NEED FOR EXPLANATIONS IN GRAPHIC ORGANIZER RESEARCH

ABSTRACT

Research relating to graphic organizers was reviewed. The findings suggest that currently there is no systematic approach to analyzing graphic organizer research resulting in a lack of explanations for why graphic organizers work or do not work. The primary difficulty to provide explanations was found to be due to the lack of consistent operational criteria in studies using graphic organizers. Further, instructional implications are tenuous at best due to the lack of explanations of how graphic organizers work or do not work. One method of analysis would be to examine previous graphic organizer studies using a relational grammar. This would allow for identifying the structure and content of text used in graphic organizer studies, the graphic organizer itself, and the measurement or evaluation instrument. This analysis would allow for a comparison of the structure and content of the different organizer studies and allow for an explanation of the cognitive processes that readers evoke in developing mental representations of ideas contained in text.     

AN EMPIRICAL METHOD FOR DETERMINING AN APPROPRIATE INTERVAL LENGTH FOR RECORDING BEHAVIOR

The study sought to examine the effects of varying interval length on the representation of data obtained using modified frequency time sampling. A 7-category scale was used to observe reliably the behavior of eight psychiatric inpatients. Using electronic real time recording equipment, it was possible to computer analyze the obtained data at varying interval lengths, the shortest interval being 1.0 seconds. It was found that increasing the interval length had little effect on the percentage of total duration recorded within each behavioral category, suggesting that this is a relatively stable measure of behavior. Percentage total events for each category was less stable with increasing interval lengths. The number of recorded events within each category tended to decrease, while their average durations tended to increase, as a function of increasing the interval length. The data suggest that the current practice of determining interval length in an arbitrary fashion, or on the basis of convention, should be abandoned. Rather, such a decision should be empirically determined for each particular observation scale and subject group. One method by which this might be achieved is presented.     

AN ARGUMENT FOR THE MANY

If one believes vagueness to be an exclusively representational phenomenon, one faces the problem of the many: in the vicinity of Kilimanjaro, there are many 'mountain-candidates', all, apparently, with more or less equal claim to be mountains. David Lewis has defended a radical claim: that all these billions of mountain-candidates are mountains. I argue that the supervaluationist about vagueness should adopt Lewis's proposal, on pain of losing their best explanation of the seductiveness of the sorites paradox.     

AN ARCHIMEDEAN POINT FOR PHILOSOPHY

Abstract: According to an orthodox account of meaning and translation, meaning is a property of expressions of a language, and translation is a matching of synonymous expressions across languages. This linguistic account of translation gives rise to well‐known skeptical conclusions about translation, objectivity, meaning, and truth, but it does not conform to our best translational practices. In contrast, I argue for a textual account of meaning based on the concept of a text‐type that does conform to our best translational practices. With their semantic function in view, text‐types are Archimedean points for their respective disciplines. The text‐type of philosophy is no exception. Culture‐transcendent conceptual analysis can proceed on firm footing without having to deny the reality of radical cultural and linguistic difference by treating components of text‐types as the concepts to be analyzed. Analyses of central philosophical concepts are provided as a means of adjudicating philosophical controversy.     

AN INTERDISCIPLINARY FRAMEWORK FOR ISLAMIC COGNITIVE THEORIES

The Islamic psychology (IP) community in Europe has recently witnessed a heated debate about the credentials required to participate in the theoretical substantiation of IP and Islamically integrated psychotherapy and counseling. This debate has provided convenient circumstances for Muslim psychologists and Islamic scholars alike to rethink their roles within the flourishing movement. Specifically, the discussions hint toward the importance of adopting a collaborative research methodology for IP, in particular for basic research. The methodology of choice will need to define the necessary qualifications and responsibilities of scholars and psychologists in a collaborative research process (personal collaboration) and evince its capability to appropriately marry knowledge and data, diverging research methods, and perspectives, concepts, and theories from Islamic studies and contemporary psychology (content‐related collaboration). Here, we devise and offer a case illustration of an Islamic Psychology Basic Research Framework (coined the SALAAM Framework). This framework uses the Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies (IIS) Model of Interdisciplinary Research, developed by the IIS at the University of Amsterdam. Our first aim is to appropriate the IIS model for the IP literature by applying the model's research process phases and technique for the integration of disparate bodies of knowledge—that is, the identification of common ground—to methodological approaches in the contemporary IP literature. Our second aim is to exemplify the devised SALAAM Framework using the relatively unexplored area of Islamic cognitive theories (ICTs), which remain underdeveloped in contemporary psychological literature, primarily because of a lack of commensurability with the nomenclature of contemporary psychology. We thus provide a primer on the potential scope of ICTs. Toward the end of this article, we discuss the potential of the project of interdisciplinary construction of Islamic psychological theory, and the ability of the SALAAM Framework to establish a research program in IP that centers on cognition. We finally offer our reflections on the distinctiveness of Islamic psychologies in comparison to mainstream and Christian psychology.     

EFFECTS OF AND PREFERENCE FOR PAY FOR PERFORMANCE: AN ANALOGUE ANALYSIS

We examined the effects of 2 payment systems on the rate of check processing and time spent on task by participants in a simulated work setting. Three participants experienced individual pay‐for‐performance (PFP) without base pay and pay‐for‐time (PFT) conditions. In the last phase, we asked participants to choose which system they preferred. For all participants, the PFP condition produced higher rates of check processing and more time spent on task than did the PFT condition, but choice of payment system varied both within and across participants.     

INTEGRITY TESTING FOR PERSONNEL SELECTION: AN UPDATE

Sackett and M. M. Harris (1984) reviewed published and unpublished literature on the use of commercially available paper-and-pencil integrity tests for employee selection. This paper reviews recent developments in this area. Legal issues related to the use of the polygraph, and integrity tests are discussed. Empirical research on the reliability, criterion-related validity, construct validity, fakability, and adverse impact of integrity tests is reviewed. Major changes since the previous review include (1) the emergence of two distinct types of tests, labeled overt integrity tests and personality-oriented measures, (2) a broadening of the criteria used for test validation to include global performance, absence, turnover, and forms of counterproductivity other than theft, and (3) an increase in the use of external criteria (e.g., detected theft, turnover) rather than self-report criteria (e.g., admissions of theft) in validation research. Difficulties in interpreting research findings and practical constraints on the use of integrity tests are discussed.     

AN ARGUMENT FOR AGENT‐NEUTRAL VALUE

This paper argues (a) that to any agent‐relative value maker there will correspond an agent‐neutral value maker, and the latter explains the former; and (b) that to each agent‐relative constitutive ground there corresponds a neutral one, and the latter explains the former. It follows from (b), if not from (a), that agent‐neutral value exists if agent‐relative value does.