Retrieving relevant factors with exploratory SEM and principal-covariate regression: A comparison

Behavioral researchers often linearly regress a criterion on multiple predictors, aiming to gain insight into the relations between the criterion and predictors. Obtaining this insight from the ordinary least squares (OLS) regression solution may be troublesome, because OLS regression weights show only the effect of a predictor on top of the effects of other predictors. Moreover, when the number of predictors grows larger, it becomes likely that the predictors will be highly collinear, which makes the regression weights’ estimates unstable (i.e., the “bouncing beta” problem). Among other procedures, dimension-reduction-based methods have been proposed for dealing with these problems. These methods yield insight into the data by reducing the predictors to a smaller number of summarizing variables and regressing the criterion on these summarizing variables. Two promising methods are principal-covariate regression (PCovR) and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). Both simultaneously optimize reduction and prediction, but they are based on different frameworks. The resulting solutions have not yet been compared; it is thus unclear what the strengths and weaknesses are of both methods. In this article, we focus on the extents to which PCovR and ESEM are able to extract the factors that truly underlie the predictor scores and can predict a single criterion. The results of two simulation studies showed that for a typical behavioral dataset, ESEM (using the BIC for model selection) in this regard is successful more often than PCovR. Yet, in 93% of the datasets PCovR performed equally well, and in the case of 48 predictors, 100 observations, and large differences in the strengths of the factors, PCovR even outperformed ESEM.     

Stress, glucocorticoids and liquorice in human pregnancy: programmers of the offspring brain

A suboptimal prenatal environment may induce permanent changes in cells, organs and physiology that alter social, emotional and cognitive functioning, and increase the risk of cardiometabolic and mental disorders in subsequent life ("developmental programming"). Although animal studies have provided a wealth of data on programming and its mechanisms, including on the role of stress and its glucocorticoid mediators, empirical evidence of these mechanisms in humans is still scanty. We review the existing human evidence on the effects of prenatal maternal stress, anxiety and depression, glucocorticoids and intake of liquorice (which inhibits the placental barrier to maternal glucocorticoids) on offspring developmental outcomes including, for instance, alterations in psychophysiological and neurocognitive functioning and mental health. This work lays the foundations for biomarker discovery and affords opportunities for prevention and interventions to ameliorate adverse outcomes in humans.     

Immediate and long-term priming effects are independent of prime awareness

Subliminal primes are assumed to produce weaker and short-lived effects on subsequent behavior compared to clearly visible primes. However, this difference in priming effect may be due to differences in signal strength, rather than level of awareness. In the present study we manipulated prime discriminability by using metacontrast masks and pseudomasks, while keeping the prime strength equal. This manipulation resulted in large differences in discriminability of the primes. However, both immediate response priming and long-term response priming (measured with conflict adaptation) was equal for the poorly discriminable and well discriminable primes, and equal for groups that differed markedly in terms of how well they could discriminate the primes. Our findings imply that discriminability of information is independent of both the immediate and long-term effects that information can have on behavior.     

Prime and probability: causal knowledge affects inferential and predictive effects on self-agency experiences

Experiences of having caused a certain outcome may arise from motor predictions based on action–outcome probabilities and causal inferences based on pre-activated outcome representations. However, when and how both indicators combine to affect such self-agency experiences is still unclear. Based on previous research on prediction and inference effects on self-agency, we propose that their (combined) contribution crucially depends on whether people have knowledge about the causal relation between actions and outcomes that is relevant to subsequent self-agency experiences. Therefore, we manipulated causal knowledge that was either relevant or irrelevant by varying the probability of co-occurrence (50% or 80%) of specific actions and outcomes. Afterwards, we measured self-agency experiences in an action–outcome task where outcomes were primed or not. Results showed that motor prediction only affected self-agency when relevant actions and outcomes were learned to be causally related. Interestingly, however, inference effects also occurred when no relevant causal knowledge was acquired.     

Cortical electrophysiological network dynamics of feedback learning

Understanding the neurophysiological mechanisms of learning is important for both fundamental and clinical neuroscience. We present a neurophysiologically inspired framework for understanding cortical mechanisms of feedback-guided learning. This framework is based on dynamic changes in systems-level oscillatory synchronization, reflecting changes in synaptic plasticity between stimulus-processing and motor areas that are modulated in a top-down fashion by different areas of the prefrontal cortex. We make new and testable predictions for how large-scale cortical networks support learning from feedback. Testing these predictions may provide new insights into the basic mechanisms underlying learning and how these mechanisms may be impaired in clinical disorders in which feedback learning is compromised.     

Pushing dualism to an extreme: On the philosophical impetus of a new materialism

This article discusses the way in which a group of contemporary cultural theorists in whose work we see a “new materialism” (a term coined by Braidotti and DeLanda) at work constitutes a philosophy of difference by traversing the dualisms that form the backbone of modernist thought. Continuing the ideas of Lyotard and Deleuze they have set themselves to a rewriting of all possible forms of emancipation that are to be found. This rewriting exercise involves a movement in thought that, in the words of Bergson, can be termed “pushing dualism to an extreme.” By this movement, Deleuze has stated, “difference is pushed to the limit,” that is, using Colebrook’s words, “difference is shown differing.” The article addresses the ways in which modernity’s dualisms (structured by a negative relation between terms) are traversed, and how a new conceptualization, and ontology, of difference (structured by an affirmative relation) comes to be constituted along the way. New materialism leaves behind all prioritizations (implicitly) involved in modern dualist thinking since a difference structured by affirmation does not work with predetermined relations (e.g., between mind and body) nor does it involve a (counter-)hierarchy between terms. The article makes explicit the methodology of the current-day rise of non-dualist thought, both in terms of its non-classificatory mode of (Deleuzian) thinking and in terms of the theory of the time of thought thus effectuated (Lyotard’s notion of ‘rewriting modernity’ is not a post-modernism). Throughout the article we will engage with an example in order to demonstrate the ontology that is being practiced following this methodology: How does a new (feminist) materialism traverse the sexual dualisms that structure modernist (feminist) thinking? This example also shows how a feminist post-modernism (found in the canonical work of Butler) has remained dualist, and what makes new materialism “new.” Freed from a dualist methodology, the modernist emancipatory project comes to full fruition in new materialism.     

Self-esteem, self-affirmation, and schadenfreude

In two studies we demonstrated that self-esteem has a negative relationship with schadenfreude toward a high achiever and that this relationship was mediated by the self-threat evoked by this high achiever. Moreover, we showed that this indirect relationship was contingent on an opportunity to affirm the self. When no self-affirmation opportunity was available, low self-esteem participants experienced a stronger self-threat when confronted with a high achiever, and this self-threat increased their schadenfreude, whereas this response was attenuated when they were given an opportunity to self-affirm. These findings indicate that the misfortunes of others can evoke schadenfreude because they provide people with an opportunity to protect or enhance their self-views.     

Moving faces, looking places: validation of the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES)

We report two studies validating a new standardized set of filmed emotion expressions, the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES). The ADFES is distinct from existing datasets in that it includes a face-forward version and two different head-turning versions (faces turning toward and away from viewers), North-European as well as Mediterranean models (male and female), and nine discrete emotions (joy, anger, fear, sadness, surprise, disgust, contempt, pride, and embarrassment). Study 1 showed that the ADFES received excellent recognition scores. Recognition was affected by social categorization of the model: displays of North-European models were better recognized by Dutch participants, suggesting an ingroup advantage. Head-turning did not affect recognition accuracy. Study 2 showed that participants more strongly perceived themselves to be the cause of the other's emotion when the model's face turned toward the respondents. The ADFES provides new avenues for research on emotion expression and is available for researchers upon request.