Development and the epigenome: the ‘synapse’ of gene–environment interplay

This paper argues that there is a revolution afoot in the developmental science of gene–environment interplay. We summarize, for an audience of developmental researchers and clinicians, how epigenetic processes – chromatin structural modifications that regulate gene expression without changing DNA sequences – may offer a strong, parsimonious account for the convergence of genetic and contextual variation in the genesis of adaptive and maladaptive development. Epigenetic processes may play a plausible explanatory role in understanding: divergent trajectories and sexual dimorphisms in brain development; statistical interactions between genes and environments; the biological embedding of early psychosocial adversities; the linkages of such adversities to disorders of mental health; the striking individual variation in the strength of those linkages; the molecular origins of critical and sensitive periods; and the transgenerational inheritance of risk and protection. Taken together, these arguments converge in a claim that epigenetic processes constitute a promising and illuminating point of connection – a ‘synapse’ – between genes and environments.     

Understanding the foot‐in‐the‐door effect as a pseudo‐effect from the perspective of the Campbell paradigm

Compliance with a small request (a metaphorical foot‐in‐the‐door) promotes compliance with a subsequent big request. Whereas some explanations expect a drop in the behavioural costs of the big request, others suspect that the effect comes from boosting the underlying attitude. However, evidence for both explanations is equivocal and circumstantial, at best. Drawing on what Kaiser et al. (2010) call the Campbell paradigm, we present an integrative account: Compliance with any request demands a corresponding attitude to counterbalance the costs of the request. In our research, 229 participants were randomly assigned to either a foot‐in‐the‐door (i.e., initially asked to sign a pro‐environmental petition) or a control condition. Small‐request‐compliant participants were more likely than control participants to also comply with the big request and to continue filling out environmental‐issues‐related questionnaires. However, this foot‐in‐the‐door effect occurred without diminishing behavioural costs or increasing attitude levels. Accordingly, the greater likelihood of small‐request‐compliant participants to also comply with the big request can be parsimoniously explained by baseline variability in people's attitude levels that manifests in their compliance with the initial request. We conclude that several of the foot‐in‐the‐door effects reported in the literature carry the risk of representing mere pseudo‐effects.     

“Rethinking” the Preface of the Tractatus

This paper is principally a re‐evaluation of the meaning of Denken in the puzzling third paragraph of the Preface to Wittgenstein's Tractatus. It shows that there is a uniform misreading of this paragraph throughout the literature and suggests a corrected reading and some of its implications. The paper asserts that the influential “New Wittgenstein” reading of the Preface as containing Wittgenstein's all important “framing” thoughts on the Tractatus, is correct. However it also argues that the anti‐metaphysical reading the New view draws by way of its frame thesis is incorrect since it is still premised on the incorrect reading of the Preface's third paragraph. With the correct reading of the third paragraph, the paper shows the anti‐metaphysical reading of the Tractatus lacks substantive support.     

‘But Suppose Everyone Did the Same’1 — The Case of the Danish Utopian Micro‐Society of Christiania

abstract The paper considers what (if anything) can justify that a utopian community or a micro‐society makes an exception to the general rules of society for itself. The discussion evolves around the Danish case of Christiania. Three moral theories, to wit Kantian constructivism, rule‐consequentialism and act‐consequentialism, are applied to the case at hand. The aim is to test whether the exceptions in question are unjust or in other ways morally problematic. The two former theories appear to deny the justice of Christiania. The relevant exceptions are unacceptable according to those two moral perspectives. Act‐consequentialism, however, seems to endorse the case of Christiania, including the exceptions pertaining to it. While the latter theory is often thought to conflict with widely shared reflective moral convictions, in this case it might square with at least an important pragmatic layer of Danish public culture.     

An experimental examination of the “good judge”

Many personality traits have been proposed to predict a person’s ability to judge another. The predictive abilities found for these traits have been inconsistent. Funder and others (e.g., [Gilbert, 1989] and [Trope, 1986]) suggested that social knowledge, motivation to read others, and the ability to multitask are essential components of accurate judgment. In this study, we manipulated participants to be high or low in each of these characteristics and examined the impact of these manipulations on IPT-15 performance. As predicted, participants manipulated to be high in social knowledge, motivation to read others, and multitasking showed superior performance on the IPT-15 compared to participants in the corresponding low conditions. These results support Funder’s “good judge” construct as a predictor of judgmental accuracy.