Nomic Universals and Particular Causal Relations: Which are Basic and Which are Derived?

Armstrong holds that a law of nature is a certain sort of structural universal which, in turn, fixes causal relations between particular states of affairs. His claim that these nomic structural universals explain causal relations commits him to saying that such universals are irreducible, not supervenient upon the particular causal relations they fix. However, Armstrong also wants to avoid Plato’s view that a universal can exist without being instantiated, a view which he regards as incompatible with naturalism. This construal of naturalism forces Armstrong to say that universals are abstractions from a certain class of particulars; they are abstractions from first-order states of affairs, to be more precise. It is here argued that these two tendencies in Armstrong cannot be reconciled: To say that universals are abstractions from first-order states of affairs is not compatible with saying that universals fix causal relations between particulars. Causal relations are themselves states of affairs of a sort, and Armstrong’s claim that a law is a kind of structural universal is best understood as the view that any given law logically supervenes on its corresponding causal relations. The result is an inconsistency, Armstrong having to say that laws do not supervene on particular causal relations while also being committed to the view that they do so supervene. The inconsistency is perhaps best resolved by denying that universals are abstractions from states of affairs.

Commentary: What are behavior systems and what use are they?

The contributions of this symposium on behavior systems are summarized and evaluated by considering two questions: (1) What is a behavior system? (2) What use to the learning theorist are behavior systems? Two examples of behavior systems from the classical ethological literature are compared with the behavior systems discussed in the symposium, and some similarities and differences in the type of analyses used are discussed. Analysis of the pre-organized species-typical behavior systems relevant to the unconditioned stimuli or reinforcers in learning experiments can contribute performance rules and better understanding of the conditions and contents of learning. The organization of behavior systems can also provide important clues to the neural circuitry underlying behavior, and a behavior systems approach can raise novel questions concerning learning and behavioral development. Possible future directions for the behavior systems approach are briefly discussed.     

Scientific societies and research integrity: What are they doing and how well are they doing it?

Scientific societies can play an important role in promoting ethical research practices among their members, and over the past two decades several studies have addressed how societies perform this role. This survey continues this research by examining current efforts by scientific societies to promote research integrity among their members. The data indicate that although many of the societies are working to promote research integrity through ethics codes and activities, they lack rigorous assessment methods to determine the effectiveness of their efforts. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the AAAS-Office of Research Integrity (ORI) meeting in Washington DC on the theme: “The Role and Activities of Scientific Societies in Promoting Research Integrity” held on April 10–11, 2000.     

How are cognitive and physical difficulty compared?

Tasks that require less physical effort are generally preferred over more physically demanding alternatives. Similarly, tasks that require less mental effort are generally preferred over more mentally demanding alternatives. But what happens when one must choose between tasks that entail different kinds of effort, one mainly physical (e.g., carrying buckets) and the other mainly mental (e.g., counting)? We asked participants to choose between a bucket-carrying task and a counting task. Our participants were less likely to choose the bucket task when it required a long reach rather than a short reach, and our participants were also less likely to choose the bucket task the smaller the final count value. We tested the hypothesis that subjective task durations provided a common currency for comparing the difficulties of the two kinds of tasks. We found that this hypothesis provided a better account of the task choice data than did an account that relied on objective task durations. Our study opens the door to a new problem in the study of attention, perception, and psychophysics—judging the difficulty of different kinds of tasks. The approach we took to this problem, which relies on two-alternative forced choice along with modeling the basis for the choice, may prove useful in future investigations.     

How lonely are gay and lesbian youth?

UCLA Loneliness Scale (8-item version) scores in a sample of 384 gay and lesbian adolescents support the hypothesis that such youths are especially vulnerable to loneliness.     

Workaholism and work engagement: how are they similar? How are they different? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Workaholism and work engagement can be depicted, respectively, as the pathological and the healthy form of heavy work investment. In spite of their different definitions and outcomes on individual and organizational life, workaholism and work engagement are not clearly and adequately distinguished by scholars and researchers as they appear to show some overlapping features. The aim of this investigation was to meta-analyze available studies, selected by systematic review, on the relations between subdimensions of workaholism and work engagement. Thirty-five studies were eligible for analysis. Associations emerged between Working Excessively and Absorption (g = .34), Working Compulsively and Absorption (g = .28), and Working Excessively and Dedication (g = .14). Moreover, the results were not influenced by publication bias and showed nationality to be a significant moderator. Overall, these findings suggest that further research is necessary to extend our knowledge of workaholism, work engagement, and the relationship between the two, in order to disentangle commonalities and differences between them.     

How central are judgment and agency to epistemology?

Ernest Sosa’s Judgment and Agency marks an important change from his earlier work in epistemology. While belief was at the center of his earlier approach to epistemological issues, a far more sophisticated mental state, judgment, plays the central role here. This paper examines the significance of this change in focus, and argues that there is reason to favor the earlier belief-centered approach over this new judgment-centered account.     

How similar are recognition memory and inductive reasoning?

Conventionally, memory and reasoning are seen as different types of cognitive activities driven by different processes. In two experiments, we challenged this view by examining the relationship between recognition memory and inductive reasoning involving multiple forms of similarity. A common study set (members of a conjunctive category) was followed by a test set containing old and new category members, as well as items that matched the study set on only one dimension. The study and test sets were presented under recognition or induction instructions. In Experiments 1 and 2, the inductive property being generalized was varied in order to direct attention to different dimensions of similarity. When there was no time pressure on decisions, patterns of positive responding were strongly affected by property type, indicating that different types of similarity were driving recognition and induction. By comparison, speeded judgments showed weaker property effects and could be explained by generalization based on overall similarity. An exemplar model, GEN-EX (GENeralization from EXamples), could account for both the induction and recognition data. These findings show that induction and recognition share core component processes, even when the tasks involve flexible forms of similarity.     

Structures and strategies: Where are we now?

Summary Psychological opinion tends to sway between a view that people are almost infinitely flexible and a view that there are definite and unchangeable fundamental mechanisms that always work in the same way and set limits of flexibility. A popular compromise has been to suppose that lower mechanisms are as determinate as typewriters, while higher ones are unanalysable, autonomous, and perhaps even beyond scientific enquiry. The point of view in this paper favours a different compromise; very early and elementary operations are thought to be done in different ways, depending on the goals and experience of the person. There is, however, a good deal of constraint, which allows laws and principles to be laid down. Yet, there is also a degree of strategic flexibility in the operations actually performed that goes further than would be allowed by theorists of a different persuasion. The selective operations of attention are not due to unalterable mechanisms, nor does there seem to be convincing evidence of universal and invariant computation of all aspects of the input. What is computed, briefly, is the minimum necessary to perform the task before the person.     

Religion and medicine: How are they related?

This paper provides a comprehensive and dynamic profile of religion-medicine interrelationships. This profile is drawn from the respective characteristics of religion and medicine, as well as from historic and contemporary literature regarding their interconnections. Six symbiotic functions are identified and discussed with respect to their bearing on clinical practice, medical education, and research.The authors thank Drs. Chester R. Burns, Thomas H. Murray, and Ronald A. Carson for their comments on drafts of this paper.     

Number and language: how are they related?

Does the ability to develop numerical concepts depend on our ability to use language? We consider the role of the vocabulary of counting words in developing numerical concepts. We challenge the 'bootstrapping' theory which claims that children move from using something like an object-file - an attentional process for responding to small numerosities - to a truly arithmetic one as a result of their learning the counting words. We also question the interpretation of recent findings from Amazonian cultures that have very restricted number vocabularies. Our review of data and theory, along with neuroscientific evidence, imply that numerical concepts have an ontogenetic origin and a neural basis that are independent of language.     

When are grandiose and vulnerable narcissists least helpful?

Grandiosity and vulnerability are distinct dimensions of narcissism, but little research has examined their differences regarding prosocial behavior. This investigation is the first to test the hypotheses that grandiose narcissism predicts withholding help under high social pressure, whereas vulnerable narcissism predicts withholding help under low social pressure. Undergraduate participants (N = 220, M_age = 19.5, 142 women) were partnered with a confederate for the supposed purpose of a mock counseling session. The confederate ruined the session by demonstrating inconsiderate behavior, after which the participant encountered two opportunities to help the confederate: one presented under high social pressure to help, the other presented under low social pressure to help. Measures also assessed participants’ prosocial emotions, including empathy for and forgiveness of the confederate. Consistent with hypotheses, grandiose narcissism predicted less helping under high social pressure, whereas vulnerable narcissism predicted less helping under low social pressure, the latter relationship being mediated by reduced forgiveness. Vulnerable narcissism was also associated with less empathy and forgiveness. Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism differentially predicted helping behavior depending on the amount of social pressure to help. These results conform to theoretical distinctions between grandiosity and vulnerability regarding social dominance and internalization.     

Authors’ response: what are emotions and how are they created in the brain?

In our response, we clarify important theoretical differences between basic emotion and psychological construction approaches. We evaluate the empirical status of the basic emotion approach, addressing whether it requires brain localization, whether localization can be observed with better analytic tools, and whether evidence for basic emotions exists in other types of measures. We then revisit the issue of whether the key hypotheses of psychological construction are supported by our meta-analytic findings. We close by elaborating on commentator suggestions for future research.