Does Arguing from Coherence Make Sense?

In this paper the argument from coherence is submitted to a critical analysis. First, it is argued to be a complex form of coordinative argumentation, structured on various argumentative levels. Then, using the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation a distinction is brought out between two basic forms of the argument from coherence: in one use this argument occurs as a sequence of two symptomatic arguments; in the other use we have a main symptomatic argument supported by a subordinate pragmatic argument. Finally, from an evaluative point of view it is assessed whether the argument from coherence can be found acceptable as a tool for settling disputes. It is claimed that in general, we can welcome this argumentative structure as sound and fully acceptable provided that we are aware of the interpretative discretion its use implies. A preliminary version of this essay was presented at the symposium organised by the Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory, and Rhetoric at the University of Amsterdamon the 27/02/04. I wish to express my indebtedness to Dora Achourioti, Francesco Belvisi, Frans van Eemeren, Eveline Feteris, Bart Garssen, Jean Wagemans, Peter Houtlosser, and Henrike Jansen for their helpful remarks. Needless to say, the responsibility for the views expressed herein as well as for any errors of form or content rests solely with me.     

DIMENSIONS OF FRUSTRATION INTOLERANCE AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO SELF-CONTROL PROBLEMS

Frustration intolerance beliefs are central to the theory and practice of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. However, there has been little investigation of the content of these beliefs, and empirical evidence linking specific beliefs to distinct psychological problems is sparse. To redress this, the Frustration–Discomfort Scale has been developed as a multidimensional measure. This was used to explore the relationship between the four dimensions of frustration intolerance (emotional intolerance, demands for entitlement, comfort, and achievement) and problems of self-control. Results indicated that the Frustration–Discomfort sub-scales showed differential relationships with self-control problems, independent of self-worth beliefs. This supported the validity and usefulness of the scale and the importance of distinguishing between dimensions of frustration intolerance. This paper is based on research submitted to the University of Edinburgh in part fulfillment of a Doctorate of Philosophy degree. Address correspondence to Neil Harrington, Psychology Department, Stratheden Hospital, Cupar, Fife, KY15 5RR, UK; e-mail: neil@nharr.freeserve.co.uk.     

Policy Recommendations for Carrier Testing and Predictive Testing in Childhood: A Distinction That Makes a Real Difference

The genetic testing of children raises many ethical concerns. This paper examines how five position statements from Canada, UK and USA, which present guidelines for good practice in this area produce different recommendations for carrier testing and predictive testing. We find that the genetic information generated through carrier testing is routinely presented as less serious than that generated from predictive testing. Additionally, the reproductive implications of predictive testing are also routinely erased. Consequently, the papers argue strongly against predictive testing but advise caution against carrier testing in somewhat weaker terms. We argue that these differences rest on assumptions about the status of reproduction in people’s lives and on an ethical stance that foregrounds the self over others. We propose that questioning the crude and sharp distinction between carrier and predictive testing in principle may enable practitioners and parents/families to make more nuanced decisions in practice. Parts of this work have been presented in the 1st International CESAGen Conference, London, 2004, and Genetics and Society Meetings, Wales.     

Recognition memory for distractor faces depends on attentional load at exposure

Incidental recognition memory for faces previously exposed as task-irrelevant distractors was assessed as a function of the attentional load of an unrelated task performed on superimposed letter strings at exposure. In Experiment 1, subjects were told to ignore the faces and either to judge the color of the letters (low load) or to search for an angular target letter among other angular letters (high load). A surprise recognition memory test revealed that despite the irrelevance of all faces at exposure, those exposed under low-load conditions were later recognized, but those exposed under high-load conditions were not. Experiment 2 found a similar pattern when both the high- and low-load tasks required shape judgments for the letters but made differing attentional demands. Finally, Experiment 3 showed that high load in a nonface task can significantly reduce even immediate recognition of a fixated face from the preceding trial. These results demonstrate that load in a nonface domain (e.g., letter shape) can reduce face recognition, in accord with Lavie’s load theory. In addition to their theoretical impact, these results may have practical implications for eyewitness testimony.     

Toleration and Cultural Controversies*

Multicultural societies are far more likely than others to include minorities committed to the pursuit of practices that offend the majority, and treating the cultural commitments of all citizens fairly will require some set of guiding principles to distinguish tolerable ‘cultural controversies’ from intolerable ones. This paper does not directly address the moral question at stake here (i.e. demarcating the limits of toleration) but rather seeks to provide a politically justifiable normative argument to explain when tolerant restraint is necessary, permissible or prohibited. This argument emerges from a concern to treat the cultural commitments of all citizens fairly. In turn, the argument indicates a potential reconciliation of the ‘politics of toleration’ with the ‘politics of respect’. *I would like to thank Stephen De Wijze, Hillel Steiner, Thomas Uebel, Peter Jones and Res Publica’s anonymous referees for their very helpful comments. I would also like to thank the ESRC for providing funding.     

Systems for the Production of Plagiarists? The Implications Arising from the Use of Plagiarism Detection Systems in UK Universities for Asian Learners

This paper argues that the inappropriate framing and implementation of plagiarism detection systems in UK universities can unwittingly construct international students as ‘plagiarists’. It argues that these systems are often implemented with inappropriate assumptions about plagiarism and the way in which new members of a community of practice develop the skills to become full members of that community. Drawing on the literature and some primary data it shows how expectations, norms and practices become translated and negotiated in such a way that legitimate attempts to conform with the expectations of the community of practice often become identified as plagiarism and illegitimate attempts at cheating often become obscured from view. It argues that this inappropriate framing and implementation of plagiarism detection systems may make academic integrity more illusive rather than less. It argues that in its current framing – as systems for ‘detection and discipline’ – plagiarism detection systems may become a new micro-politics of power with devastating consequences for those excluded.     

The capacity of visual short-term memory within and between hemifields

Visual short-term memory (VSTM) and attention are both thought to have a capacity limit of four items [e.g. Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 309, 279-281; Pylyshyn, Z. W., & Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3, 179-197.]. Using the multiple object visual tracking paradigm (MOT), it has recently been shown that twice as many items can be simultaneously attended when they are separated between two visual fields compared to when they are all presented within the same hemifield [Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2004). Independent attention resources for the left and right visual hemifields (Abstract). Journal of Vision, 4(8), 29a.]. Does VSTM capacity also increase when the items to be remembered are distributed between the two visual fields? The current paper investigated this central issue in two different tasks, namely a color and spatial location change detection task, in which the items were displayed either in the two visual fields or in the same hemifield. The data revealed that only memory capacity for spatial locations and not colors increased when the items were separated between the two visual fields. These findings support the view of VSTM as a chain of capacity limited operations where the spatial selection of stimuli, which dominates in both spatial location VSTM and MOT, occupies the first place and shows independence between the two fields.