The role accorded to the public by philosophers of science 1

The role accorded to the public by scientists and philosophers of science has undergone an essential historical change in the last three centuries. Public participation in (witnessing of) scientific experiments was considered an important requirement for 17th century experimenters (e.g. for Boyle or Pascal). The cognitive role played by lay persons was later substantially downgraded; witnessing went out of fashion, while science became more and more esoteric and a matter for experts only. Part of this process was that all scientific disciplines became intensively compartmentalized and in consequence a rather puzzling or even paradoxical situation appeared: that the scientists themselves were and are being reduced epistemically to the status of lay persons, outside of their proper field of expertise (as was pointed out by J. Hardwig). The paper deals with some cognitive aspects of this historical process.     

The functional role of attention for spatial coding in the Simon effect

Summary Two experiments investigated relative spatial coding in the Simon effect. It was hypothesized that relative spatial coding is carried out with reference to the position of the focus of visual attention. The spatial code for an imperative stimulus presented exactly at the position of focal attention should be neutral on the horizontal plane, and therefore no Simon effect should be observed. However, when the imperative stimulus is presented to the left or to the right of the current position of focal attention, the spatial code should not be neutral, thus producing a Simon effect. In both experiments, focal attention was manipulated either by a peripherally presented onset precue (Experiment 1) or by a centrally presented symbolic precue (Experiment 2). Results showed that the Simon effect was substantially reduced in both experiments when a valid precue preceded the imperative stimulus just in time to conclude refocusing of attention to the position of the imperative stimulus before it was presented. However, conditions with neutral precues yielded a normally sized Simon effect. In both experiments, the Simon effect decreased as the SOA grew when the precue was valid. At least for the Simon effect, the results can be interpreted as evidence that relative spatial coding is functionally related to the position of the focus of attention.     

Data selection and responsible conduct: Was millikan a fraud?

This paper addresses a problem in reporting scientific research. The problem is how to distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable data selection. Robert Millikan is notorious for an infamous remark that he used all his data when in fact he had used a selection. On this basis he has been accused of fraud. There is a tension here — historians and his defenders see his selection as understandable and legitimate, while current statements about the Responsible Conduct of Research imply his selection was illegitimate. This paper discusses two main issues that arise in assessing his conduct, whether he was intentionally misleading and whether he actually did mislead the scientific community about some facts of nature. It is argued that he was not intentionally misleading, and that it is unlikely that he misled the scientific community.     

Local and global factors of similarity in visual search

Effects of the similarity between target and distractors in a visual search task were investigated in several experiments. Both familiar (numerals and letters) and unfamiliar (connected figures in a 5 × 5 matrix) stimuli were used. The observer had to report on the presence or absence of a target among a variable number of homogeneous distractors as fast and as accurately as possible. It was found that physical difference had the same clear effect on processing time far familiar and for unfamiliar stimuli: processing time decreased monotonically with increasing physical difference. Distractors unrelated to the target and those related to the target by a simple transformation (180° rotation, horizontal or vertical reflection) were also compared, while the physical difference was kept constant. For familiar stimuli, transformational relatedness increased processing time in comparison with that fort unrelated stimulus pairs. It was further shown in a scaling experiment that this effect could be accounted for by the amount of perceived similarity of the target-distractor pairs. For unfamiliar stimuli, transformational relatedness did have a smaller and less pronounced effect. Various comparable unrelated distractors resulted in a full range of processing times. Results from a similarity scaling experiment correlated well with the outcome of the experiments with unfamiliar stimuli. These results are interpreted in terms of an underlying continuum of perceived similarity as the basis of the speed of visual search, rather than a dichotomy of parallel versus serial processing.     

Decompositions and biplots in three-way correspondence analysis

In this paper correspondence analysis for three-way contingency tables is presented using three-way generalisations of the singular value decomposition. It is shown that in combination with Lancaster's (1951) additive decomposition of interactions in three-way tables, a detailed analysis is possible of the deviations from independence. Finally, biplots are shown to produce powerful graphical representations of the results from three-way correspondence analyses. An example from child development is used to illustrate the theoretical developments.     

Empirically defined symptom scales using the DISC 2.3

Empirically defined scales of depressive, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional-defiant disorder, and conduct symptoms from the lay-administered National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC), version 2.3, and evidence of their reliability and validity, are presented. The scales were developed using factor analyses of data obtained from an epidemiologic survey of over 1,200 children drawn from four sites across the U.S. and Puerto Rico (the NIMH Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders, or MECA Study). Their psychometric properties were tested in a subsample of children reinterviewed by clinicians. The findings support the use of these continuous measures. The scales are strongly related to the diagnostic categories and show good test-retest reliability. The scales can be used to characterize severity in children with diagnoses and to describe problems and symptoms in children without diagnoses. Because these scales can measure gradations in symptomatology, they may be more useful than categorical measures. Like categorical measures, the scales based on the DISC are greatly influenced by the informant, whether child or parent.This research was supported by grant MH-46732 from the National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland.The MECA Program is an epidemiologic methodology study performed by four independent research teams in collaboration with staff of the Division of Clinical Research, which was reorganized in 1992 with components now in the Division of Epidemiology and Services Research and the Division of Clinical and Treatment Research, of the NIMH, Rockville, Maryland. The NIMH Principal Collaborators are Darrel A. Regier, MD, MPH, Ben Z. Locke, MSPH, Peter S. Jensen, MD, William E. Narrow, MD, MPH, and Donald S. Rae, MA; the NIMH Project Officer was William J. Huber. The Principal Investigators and Coinvestigators from the four sites are as follows: Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, UO1 MH46725: Mina K. Dulcan, MD, Benjamin B. Lahey, PhD, Donna J. Brogan, PhD, Sherryl Goodman, PhD, and Elaine Flagg, PhD; Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene at New York State Psychiatric Institute (Columbia University), New York, New York, UO1 MH46718: Hector R. Bird, MD, David Shaffer, MD, Myrna Weissman, PhD, Patricia Cohen, PhD, Denise Kandel, PhD, Christina Hoven, PhD, Mark Davies, MPH, Madelyn S. Gould, PhD, and Agnes Whitaker, MD; Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, UO1MH46717: Mary Schwab-Stone, MD, Philip J. Leaf, PhD, Sarah Horwitz, PhD, and Judith H. Lichtman, MPH; University of Puerto Rico, San Juan, Puerto Rico, UO1 MH46732: Glorisa Canino, PhD, Maritza Rubio-Stipec, MA, Milagros Bravo, PhD, Margarita Alegría, PhD, Julio Ribera, PhD, Sarah Huertas, MD, and Michael Woodbury, MD.The authors gratefully acknowledge Zenaida González and José Martínez who performed the data nalayses, as well as Elizabeth Pastrana, and Felícita Laboy, secretaries, for their valuable contributions to this work.