Longitudinal factor analysis

A model is presented for factor analysing scores on a set of psychological tests administered as both pre- and postmeasures in a study of change. The model assumes that the same factors underlie the tests on each occasion, but that factor scores as well as factor loadings may change between occasions. Factors are defined to be orthogonal between as well as within occasions. A two-stage least squares procedure for fitting the model is described, and generally provides a unique rotation solution for the factors on each occasion.We thank M. W. Browne, R. P. McDonald, R. Pruzek, and the Managing Editor for their constructive comments.     

Control of responding by the elements of a compound discriminative stimulus and by the elements as individual discriminative stimuli

In the first of two studies, the responding of four albino rats was differentially reinforced in the presence of noise and light together and then tested in the presence of the noise and the light separately during extinction. The light exercised substantially more control of responding than did the noise. In the second study the responding of a similar group of four rats was differentially reinforced in the presence of the noise and the light separately. Control of responding by the light developed more rapidly than control by the noise. Results suggest that levels of control by stimuli after differential reinforcement with respect to the stimuli together can be predicted by the rates of development of control during differential reinforcement with respect to the stimuli separately.     

Are thresholds reduced by illusions? An attempt at replication

Three experiments are reported, which are attempts to replicate the finding of Ross and Gregory (1964) that difference thresholds for weights can be lowered by means of the size-weight illusion. Three different procedures were used, the first one (experiment I) being designed to show whether or not changes in a subject's judgement criterion could account for apparent changes in sensitivity. The second method (Experiment II) was a replication of Ross and Gregory's first procedure, in which the standard weight was judged before the comparison. In Experiments I and II a larger illusion was induced than in the original studies, but in Experiment III both the weights and container sizes were practically identical to those used by Ross and Gregory. The procedure was also the same as their most successful procedure (number 3) in which standard and comparison were judged simultaneously. The findings were uniformly negative: there was no evidence of criterion shift when the size-weight illusion was induced nor did we find the lowering of threshold previously reported.