JEAB Research Over Time: Species Used,Experimental Designs,Statistical Analyses,and Sex of Subjects

We examined the species used as subjects in every article published in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB) from 1958 through 2013. We also determined the sex of subjects in every article with human subjects (N = 524) and in an equal number of randomly selected articles with nonhuman subjects, as well as the general type of experimental designs used. Finally, the percentage of articles reporting an inferential statistic was determined at 5-year intervals. In all, 35,317 subjects were studied in 3,084 articles; pigeons ranked first and humans second in number used. Within-subject experimental designs were more popular than between-subjects designs regardless of whether human or nonhuman subjects were studied but were used in a higher percentage of articles with nonhumans (75.4 %) than in articles with humans (68.2 %). The percentage of articles reporting an inferential statistic has increased over time, and more than half of the articles published in 2005 and 2010 reported one. Researchers who publish in JEAB frequently depart from Skinner’s preferred research strategy, but it is not clear whether such departures are harmful. Finally, the sex of subjects was not reported in a sizable percentage of articles with both human and nonhuman subjects. This is an unfortunate oversight.     

Epistemologische betrachtungen zu [S4, S5]

Zusammenfassung Die zahlreichen modallogischen Systeme zwischen den Standardkalkülen S4 und S5 werden vom epistemologischen Standpunkt aus untersucht, indem Notwendigkeit wahlweise als Wissen bzw. als Überzeugt-sein gedeutet wird. Dabei stellt sich heraus, daß — unter gewissen andernorts begründeten Voraussetzungen über epistemische Logik-S4.4 als Logik der wahren Überzeugungen aufgefaßt werden kann, während die Systeme S4.3.2 und S4.2 als Logiken für solche Leute erscheinen, die das Schema Wissen = wahre Überzeugung nur eingeschränkt für ganz spezielle rein doxastische bzw. rein epistemische Sätze akzeptieren. S4.2 ist dabei allem Anschein nach die Logik des Wissens.

---

The numerous modal systems between S4 and S5 are investigated from an epistemological point of view by interpreting necessity either as knowledge or as (strong) belief. It is shown that-granted some assumptions about epistemic logic for which the author has argued elsewhere-the system S4.4 may be interpreted as the logic of true belief, while S4.3.2 and S4.2 may be taken to represent epistemic logic systems for individuals who accept the scheme knowledge = true belief only for certain special instances. There is strong evidence in favor of the assumption that S4.2 is the logic of knowledge.

     

Doctoral dissertations in pastoral psychology June, 1961 to June, 1962

Pastoral Psychology -