The cause of infant categorization?

We asked whether infants are sensitive to causal relations between objects and outcomes and whether this sensitivity supports categorization. Fourteen- and 18-month-old infants were familiarized with objects from a novel category. For some, the objects caused an electronic toy to activate. For others, the objects were present during activation of the toy, but did not cause the event. For the remaining infants, the events were never activated. Infants were asked to select another category member from a pair of previously unseen objects (one from the familiar, and one from a novel, category). Infants were more likely to select the category match in the causal than the non-causal and no outcome conditions, suggesting that they capitalize on causal information in forming object categories.     

The effect of question order on evaluations of test performance: Can the bias dissolve?

Question difficulty order has been shown to affect students’ global postdictions of test performance. We attempted to eliminate the bias by letting participants experience the question order manipulation multiple times. In all three experiments, participants answered general knowledge questions and self-evaluated their performance. In Experiment 1, participants studied questions and answers in easy–hard or hard–easy question order prior to taking a test in the same order. In Experiment 2, participants took the same test twice in the opposite question order (easy–hard then hard–easy, or hard–easy then easy–hard). In Experiment 3, participants took two different tests in the opposite question order (easy–hard then hard–easy, or hard–easy then easy–hard). In all three experiments, we were unable to eliminate the bias, which suggests that repeated exposure is insufficient to overcome a strong initial anchor.     

The root cause of the attentional blink: First-target processing or disruption of input control?

Identification of the second of two targets (T2) is impaired when presented shortly after the first (T1). T1-based theories ascribe this attentional blink (AB) to a T1-initiated period of inattention. Distractor-based theories ascribe it to a disruption of input control caused by post-T1 distractors. The finding that an AB occurs without intertarget distractors (Nieuwenstein, Potter, & Theeuwes, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 35:159-169, 2009) seemingly disconfirms distractor-based theories. The present experiments addressed different ways in which distractor-based theories might account for that finding. Intertarget events were varied in four experiments. Experiment 1 replicated Nieuwenstein, Potter, and Theeuwes??s findings. The next two experiments tested two ways (lack of visual stimulation, violation of expectation) in which the blank intertarget interval might cause an AB. Experiment 4 explored whether backward-masking of T1 can account entirely for the larger AB obtained with intervening distractors or whether distractors also disrupt input control. The results disconfirm predictions from distractor-based theories and support the claim of T1-based theories that T1 processing alone is sufficient for the AB. Simulations based on the eSTST (Wyble, Bowman, & Nieuwenstein, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 35:787-807, 2009) and the B&B models (Olivers & Meeter, Psychological Research, 115, 836-863 2008) were compared. Predictions were more accurate from the T1-based theory (eSTST) than from the distractor-based theory (B&B).     

The effect of question order on evaluations of test performance: how does the bias evolve?

Weinstein and Roediger (Memory & Cognition 38:366-376, 2010) found that manipulating the order of questions on a general knowledge quiz resulted in differing evaluations of performance at the end of the quiz: Irrespective of their actual performance, participants were consistently more optimistic about their performance when questions were given in an easy-to-hard order. In the present experiment, the participants were stopped 10 times throughout a 100-item test and asked to evaluate their performance on the last 10 questions they had answered, as well as rating their impressions of the test so far and predicting their final performance. Arranging the questions from the easiest to the hardest produced more optimistic performance evaluations on each block than did an analogous hard-easy question order, even though performance on the two versions did not differ significantly as a function of question order. Furthermore, the ratings of item difficulty on each block of 10 questions were asymmetrical in the two conditions, with a higher sensitivity to increasing as compared to decreasing question difficulty. On the other hand, the item-by-item ratings and predictions remained unaffected by question order. Our findings are best explained by an anchoring interpretation, which suggests that students fail to adjust their evaluations of performance as the difficulty of the questions changes across the test.     

The acquisition of the label “stuttering” by primary level schoolchildren

Two groups of primary level schoolchildren were asked to listen to recordings of a familiar story. One recording was of fluent speech and the second of stuttered speech. Group I, composed of 30 children in the first and second grades, was able to differentiate between stuttered and fluent speech, but did not label disfluent behavior as “stuttering.” Group II, composed of 30 children in the third and fourth grades, not only differentiated the samples, but showed a tendency to label the disfluent behavior “stuttering.” Both groups indicated a preference for the fluent sample.     

Where’s the difficulty in standardized reading tests: The passage or the question?

The purpose of this investigation was to examine the extent to which item and text characteristics predict item difficulty on the comprehension portion of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests for the 7th–9th and 10th–12th grade levels. Detailed item-based analyses were performed on 192 comprehension questions on the basis of the cognitive processing model framework proposed by Embretson and colleagues (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987). Item difficulty was analyzed in terms of various passage features (e.g., word frequency and number of propositions) and individual-question characteristics (e.g., abstractness and degree of inferential processing), using hierarchical linear modeling. The results indicated that the difficulty of the items in the test for the 7th–9th grade level is primarily influenced by text features—in particular, vocabulary difficulty—whereas the difficulty of the items in the test for the 10th–12th grade level is less systematically influenced by text features.     

Verbal probabilities: a question of frame?

Verbal expressions of probability and uncertainty are of two kinds: positive (‘probable’, ‘possible’) and negative (‘not certain’, ‘doubtful’). Choice of term has implications for predictions and decisions. The present studies show that positive phrases are rated to be more optimistic (when the target outcome is positive), and more correct, when the target outcome actually occurs, even in cases where positive and negative phrases are perceived to convey the same probabilities (Experiments 1 and 2). Selection of phrase can be determined by linguistic frame. Positive quantifiers (‘some’, ‘several’) support positive probability phrases, whereas negative quantifiers (‘not all’) suggest negative phrases (Experiment 3). Positive frames induced by numeric frequencies (e.g. the number of students to be admitted) imply positive probability phrases, whereas negative frames (e.g. the number of students to be rejected) call for negative probability phrases (Experiment 4). It is concluded that choice of verbal phrase is based not only on level of probability, but also on situational and linguistic cues. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The problem of religious evil: Does belief in god cause evil?

Daniel Kodaj has recently developed a pro-atheistic argument that he calls “the problem of religious evil.” This first premise of this argument is “belief in God causes evil.” Although this idea that belief in God causes evil is widely accepted, certainly in the secular West, it is sufficiently problematic as to be unsuitable as a basis for an argument for atheism, as Kodaj seeks to use it. In this paper I shall highlight the problems inherent in it in three ways: by considering whether it is reasonable to say that “belief in God” causes evil; whether it is reasonable to say that belief in God “causes” evil; and whether it is reasonable to say that belief in God causes “evil.” In each case I will argue that it is problematic to make such claims, and accordingly I will conclude that the premise “belief in God causes evil” is unacceptable as it stands, and consequently is unable to ground Kodaj’s pro-atheistic argument.     

Respiratory stuttering?: A case history

This report is a case history by the first author of his life-long speech disorder. The case involves sudden onset respiratory blocking without a prior history of disfluency. The disorder appears to be familial and has its onset and most frequent appearance under social stress. Attempts at treatment by psychoanalysis and psychotherapy were of no help. In commenting on the case, the second author suggests that the respiratory blocking is an example of tension and fixation characteristic of all secondary stuttering, which may be essentially independent from the primary stuttering that often but not always is a precursor to secondary stuttering. Flexible, multidimensional treatment based on the stimulus for tension and fixation is discussed.     

On the question of self-disclosure by the analyst: error or advance in technique?

The question of self-disclosure by the analyst and its uses in treatment is an issue widely debated today. In this paper, the author reviews this controversial technique from historical and contemporary points of view, delineates several forms of self-disclosure, and, by means of several clinical examples, discusses the effects on the patient and the analytic process of utilizing one or another kind of self-disclosure in these particular situations.     

The use of impression management tactics in structured interviews: a function of question type?

This study investigated impression management tactic use during structured interviews containing both experience-based and situational questions. Specifically, the authors examined whether applicants' use of impression management tactics depended on question type. Results from 119 structured interviews indicated that almost all of the applicants used some form of impression management. Significantly more assertive than defensive impression management tactics were used, and among assertive tactics, applicants tended to use self-promotion rather than ingratiation. However, different question types prompted the use of different impression management tactics. Ingratiation tactics were used significantly more when applicants answered situational questions, whereas self-promotion tactics were used significantly more when applicants answered experience-based questions. Furthermore, the use of self-promotion and ingratiation tactics was positively related to interviewer evaluations.     

The IQ paradox: resolved? Still an open question

A generalized Dickens-Flynn (2001) model is presented and various simulations undertaken with it to give readers a better sense of the properties of such models. In particular, the inclusion of moderate degrees of persistence of intelligence and intelligence-relevant environment did not have much impact on the overall behavior of the models, although more extreme degrees of persistence did. Even moderate degrees, however, affected the internal relationships in the models. The importance of specifying the time scale and of addressing developmental aspects of the models is emphasized. It is noted that the translation of individual changes to population changes is not a simple matter in resolving the "IQ paradox" of large population gains over time in intelligence test scores.     

The client: Therapist's partner or therapist's opponent? thoughts on the question of power and cooperation in therapy

The difference in process and outcome of two therapies conducted by the author with families having a psychotic adolescent is considered. Attention is paid to the fact that in one case the client was regarded theoretically as an opponent and in the other as a partner. It is concluded that the contention thatthe therapist must decide whether to be influential or cooperative arises from a logical confusion by failing to recognize that therapy cannot be anything other than cooperation.Originally published as part of a special issue on the power metaphor guestedited by Klaus G. Deissler inZeitschrift fur systemische Therapie (1986),4, 253–257. Translated by S. Awodey.     

The Japanese version of the overall assessment of the speaker’s experience of stuttering for adults (OASES-A-J): Translation and psychometric evaluation

PurposeThis study evaluates the psychometric performance of the Japanese version of the Overall Assessment of the Speaker’s Experience of Stuttering for Adults (OASES-A), a comprehensive assessment tool of individuals who stutter.MethodsThe OASES-A-J was administered to 200 adults who stutter in Japan. All respondents also evaluated their own speech (SA scale), satisfaction of their own speech (SS scale) and the Japanese translation version of the Modified Erickson Communication Attitude scale (S-24). The test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the OASES-A-J were assessed. To examine the concurrent validity of the questionnaire, Pearson correlation was conducted between the OASES-A-J Impact score and the S-24 scale, SA scale and SS scale. In addition, Pearson correlation among the impact scores of each section and total were calculated to examine the construct validity.ResultsThe OASES-A-J showed a good test-retest reliability (r = 0.81–0.95) and high internal consistency (α > 0.80). Concurrent validity was moderate to high (0.55–0.75). Construct validity was confirmed by the relation between internal consistency in each section and correlation among sections’ impact scores. Japanese adults showed higher negative impact for ‘General Information’, ‘Reactions to Stuttering’ and ‘Quality of Life’ sections.ConclusionThese results suggest that the OASES-A-J is a reliable and valid instrument to measure the impact of stuttering on Japanese adults who stutter. The OASES-A-J could be used as a clinical tool in Japanese stuttering field.     

Perceiving unfairness in the family: cause or consequence of marital distress?

This research tests a model suggesting that marital distress leads individuals to scrutinize what is given and received in the relationship. This scrutiny elicits perceptions of unfairness that maintain or exacerbate marital distress. In a 3-panel longitudinal study tracking married couples across the transition to parenthood, both wives' and husbands' reports of marital conflict and wives' marital dissatisfaction at Time 1 positively predicted perceived unfairness of the allocation of household tasks at Time 2, controlling for earlier perceptions of unfairness. In addition, there was evidence of perceived unfairness of division of labor at Time 2 predicting marital conflict and marital dissatisfaction for wives at Time 3, controlling for earlier conflict and dissatisfaction. This model of relationship distress and perceptions of unfairness is contrasted with prior interpretations of links between perceived injustice and distress in relationships.