How do people know?

To fully understand processes of knowing and knowledge acquisition, it is necessary to examine people's understanding of their own knowing. Individual and developmental differences in what it means to know something, and hence in the criteria for justifying knowledge claims, have potentially wide-ranging implications. In providing support for a claim, young children have difficulty differentiating explanation of why a claim makes sense and evidence that the claim is true. Epistemic understanding progresses developmentally, but substantial variation remains among adults, with few adults achieving understanding of the complementary strengths and weaknesses of evidence and explanation in argument. Epistemic understanding shapes intellectual values and hence the disposition (as opposed to competence) to exercise intellectual skills. Only its most advanced levels support a disposition to engage in the intellectual effort that reasoned argument entails. The sample case of juror reasoning illustrates how epistemic understanding underlies and shapes intellectual performance.     

How do people order stimuli?

People may find it easier to construct an order after first representing stimuli on a scale or categorizing them, particularly when the number of stimuli to be ordered is large or when some of them must be remembered. Five experiments tested this hypothesis. In two of these experiments (1 and 3), we asked participants to rank line lengths or to rank photographs by artistic value. The participants provided evidence of how they performed these tasks, and this evidence indicated that they often made use of some preliminary representation—either a metric or a categorization. Two further experiments (2 and 4) indicated that people rarely produced rankings when given a choice of assessment measures for either the length of lines or the artistic value of photographs. In Experiment 5, when the number of lines was larger or lines were only visible one at a time, participants were faster at estimating line lengths as a percentage of the card covered than at rank ordering the lengths. Overall, the results indicate that ordering stimuli is not an easy or natural process when the number of stimuli is large or when the stimuli are not all perceptible at once. An implication is that the psychological measures available to individuals are not likely to be purely ordinal when many of the elements being measured must be recalled.     

How well do elderly people cope with uncertainty in a learning task?

The relation between age, task complexity and learning performance in a Multiple Cue Probability Learning task was studied by systematically varying the level of uncertainty present in the task, keeping constant the direction of relationships. Four age groups were constituted: young adults (mean age = 21), middle-aged adults (45), elderly people (69) and very elderly people (81). Five uncertainty levels were considered: predictability = 0.96, 0.80, 0.64, 0.48, and 0.32. All relationships involved were direct ones. A strong effect of uncertainty on 'control', a measure of the subject's consistency with respect to a linear model, was found. This effect was essentially a linear one. To each decrement in predictability of the task corresponded an equal decrement in participants' level of control. This level of decrement was the same, regardless of the age of the participant. It can be concluded that elderly people cope with uncertainty in probability learning tasks as well as young adults.     

How do people apprehend large numerosities?

People discriminate remarkably well among large numerosities. These discriminations, however, need not entail numerical representation of the quantities being compared. This research evaluated the role of both non-numerical and numerical information in adult judgments of relative numerosity for large-numerosity spatial arrays. Results of Experiment 1 indicated that judgments of relative numerosity were affected by the amount of open space in the arrays being compared. Further, the accuracy of verbal estimates of the numerosities of the arrays made upon completion of the comparison task bore little relation to performance on that task. Experiment 2, however, showed that numerical estimates for individually presented arrays were affected in much the same way by open space within or around the edges of the array as were the comparative judgments examined in Experiment 1. The findings suggest that adults heuristically utilize non-numerical cues as well as numerical information in apprehending large numerosities.     

How do people respond to health news? The role of personality traits

When a patient receives a health diagnosis, their response (e.g. changes in behaviour, seeking support) can have significant consequences for long-term health and well-being. Characteristics of health news are known to influence these responses, but personality traits have been omitted from this line of research. The current study examines the role of personality traits in predicting response to health news. Participants (N = 298) read scenarios in which they received health news that was manipulated to vary in severity, controllability and likelihood of outcomes. Participants then rated how likely they were to engage in a number of response behaviours. We examined the main effects and interaction of situational manipulations and personality traits on ratings of these behaviours. Both situations and personality traits influenced behavioural responses to health events. In particular, conscientiousness predicted taking action and seeking social support. Neuroticism predicted both maladaptive and adaptive behavioural responses, providing support for the ‘healthy neurotic’ hypothesis. Moreover, personality traits predicted best in weak (unlikely, controllable) situations. Both personality traits and situational characteristics contribute to behavioural responses to health news.     

How do people interpret and respond to self-report sitting time questionnaires? a think-aloud study

Sedentary behaviour research to date has been predominantly based on self-reported sitting time, yet little attention has been paid to how respondents interpret sitting questionnaire items. 25 office workers participated in qualitative, ‘think-aloud’ interviews, describing their thoughts while completing 43 items derived from 9 existing questionnaires. Inductive Thematic Analysis identified four potential interpretation or response problems: misinterpretation and uncertainty; the mental calculation process involved in formulating responses; self-presentation concerns; and the affective and motivational impact of questionnaire completion. Results not only show that lay representations of sitting may diverge from those of researchers, but also highlight potential errors and biases encountered when generating sitting estimates. Additionally, reporting sitting may generate a desire to reduce sitting time. Findings suggest that domain-specific measures that estimate sitting across different settings may better correspond with participants’ perceptions. Future research should investigate the potential for sedentary behaviour questionnaire completion to change behaviour.     

How do the victims respond to bullying?

Reactions to harassment of victims of bullying were studied. One issue was, what kind of behavior on the part of the victim is likely to a) make the others start or continue bullying or b) diminish bullying or put an end to it. Altogether 573 pupils (286 girls, 287 boys) from 11 Finnish schools served as subjects: 67 of them (33 girls, 34 boys) were identified as victims of bullying. Both peer- and self-evaluations were used as methods of the study. Three subscales, describing counteraggressive, helpless, and nonchalant behavioral responses to bullying were established on the basis of peer-evaluations of the victims' behavior. Three different subtypes of victims (the Counteraggressive, the Helpless, and the Nonchalant) were identified. Helplessness and nonchalance were found to be typical responses of the girl victims, while boy victims tended to react to bullying with counteraggression or nonchalance. The victims' self-evaluations of their behavior supported these views. Helplessness and counteraggression in the case of girl victims and counteraggression in the case of boy victims were perceived as making the bullying start or continue. The absence of helplessness in the case of girl victims, and nonchalance as well as the absence of counteraggression in the case of boy victims were perceived as making the bullying diminish or stop. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

How do students improve their value-based learning with task experience?

When learning items that vary in reward, students improve their scores (i.e., earned reward) with task experience. In four experiments, we examined whether such improvements arise from better selective encoding of items that would earn more (vs. less) reward. Participants studied and recalled words across multiple study-test trials. On each trial, 12 words were slated with different values (typically from 1 to 12), and participants earned the point value assigned to a given word if it was correctly recalled. In all experiments, participants earned more points across the first two trials. In Experiment 1, participants either self-paced their study or had experimenter-paced study and in Experiment 2, some participants were penalised for each second spent during study. Improvements in points earned were related to increases in overall recall but not to selective encoding. In Experiment 3, some participants were given value-emphasised instructions, yet they did not demonstrate selective encoding. In Experiment 4, we used a larger range of point values, but selective encoding still did not account for the improvement in point scores across lists. These results suggest that metacognitively-driven selective encoding is not necessary to observe improvements in value-based learning.     

Performance expectations,personal resources,and job resources: How do they predict work engagement?

Research on work engagement has mainly focused on the role of job and personal resources and has ignored the possible impact of personal demands workers develop with regard to their work. The aim of our study was to test the reciprocal relationships that job resources, personal resources, and personal demands, operationalized as performance expectations, share with work engagement. Three-wave longitudinal data were collected in a Belgian public institution (N?=?473). Results confirm the causal effects of job resources, personal resources, and performance expectations on work engagement. Reciprocal relationships are not significant. Results are discussed with regard to the impact of changes in job and personal resources and performance expectations on work engagement. Practical implications including reinforcement of Human Resources practices such as appraisal interviewing and career management are also discussed.     

How do memory systems interact? Evidence from human classification learning

Studies of human classification learning using functional neuroimaging have suggested that basal ganglia and medial temporal lobe memory systems may interact during learning. We review these results and outline a set of possible mechanisms for such interactions. Effective connectivity analyses suggest that interaction between basal ganglia and medial temporal lobe are mediated by prefrontal cortex rather than by direct connectivity between regions. A review of possible neurobiological mechanisms suggests that interactions may be driven by neuromodulatory systems in addition to mediation by interaction of inputs to prefrontal cortical neurons. These results suggest that memory system interactions may reflect multiple mechanisms that combine to optimize behavior based on experience.     

Why do people self-harm?

The accuracy of perceptions about self-harm that are presented in the psychological and psychiatric literature was assessed with a sample of self-harmers. A list of 20 statements containing ten myths and ten accurate statements about self-harm behaviour was incorporated into an internet-based questionnaire. Respondents (n?=?243) rated their extent of agreement with each statement. Factor analysis confirmed the a priori classification of statements as being accurate. Only one item, regarding the relationship of self-harm to previous sexual abuse, did not confirm a priori classification; this statement was considered by self-harmers to be an accurate perception of self-harm. It was concluded that this questionnaire could be a useful aid for group-work training with professionals who are involved in working with people who engage in self-harm.     

Comparing two tiny giants or two huge dwarfs? Preference reversals owing to number size framing

Previous research has found that changes in irrelevant information, evaluation scales, or evaluation modes can lead to preference reversals. Drawing upon prospect theory, we introduced number size preference reversals, which occur under two conditions sharing identical information, evaluation mode, and evaluation scale. That is, for multiple options that have tradeoffs between attributes, an option is favored more when its superior attribute is framed with small numbers than when it is framed with large numbers. We tested the number size preference reversal in six experiments, demonstrating that it occurred in different background settings, remained stable when different evaluation scales were used, and was not contingent upon positive–negative attribute frames.     

How do people influence in jury deliberation? a social psychological view

Research in small-group decision making suggests two means by which discussion shifts the responses of individual members—Nonmative influence and informational influence. The former is based on pressure to conform to the normative positions of group members, and the latter involves changes due to the informational content of persuasively or passively shared facts. Which influence mode is used depends on the group decision rule, whether the response is public or private, the perceived nature of the task, and the nature of the issue. Specifically, normative influence is likely to prevail in public judgments, under group cohesion sets, and with value-laden issues, while informational influence will emerge when responses are private, the group is oriented toward the immediate task, and the issue is intellective. Suggestions are made regarding strategy and tactics for anticipating, harnessing, and shaping the form of influence that will take place during deliberation.     

How do people solve the "weather prediction" task?: individual variability in strategies for probabilistic category learning

Probabilistic category learning is often assumed to be an incrementally learned cognitive skill, dependent on nondeclarative memory systems. One paradigm in particular, the weather prediction task, has been used in over half a dozen neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies to date. Because of the growing interest in using this task and others like it as behavioral tools for studying the cognitive neuroscience of cognitive skill learning, it becomes especially important to understand how subjects solve this kind of task and whether all subjects learn it in the same way. We present here new experimental and theoretical analyses of the weather prediction task that indicate that there are at least three different strategies that describe how subjects learn this task. (1) An optimal multi-cue strategy, in which they respond to each pattern on the basis of associations of all four cues with each outcome; (2) a one-cue strategy, in which they respond on the basis of presence or absence of a single cue, disregarding all other cues; or (3) a singleton strategy, in which they learn only about the four patterns that have only one cue present and all others absent. This variability in how subjects approach this task may have important implications for interpreting how different brain regions are involved in probabilistic category learning.     

How do horses (Equus caballus) learn from observing human action?

Animal Cognition - A previous study demonstrated that horses can learn socially from observing humans, but could not draw any conclusions about the social learning mechanisms. Here we develop this...     

How do people react to negative procedures? On the moderating role of authority’s biased attitudes

The authors focus on the effects an authority’s apparent inconsistency between persons on judgments of relational treatment and procedural justice following negative procedures (i.e., procedures that people commonly regard as unfair). In Experiment 1, participants responded most negatively following a procedure that denied them, but granted another participant, an opportunity to voice an opinion when the intergroup context raised suspicions of bias (i.e., when both the experimenter and another participant were outgroup members). In Experiment 2, participants responded most negatively when the experimenter had expressed biased attitudes in favor of another participant, but this effect occurred only following procedures that denied participants a voice opportunity. We conclude that authority’s biased attitudes help people to make sense of negative procedure information.     

Adult attachment and dating strategies: How do insecure people attract mates?

When asked to choose among secure or insecurely attached partner prototypes, research shows that people tend to select secure individuals as their first choice. Despite this pattern, not everyone chooses secure partners in reality. The goal of this study was to examine the ways in which insecure individuals present themselves that might make them attractive to others. To achieve this goal, participants were led to believe that they were interacting with a possible date. That insecure individuals presented themselves as warm, engaging, and humorous people when communicating with potential mates were found. These findings suggest that insecure people have numerous dating tactics and positive qualities that they display to win over romantic partners.     

How do people evaluate social sexual conduct at work? A psycholegal model

The authors tested a psycholegal model of how people evaluate social sexual conduct at work with videotaped reenactments of interviews with alleged complainants, perpetrators, and other workers. Participants (200 full-time male and female workers) were randomly assigned to evaluate the complaints with either the reasonable person or reasonable woman legal standard. Participants answered questions about sexual harassment law and completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. Participants who took the reasonable woman perspective, as compared with those who took the reasonable person perspective, were more likely to find the conduct harassing; this was especially the case among participants high in hostile sexism. Medium-sized gender effects were found in the severe case but were absent in the weaker, more ambiguous case. The implications of these findings for hostile work environment law are discussed.