Absolute identification is relative: a reply to Brown, Marley, and Lacouture (2007)

N. Stewart, G. D. A. Brown, and N. Chater presented a relative judgment model (RJM) of absolute identification, in which the current stimulus is judged relative to the preceding stimulus. S. Brown, A. A. J. Marley, and Y. Lacouture found that the RJM does not predict their finding of increased accuracy after large stimulus jumps, except at the expense of other effects. In fact, the RJM does predict both the core effects and increased accuracy after large jumps (although it underestimates this effect) when better constrained parameters are estimated from the trial-by-trial raw data rather than from summary plots. Further, a modified RJM, in which the stimulus from two trials ago is sometimes used as a referent, provides a better fit.     

Why g is not an adaptation: a comment on Kanazawa (2004)

In S. Kanazawa's evolutionary theory of general intelligence (g), g is presented as a species-typical information-processing mechanism. This conceptualization of g departs radically from the accepted conceptualization of g as a source of individual differences that is manifest in the positive manifold. Kanazawa's theory is thus problematic in the sense that it concerns a purely hypothetical, and empirically unsupported, conceptualization of g. The authors argue that an evolutionary account of g should address it as a source of individual differences--that is, in a manner that is consistent with the empirical support for g.     

Individual differences and the use of nonspecifying variables in learning to perceive distance and size: Comments on McConnell, Muchisky, and Bingham (1998)

McConnell, Muchisky, and Bingham (1998) showed that observers are able to judge the distance and size of falling, rolling, and swinging balls and that performance improves after practice with feedback. They concluded that observers use information that specifies the spatial scales of the different event types—namely, event duration in combination with event-specific constants. The improvement was interpreted as the calibration of the event-specific constants. We argue that their analyses should have considered the use of optical variables that do not specify the to-be-perceived metrics and individual differences in variable use. Furthermore, we propose convergence on the more useful variables as an alternative explanation for the observed improvement. The viability of these arguments is demonstrated with an experiment in which participants are trained with feedback to judge the distance and size of freely falling balls.     

Interpretational confounding is due to misspecification, not to type of indicator: comment on Howell, Breivik, and Wilcox (2007)

R. D. Howell, E. Breivik, and J. B. Wilcox (2007) have argued that causal (formative) indicators are inherently subject to interpretational confounding. That is, they have argued that using causal (formative) indicators leads the empirical meaning of a latent variable to be other than that assigned to it by a researcher. Their critique of causal (formative) indicators rests on several claims: (a) A latent variable exists apart from the model when there are effect (reflective) indicators but not when there are causal (formative) indicators, (b) causal (formative) indicators need not have the same consequences, (c) causal (formative) indicators are inherently subject to interpretational confounding, and (d) a researcher cannot detect interpretational confounding when using causal (formative) indicators. This article shows that each claim is false. Rather, interpretational confounding is more a problem of structural misspecification of a model combined with an underidentified model that leaves these misspecifications undetected. Interpretational confounding does not occur if the model is correctly specified whether a researcher has causal (formative) or effect (reflective) indicators. It is the validity of a model not the type of indicator that determines the potential for interpretational confounding.     

陈铎散曲点评(之十五、之十六、之十七)

(十五)外三章(其一):北中品·朝天子·卜(注一) 睁着眼莽诌(注二),闭着眼瞎诌,那一个知休咎(注三)?流年月令费钻求(注四),就里多虚谬.四课三传(注五),张八李九(注六),一桩桩不应口.百中经枕头(注七),卦盒儿在手,花打算胡将就(注八).     

Performance of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) on a quantity discrimination task is similar to that of African savanna elephants (Loxodonta africana)

Animal Cognition - Using an object-choice task, we measured the relative quantity discrimination ability of Asian elephants. Two zoo-housed elephants were given auditory cues of food being dropped...     

Refinement of the MMPI-2 F(p) scale is not necessary: a response to Gass and Luis

Gass and Luis (2001) reported that four MMPI-2 Lie scale items contained on the F(p) scale do not measure symptom exaggeration but measure defensiveness. They hold that elimination of the four Lie scale items improves the utility of the F(p) scale in the identification of exaggeration in VA samples. To directly address the assertion that removal of the L scale items from the F(p) scale enhances the predictive validity of F(p), data derived from a previously published study where 74 psychiatric inpatients were asked to retake the MMPI-2 and either feign psychopathology or respond in an honest manner were reanalyzed. The intact F(p) scale demonstrated a stronger correlation with group membership, increased incremental validity, and superior classification rates compared with the F(p) scale without the 4 Lie scale items. Consequently, the F(p) refinement recommended by Gass and Luis is unnecessary.     

Research on psychological testing supervision using the Holloway (1995) method: a critique of DeCato (2002)

DeCato (2002) conducted a brief quantitative study of the supervision process in psychological testing based on a method developed by Holloway in 1995. The study demonstrated the utility of the method but had many shortcomings limiting generalizability of outcomes. A brief critique of the DeCato research with suggestions to address the use of this method in researching child and adolescent testing supervision is undertaken.     

逻辑哲学研究述评(上)

在英文中 ,与逻辑哲学相关的表达一般有三个 :哲学逻辑 (philosophicallogic)、逻辑哲学 (philosophyoflogic)和逻辑的哲学 (logicalphilosophy)。从文献来看 ,使用较多的是前两个。关于这两个表达 ,人们的看法是不一样的。而且 ,即使是关于其中的某一个表达 ,看法也不一样。这些看法不仅表现出人们对逻辑哲学的不同理解 ,而且也反映出在以逻辑哲学为名的东西上存在的问题。一般认为 ,罗素最早使用了“哲学逻辑”这个概念。但是 ,这个词以及与它相近的词“逻辑哲学”的频繁出现却是在进入 2 0世纪 6 0年代以后。在过去几十年的时间里 ,不仅…     

Knowledge,safety, and Gettierized lottery cases: Why mere statistical evidence is not a (safe) source of knowledge

The lottery problem is the problem of explaining why mere reflection on the long odds that one will lose the lottery does not yield knowledge that one will lose. More generally, it is the problem of explaining why true beliefs merely formed on the basis of statistical evidence do not amount to knowledge. Some have thought that the lottery problem can be solved by appeal to a violation of the safety principle for knowledge, i.e., the principle that if S knows that p, not easily would S have believed that p without p being the case. Against the standard safety‐based solution, I argue that understanding safe belief as belief that directly covaries with the truth of what is believed in a suitably defined set of possible worlds forces safety theorists to make a series of theoretical choices that ultimately prevent a satisfactory solution to the problem. In this way, I analyze several safety principles that result from such choices—the paper thus gives valuable insights into the nature of safety—and explain why none solves the lottery problem, including their inability to explain away Gettierized lottery cases. On a more positive note, I show that there is a viable solution in terms of safety if we get rid of the unquestioned assumption that safe beliefs directly track the truth. The alternative is a conception of safe belief according to which what safe beliefs directly track is the appropriateness of the circumstances and, indirectly, the truth. The resulting safety principle, I argue, explains why mere statistical evidence is not a safe source of knowledge.     

Assessing the importance of letter pairs in reading-parafoveal processing is not the only view: reply to Inhoff, Radach, Eiter, and Skelly (2003)

D. Briihl and A. W. Inhoff (1995; see record 1995-20036-001) found that exterior letter pairs showed no privileged status in reading when letter pairs were presented as parafoveal primes. However, T. R. Jordan, S. M. Thomas, G. R. Patching, and K. C. Scott-Brown (2003; see record 2003-07955-013) used a paradigm that (a) allowed letter pairs to exert influence at any point in the reading process, (b) overcame problems with the stimulus manipulations used by Briihl and Inhoff (1995), and (c) revealed a privileged status for exterior letter pairs in reading. A. W. Inhoff, R. Radach, B. M. Eiter, and M. Skelly (2003; see record 2003-07955-014) made a number of claims about the Jordan, Thomas, et al. study, most of which focus on parafoveal processing. This article addresses these claims and points out that although studies that use parafoveal previews provide an important contribution, other techniques and paradigms are required to reveal the full role of letter pairs in reading.     

Psychometric validation of an Organisational Performance Questionnaire (OPQ) based on the Burke-Litwin model

This study reports the findings on the development and validation of an Organisational Performance Questionnaire (OPQ) based on the Burke-Litwin model. Respondents were 398 employees from various public and private sector organisations in South Africa, consisting of different genders (male = 60.8%, female = 39.2%), different functional groupings (mostly operations, finance, human relations = 37.25%) and mostly middle or senior level managers (62.4%). Data were analysed utilising exploratory factor analysis with promax rotation. Results indicated the OPQ to measure all twelve of the Burke-Litwin elements contained in their model: external environment, mission and strategy, leadership, culture, structure, management practices, systems, work group climate, skills/job match, individual needs and values, motivation, and organisational and individual performance. An OPQ based on the Burke-Litwin model appears valid for assessing organisational performance in the South African setting.     

Developing the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) as a Measure of Self-Forgiveness Related to Failing and Succeeding Behaviors

The Psychological Record - This study aimed to develop the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) as a measure of response biases related to emotional reactions and expected outcomes in...