Mutual Suppression: Comment on Paulhus et al. (2004)

Paulhus, Robins, Trzesniewski, and Tracy (Multivariate Behavioral Research, 2004 Paulhus, D. L., Robins, R. W., Trzesniewski, K. H. and Tracy, J. L. 2004. Two replicable suppressor situations in personality research. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39: 303–328. [Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 39, 305–328) suggested that the three types of two-predictor suppression situations—classical suppression, cooperative suppression, and net suppression—-can all be considered special cases of mutual suppression, in that the magnitude of each of the two standardized partial regression coefficients exceeds the magnitude of its corresponding standardized bivariate regression coefficient. Classical suppression and cooperative suppression can be considered mutual suppression, but net suppression cannot. Hypothetical and empirical examples of net suppression in which the magnitude of the standardized partial regression coefficient for the suppressor variable is greater than, equal to, and less than the magnitude of its standardized bivariate regression coefficient are provided. The empirical examples were drawn from the social psychology literature relating psychological well-being outcomes to life aspirations.     

The validity and appropriateness of methods, analyses, and conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A rebuttal of victimological critique from Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001).

The authors respond to 2 victimological critiques of their 1998 meta-analysis on child sexual abuse (CSA). S. J. Dallam et al. (2001) claimed that B. Rind, P. Tromovitch, and R. Bauserman (1998) committed numerous methodological and statistical errors, and often miscoded and misinterpreted data. The authors show all these claims to be invalid. To the contrary, they demonstrate frequent bias in Dallam et al.'s criticisms. S. J. Ondersma et al. (2001) claimed that Rind et al.'s study is part of a backlash against psychotherapists, that its suggestions regarding CSA definitions were extrascientific, and that the moral standard is needed to understand CSA scientifically. The authors show their suggestions to have been scientific and argue that it is Ondersma et al.'s issue-framing and moral standard that are extrascientific. This reply supports the original methods, analyses, recommendations, and conclusions of Rind et al.     

Distinguishing Hypotheses From Hyperbole in Studies of Media Violence: A Comment on Markey et al. (2015)

In alleging that Bushman et al. (2013) made sensational and unsubstantiated claims, Markey et al. (2015) mistake hypotheses for hyperbole. Moreover, in their effort to show that gun violence in PG‐13 movies (for ages 13 and older) is unrelated to trends in population violence, they make unjustified demands on our data, with outcomes that are unconnected to hypothesized effects. Using outcomes in line with our hypotheses, we draw the contrary conclusion that recent trends in gun violence in youth are actually consistent with gun violence trends in PG‐13 movies. Nevertheless, because we do not believe those patterns are sufficient to draw causal conclusions, we suggest more adequate tests of the hypothesis that exposure to movie gun violence affects the beliefs and attitudes of youth toward guns.     

Effects of processing speed on intelligence may be underestimated: Comment on Demetriou et al. (2013)

This commentary suggests ways to extend research by Demetriou et al. (2013), who may have underestimated the effects of processing speed on the development of intelligence. It argues that future research should consider variability in processing speed, complexity in speed tasks, and reaction times excluded from speed estimates.     

When Validity Testing Lacks Validity: Comment on Levine et al.

The death of self‐construal research has been greatly exaggerated. Levine et al. (2003) highlight the alleged methodological limitations of the current body of the self‐construal model of culture. Their allegations, whether true or not, require a fair investigation. Careful examination of Levine et al. reveals pervasive logical flaws, methodological errors, and interpretation biases, which stem from ethnic stereotyping and other erroneous assumptions at various junctures. These fundamental errors, in turn, render their conclusions untenable. In testing their 1st set of hypotheses, which they proclaim to be “central to the validity” of self‐construal scales, Levine et al. bifurcate the participants into “Westerners” versus “Asians,” and then impose their a priori stereotype of how Westerners ought to be versus how Asians ought to be, which is scientifically unacceptable. This is an unscientific validation criterion (comparable to crude ethnic stereotypes such as “Asians are smarter”) and should not be used to judge the scales' validity. Next, in their discussion of priming, Levine et al. assert that the construct validity of the interdependent self‐construal requires that it must be susceptible to priming. This is an elementary logical fallacy. It simply does not follow from the definition of the interdependent self‐construal and therefore cannot be used as a criterion which reflects on construct validity. Their priming experiments are also deeply flawed by the unrepresentative sample of participants. Further, in their factor analyses, Levine et al. set up the “straw man” of a “universal a priori 2‐factor solution” although no self‐construal scholar or theory insists that there are precisely 2 universally applicable self‐construals or that the current self‐construal scales are perfect. The results of statistical analyses, such as those in Levine et al., crucially depend on the selection of presuppositions. Levine et al.'s presuppositions are untenable, yet they are passed off as self‐evident criteria for validity testing. Their article tries to create an illusion of finality, but is pervasively and fundamentally flawed.     

Lessons From Markey et al. (2015) and Bushman et al. (2015): Sensationalism and Integrity in Media Research

This article presents a response to the comment by B. J. Bushman, D. Romer, and P. E. Jamieson (2015). This reply addresses 2 issues raised by the commenters. First, they claim they and others have not made sensationalistic statements linking violent media to horrific acts of real‐world violence. In response, we supply numerous examples of sensationalistic statements made by them and others. Second, they claim they did not expect violence in films to be related to violent behavior among adults, but only among youths. However, by examining homicide arrests and homicide gun mortality rates among youths, we found that as films have become increasingly violent over time, both homicide arrests and gun‐related homicides have tended to decrease among this age group.     

Regret and Responsibility: A Reply to Zeelenberg et al. (1998)

M. Zeelenberg, W. W. van Dijk, and A. S. R. Manstead (1998, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74, 254-272) recently reported an altered replication of our earlier study (T. Connolly, L. D. Ordó?ez, & R. Coughlan, 1997, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 73-85) concerning the effects of decision agency on regret and outcome evaluation. Our earlier study had found no such effect, but Zeelenberg et al. did. In two new experiments, we have largely confirmed Zeelenberg et al.'s result but have shown that, contrary to most theory, regret (a) can appear even in the absence of decision agency, (b) can be unrelated to outcome evaluations, and (c) may be more influenced by the experience of gains or losses from the status quo than by any decisional responsibility for those changes. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.     

Recall,recognition, and the hippocampus: Reply to Yonelinas et al. (2004)

Two recent studies disagree about whether recall is more impaired than recognition (and recollection more than familiarity) in patients with damage limited to the hippocampus (Manns, Hopkins, Reed, Kitchener, & Squire, 2003; Yonelinas et al., 2002). Wixted and Squire (2004) pointed out that the disagreement about recall and recognition stems entirely from an outlying recognition score obtained by 1 of 55 control subjects in Yonelinas et al. (2002). In their comment on our paper, Yonelinas et al. (2004) minimize the importance of this result and argue that the role of the hippocampus in recollection and familiarity is best studied using different methods that attempt to measure these processes directly. Here, we argue that the recall versus recognition comparison is the strongest test because it relies on the fewest controversial assumptions, and that the other approaches explored by Yonelinas et al. (2002) rely on questionable, theory-laden assumptions. We also rehearse the reasons for concluding that the patients studied by Manns et al. (2003) have damage limited to the hippocampal region (hippocampus proper, dentate gyrus, and subiculum), and we emphasize that important questions remain about the patients studied by Yonelinas et al. (2002), inasmuch as no neuroanatomical information and minimal neuropsychological information has been provided.     

Depression, autonomic function, and cardiorespiratory fitness: comment on Hughes, et al. (2010)

A recent paper by Hughes and colleagues suggested that dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system in depressed cardiac patients was partly explained by reduced physical activity and fitness. Other data demonstrate that exercise training and improvements in fitness not only lead to improvements in autonomic function in coronary patients but also reduce depression and depression-related increased mortality.     

Comment on Soar, et al.'s case study of problems and use of Ecstasy

This case report provides no basis for drawing any conclusions regarding possible adverse effects of use of Ecstasy.     

Intrahemispherical activation,visuomotor transmission,and the Simon effect: comment on Wascher et al. (2001)

On the basis of 3 experiments E. Wascher, U. Schatz, T. Kuder, and R. Verleger (2001) concluded, "The variety of tasks subsumed under the term Simon effect turned out to be heterogeneous" (p. 749). This comment critically evaluates the validity of their conclusion by considering their hypotheses methodology, specific conclusions, and proposed broader implications. Although the Simon effect is a behavioral phenomenon, E. Wascher et al. relied heavily on physiology in hypothesis generation, methodology, and interpretation of results. Moreover, methodological differences from most previous studies, combined with limited statistical support, nonreplication of previously reported behavioral phenomena inconsistencies in results across experiments, and evidence against a contribution of intrahemispherical activation by visuomotor pathways, strongly suggest that their conclusion should be viewed with caution.     

The validity of dietary restraint scales: comment on Stice et al. (2004)

In 4 empirical studies, E. Stice, M. Fisher, and M. R. Lowe calculated the correlations between some widely used dietary restraint scales and food intake. Failing to find substantial negative correlations, they concluded that these scales were invalid. The current article challenges this conclusion. For one thing, there is some evidence that restrained eaters do eat less than do unrestrained eaters under controlled experimental conditions favoring self-control. Dietary restraint is also associated with tendencies toward disinhibition under conditions favoring loss of self-control; such disinhibition often masks (but does not invalidate) the construct of dietary restraint. For these and other reasons, the assessment of food intake at a single eating episode may not capture overall dietary restriction. Finally, how much one eats does not necessarily indicate whether one has eaten less than one desired to eat. The authors suggest that the existing restraint scales do in fact validly assess restriction of food intake, albeit in a more complex fashion than is evident from simple correlations in single episodes.     

The critical period: some thoughts on Grimshaw et al (1998)

Grimshaw et al. (1998), based on their study of an adolescent first language acquirer, support the notion of a critical period. This article discusses the findings of Grimshaw et al. in the context of second language acquisition research. The study by Grimshaw et al. is argued to be of potentially significant value in gaining an understanding of age-related differences in language acquisition. Some issues for Grimshaw et al. to address are raised.     

Personal standards and evaluative concerns dimensions of "clinical" perfectionism: a reply to Shafran et al. (2002, 2003) and Hewitt et al. (2003)

Shafran, Cooper, and Fairburn (2002, 2003) provided a cognitive-behavioral analysis of "clinical" perfectionism, a construct they considered to involve both the determined pursuit of self-imposed standards and extremely vulnerable self-evaluation. They argued against a multidimensional perspective to studying perfectionism. We respond to Shafran et al. (2002, 2003) and Hewitt, Flett, Besser, Sherry, and McGee's (2003) reply to Shafran et al. (2002) by considering the theoretical, empirical, and clinical implications of findings identifying two higher-order dimensions of perfectionism reflecting personal standards (PS) and self-critical evaluative concerns. Analyses of data from two diverse study groups, a college student sample (N = 527) and a clinical sample of patients with binge eating disorder (N = 236), revealed that self-criticism accounts for the relation between perfectionism measures and depressive, anxious, and eating disorder symptoms. We conclude that possessing high PS is not by itself maladaptive. Rather, self-critical evaluative tendencies are more relevant than PS to the critical processes Shafran et al. (2002) suggested contribute to the maintenance of clinical perfectionism.     

Handedness and drawing: attempting to complete the picture: a comment on Bruckner, et al. (2011)

In a recent study, Bruckner, Kastner-Koller, Deimann, and Voracek (2011) investigated the relationship between hand preference and drawing during preschool years. The present study offers interpretations in a larger framework which could contribute to the better understanding of that relationship, and provides future directions in this area.