the partial fusion of construct validation theory and latent variable modeling

There has come to exist a partial fusion of construct validation theory and latent variable modeling at the center of which is located a practice of equating concepts such as construct, factor, latent variable, concept, unobservable, unmeasurable, underlying, hypothetical variable, theoretical term, theoretical variable, intervening variable, cause, abstractive property, functional unity, and measured property. In the current paper we: a) provide a structural explanation of this concept equating; b) provide arguments to the effect that it is illegitimate; c) suggest that the singular reason for the presence of construct in the literature of the social and behavioral sciences is to mark an allowance taken by the social and behavioral scientist to obliterate the concept/referent distinction that is foundational of sound science.