Regulatory focus and investment decisions in small groups

Regulatory Focus Theory was applied to small interactive groups. Based on previous research, it was expected that groups with a promotion focus would discuss gain-relevant information, whereas groups with a prevention focus would be concerned with potential losses. Furthermore, promotion groups were expected to make riskier decisions than prevention groups. Regulatory focus was manipulated by rewarding good or penalizing poor group performance on a preliminary task. Subsequently, three-person groups discussed several investment funds and made a consensual investment decision. Results supported the hypotheses and suggested that regulatory focus requires time to exert its influence in groups.     

Condorcet and communitarianism: Boghossian’s fallacious inference

This paper defends the communitarian account of meaning against Boghossian’s (Wittgensteinian) arguments. Boghossian argues that whilst such an account might be able to accommodate the infinitary characteristic of meaning, it cannot account for its normativity: he claims that, since the dispositions of a group must mirror those of its members, the former cannot be used to evaluate the latter. However, as this paper aims to make clear, this reasoning is fallacious. Modelling the issue with four (justifiable) assumptions, it shows that Condorcet’s ‘Jury Theorem’ can be used to prove that the dispositions of the majority of the members of a group can differ from those of any individual member in a way that makes it possible to use communal dispositions as a standard with which individual dispositions can be assessed. Moreover, the argument of the paper is also shown to have general implications for the use of formal methods in the explanation of the nature of certain fallacious inferences.     

A Unified Nonparametric IRT Model for <Emphasis Type="Italic">d</Emphasis>-Dimensional Psychological Test Data (<Emphasis Type="Italic">d</Emphasis>-ISOP)

The (univariate) isotonic psychometric (ISOP) model (Scheiblechner, 1995) is a nonparametric IRT model for dichotomous and polytomous (rating scale) psychological test data. A weak subject independence axiom W1 postulates that the subjects are ordered in the same way except for ties (i.e., similarly or isotonically) by all items of a psychological test. A weak item independence axiom W2 postulates that the order of the items is similar for all subjects. Local independence (LI or W3) is assumed in all models. With these axioms, sample-free unidimensional ordinal measurements of items and subjects become feasible. A cancellation axiom (Co) gives, as a result, the additive isotonic psychometric (ADISOP) model and interval scales for subjects and items, and an independence axiom (W4) gives the completely additive isotonic psychometric (CADISOP) model with an interval scale for the response variable (Scheiblechner, 1999). The d-ISOP, d-ADISOP, and d-CADISOP models are generalizations to d-dimensional dependent variables (e.g., speed and accuracy of response). The author would like to thank an Associate Editor and two anonymous referees and also Professor H.H. Schulze for their very valuable suggestions and corrections.     

Die methodologifchen Grundlagen der Biologie

Ohne Zusammenfassung Nach einem Vortrag in der Gefellfchaft für wiffenfchaftliche Philofophie, Berlin.     

The rhythm of melatonin synthesis in the epiphysis and its control by light

The paper deals with the central regulation of the circadian rhythm of the melatonin in the pineal gland by light according to the literature. Examples of the effects of melatonin and their inclusion in the total endocrine complexity are pointed out. Possibilities for a therapy of chronobiological diseases with bright light resulting from animal experiments are discussed in connection with requirements for a future application to the therapy of human beings.     

A cautionary note on the use of probability values to evaluate interobserver agreement

Proposed methods of assessing the statistical significance of interobserver agreements provide erroneous probability values when conducted on serially correlated data. Investigators who wish to evaluate interobserver agreements by means of statistical significance can do so by limiting the analysis to every k(th) interval of data, or by using Markovian techniques which accommodate serial correlations.