Finite-state recall revealed by backward learning curves constructed from confidence ratings

Two experiments were carried out to show that the constancy of Type II d’ in recall is not an artifact, but is due to finite-state processes as suggested by Bernbach (1967). The following conclusions were reached: (1) The constancy of Type II d’ is not an artifact due to the inclusion of intralist intrusions in the class of incorrect responses; (2) backward learning curves constructed from confidence ratings gave clear evidence of all-or-none recall; (3) recall appeared to be all or none whether the subjects learned by rote or with a mnemonic; (4) the discriminability index derived from Luce’s (1959) choice theory did not exhibit constancy over trials, unlike Type II d’ and despite the fact that backward rating curves indicated all-or-none processes.     

AN INDEX FOR ASSESSING WEIGHT CHANGE IN CHILDREN: WEIGHT/HEIGHT RATIOS1

Weight and height data from two studies were recomputed, and original data were computed using a Weight Index formula that accounts for the interaction of actual weight/height changes in growing children and compares this ratio with that of normed weight/height ratios for equal-aged children. Recomputing the data of one study showed that the Weight Index is a more sensitive procedure for assessing long-term behavioral treatment of obesity for girls than weight alone. Recomputing the data of a second study showed that the Weight Index formula is consistent for boys and girls and is a more sensitive procedure for assessing long-term effects of a variety of medical treatments for obesity than the Ponderal Index or weight alone. Computation of the data for 17 “normal” children in a preschool class showed a zero Weight Index score before and after a six-month interval elapsed without treatment. The procedure may be useful in assessing ponderosity or anorexia over intervals of six months or more with growing children or difference between actual and normed weight over shorter intervals.     

The effect of punishment and reinforcement procedures on a stutterer's factor II avoidance response

The purpose of this clinical experiment was to investigate the manipulability of a Factor II avoidance response (arm movement). The substantive hypothesis under test was that its suppression would be enhanced by repeated punishment sessions. During the first of nine therapy sessions response-contingent negative stimulation was not delivered. In the next five, after a base-rate period, “wrong” was made consequent upon the target response. In each of these sessions the suppression of arm movement was apparent. However, the magnitude of the suppression decreased from session to session. Evidently, the continued use of punishment did not enhance suppression. Because of this finding procedural changes were introduced in the next three therapy sessions. Verbal praise was added as a consequence of increasingly stringent omission criteria and three consecutive units of praise led to time-out from the reportedly fatiguing task of continuous speech. A marked reduction and then complete extinction resulted. Moreover, learning was evidenced since the frequency of arm movement lessened in the base-rate period of each session.     

“Impossible figures” and interpretations of polyhedral figures

The concept “impossible figure” is analyzed by formalizing the interpretations of a polyhedral figure by an observer, and defining several types of inconsistency in such interpretations. Tests for these inconsistencies are developed using simple graph theory, and a sufficient condition is established for the feasibility of an interpretation. Finally, techniques are derived for the automatic construction of usual or unusual multibar figures.     

Toward a further understanding of the intuitive personologists: Some critical evidence on the diabolical quality of subjective psychometrics

Despite significant advances over the past three decades in our understanding of the implicit dangers in ad hoc psychometric procedures, some important questions remain, particularly as regards the nature of the underlying reasoning process by which subjectively meaningful theoretical impressions are formulated and expressed. The present article seeks to address this issue, with particular attention being given to the distinction between demonstrative and dialectical reasoning. Evidence is offered to show that, at least under certain conditions, intuitive psychometricians formulate and express theoretical impressions on the basis of a reasoning process that is essentially dialectical in nature. Some major implications of this point of view for the study of personality theory are discussed. The limitations of the evidence presented, and the need for further research, are forgone.