The development of young children's awareness of logical inconsistencies

Research by Markman (1979) suggests that children up to 12 years of age do not spontaneously detect logical inconsistencies. The present study was directed to factors which may limit children's ability to recognize their failures to understand. A task was devised which involved materials that were clearly based on children's experiences, and which involved premises and conclusions which were presented contiguously, rather than being interspersed among other sentences. Ninety-six 5-, 6-, and 7-year-old children were asked to judge the acceptability of eight three-sentence “stories” told by a puppet, and were asked to justify their responses. The stories differed in whether they were consistent or inconsistent, and in whether the principle upon which a story's consistency depended was implicitly or explicitly stated. The results showed developmental differences. By Age 7 years, most children were quite capable of evaluating sentences for their logical consistency. Five-year-olds, however, did not perform as well on the task, especially when the information upon which the logical cohesiveness of the stories rested was implicitly, rather than explicitly, stated. An examination of the justifications provided by these children revealed that they tended to question the empirical validity of individual sentences, rather than integrate the story as a whole and examine its overall logical structure.     

Children's representation of knowledge in verification

Thirty-two children aged 8–9 and 10–11 were asked to perform two statement verification tasks. Task 1 consisted of statements that were likely to elicit an affirmative knowledge representation,You have three eyes, is likely to elicit the representation,I have two eyes. Task 2 consisted of statements that were likely to elicit a negative knowledge of representation,You have a tail, is likely to elicit a negative representation,I do not have a tail. All statements varied in two dimensions, polarity (affirmative vs. negative) and truth value (true vs. false). Negative statements in Task 1 were found to be more difficult for children to verify than those in Task 2. This performance difference was used to infer the form of knowledge representation generated in verifying negative statements.     

The Effect of Clear Evaluation Criteria on Sex Bias in Judgments of Performance

Previous research indicates that the work of women is often devalued rela- tive to that of men. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that such sex bias appears when judges follow ambiguous guidelines or criteria in making evalua- tions, but not when they tollow clear evaluation guidelines. In each experiment, male and female undergraduates evaluated a performance that was attributed to either a man or woman (an intellectual test performance in Experiment I; an artistic craft object in Experiment 11). Subjects followed either clear, explicit evaluation criteria or vague, ambiguous criteria. As predicted, female subjects Lyaluated the "female's" performance less favorably than the "male's" only when. criteria were vague. In contast, male subjects showed little evidence of sex bias, regardless of the criteria they followed. Discussion centers upon: (1) possible cognitive processes underlying the observed effects of clear criteria; and (2) potential practical applications designed to alleviate sex bias in naturalistic settings.     

An electronic cine camera system for the automatic collection and analysis of high-speed movement of unrestrained animals

A system is decribed that collects visual data using a solid-state photodiode image sensor at rates of up to 600 frames/sec in a binary format suitable for image-analysis techniques. Of particular interest is the system’s ability to analyze high-speed movement of animals without prior modification of the subject (e.g., attachment of lamps or reflectors to the subject).     

Practice effects for visual resolution in the periphery

Resolution thresholds at 0° (fovea), 20°, 40°, and 60° along the horizontal meridian of the temporal visual field revealed a characteristic degradation in visual resolution with increasing stimulus eccentricity. However, substantial individual differences were found, particularly at 40° and 60° of eccentricity. Dramatic improvements in peripheral visual resolution occurred over a period of 11 practice sessions, with the time course of practice effects increasing for greater visual field eccentricities. Improvements with practice reduced, but did not eliminate, individual differences. The present visual resolution findings are compared to previous studies of peripheral motion detection and increment thresholds.     

Defining the Assessment and Treatment Competencies to Deliver Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavior Therapy: A Multi-Center Validation Study

Despite the vastly increased dissemination of the low-intensity (LI) version of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for the treatment of anxiety and depression, no valid and reliable indices of the LI-CBT clinical competencies currently exist. This research therefore sought to develop and evaluate two measures: the low-intensity assessment competency scale (LIAC) and the low-intensity treatment competency scale (LITC). Inductive and deductive methods were used to construct the competency scales and detailed rating manuals were prepared. Two studies were then completed. The first study used a quantitative, fully-crossed design and the second a multi-center, quantitative longitudinal design. In study one, novice, qualified, and expert LI-CBT practitioners rated an LI-CBT assessment session (using the LIAC) and an LI-CBT treatment session (using the LITC). Study two used the LIAC and LITC across four training sites to analyze the competencies of LI-CBT practitioners over time, across raters, and in relation to the actor/patients’ feedback concerning helpfulness, the alliance, and willingness to return. Both the LIAC and LITC were found to be single factor scales with good internal, test-retest reliability and reasonable inter-rater reliability. Both measures were sensitive to measuring change in clinical competence. The LIAC had good concurrent, criterion, discriminant, and predictive validity, while the LITC had good concurrent, criterion, and predictive validity, but limited discriminant validity. A score of 18 accurately delineated a minimum level of competence in LI-CBT assessment and treatment practice, with incompetent practice associated with patient disengagement. These observational ratings scales can contribute to the clinical governance of the burgeoning use of LI-CBT interventions for anxiety and depression in routine services and also in the methods of controlled studies.