Between- versus within-family factor analyses of cognitive abilities

Confirmatory factor analyses of the 15 cognitive abilities tests from the Hawaii Family Study of Cognition were conducted on between-family (BF) means and within-family (WF) differences for 370 AEA (Americans of European ancestry) and 116 AJA (Americans of Japanese ancestry) sibling pairs. Difference chi-square significance tests, goodness-of-fit indices, and congruence coefficients for the estimated loadings on four specific cognitive abilities factors and on the second-order general intelligence factor nearly all indicated that the between-family factor structures were not significantly different from the within-family structures for both AEA and AJA siblings (the AEA and AJA structures were also not significantly different). The similarity of the BF and WF structures suggests that the genetic and environmental influences underlying cognitive abilities are “intrinsic” in nature, that is, not just due to between-family differences in culture, status, values, and fortuitous cross-assortative mating.     

The perception of preschool social dominance

Children's and teachers' perception of social dominance was examined using a behavioral criterion for determining accuracy of verbal judgments. Video records of agonistic interactions were obtained during approximately 60 hours of free-play at two preschool centers. Analyses of social conflict episodes ending in submission revealed linear dominance structures for both groups. Dominance perception was assessed in two ways. Both teachers and children were asked to rank-order a subgroup of children according to dominance. They were also asked to select the more dominant children in a number of predetermined pairs. Results indicated that teachers could accurately judge dyadic dominance relations, and that accuracy among children varied as a function of their status within the group hierarchy. Findings have implications for social dominance assessment methodology, and for the issue of consensual versus ecological validity in developmental studies of social perception.     

Agonistic behavior between wild and genetically sterile male Norway rats (rattus norvegicus)

Genetically sterile male Norway rats, Rattus norvegicus, were tested in the laboratory to determine both 1) behavioral characteristics, and 2) the ability of sterile males to compete aggressively and sexually with wild Norway rat males. Sterile males were larger in weight, more frequently dominant, won as many fighting encounters, were as aggressive as wild males, and mounted females more frequently. Behavioral activities were similar for both strains when compared under laboratory conditions with no apparent abnormal behavior exhibited by the sterile males. Use of sterile males in biological control programs is discussed.     

Growth and social behavior of previously undernourished mice

Developing mice were growth-retarded by underfeeding of their mothers during lactation. Control mothers were well nourished throughout. All offspring were fed ad libitum from weaning till their behaviour was tested in adulthood. The undernourished mice had weight deficits at weaning of 49% compared with controls. Nevertheless, they showed partial catch-up growth thereafter, in that their absolute weight deficits decreased between weaning and adulthood. Social behaviour observations were made on pairs of mice of the same treatment group. Previously undernourished mice were slower to start attacking one another, spent more time near or in contact with one another and did less tail-rattling than their controls.     

Utility Monsters for the Fission Age

One of the standard approaches to the metaphysics of personal identity has some counter‐intuitive ethical consequences when combined with maximising consequentialism and a plausible (though not uncontroversial) doctrine about aggregation of consequences. This metaphysical doctrine is the so‐called ‘multiple occupancy’ approach to puzzles about fission and fusion. It gives rise to a new version of the ‘utility monster’ problem, particularly difficult problems about infinite utility, and a new version of a Parfit‐style ‘repugnant conclusion’. While the article focuses on maximising consequentialism for simplicity, the problems demonstrated apply more widely to a range of ethical views, especially flavours of consequentialism. This article demonstrates how these problems arise, and discusses a number of options available in the light of these problems for a consequentialist tempted by a multiple occupancy metaphysics.