The Case for Rules in Reasoning

A number of theoretical positions in psychology—including variants of case-based reasoning, instance-based analogy, and connectionist models—maintain that abstract rules are not involved in human reasoning, or at best play a minor role. Other views hold that the use of abstract rules is a core aspect of human reasoning. We propose eight criteria for determining whether or not people use abstract rules in reasoning, and examine evidence relevant to each criterion for several rule systems. We argue that there is substantial evidence that several different inferential rules, including modus ponens, contractual rules, causal rules, and the law of large numbers, are used in solving everyday problems. We discuss the implications for various theoretical positions and consider hybrid mechanisms that combine aspects of instance and rule models.     

Momentary mood and coping processes in TMD pain.

Temporomandibular dysfunction (TMD) pain, like many chronic pain problems, appears to be multiply determined. Patients with TMD pain of at least 6 months duration (N = 30) were administered questionnaires measuring dispositional coping styles and appraisals to explore the dynamic interactions of the pain and coping process. Patients were then issued handheld computers that prompted them to record their momentary pain and coping processes 4 times per day for 7 days. Hierarchical linear regression models using both the dispositional and momentary predictors indicated that momentary pain was a function both of dispositional tendency to catastrophize and of momentary measures of catastrophization, self-efficacy, and mood states. Results were seen as supporting a situational model of intervention for chronic TMD pain.     

Conceptual Hierarchies in a Flat Attractor Network: Dynamics of Learning and Computations

The structure of people's conceptual knowledge of concrete nouns has traditionally been viewed as hierarchical ( Collins & Quillian, 1969 ). For example, superordinate concepts ( vegetable ) are assumed to reside at a higher level than basic-level concepts ( carrot ). A feature-based attractor network with a single layer of semantic features developed representations of both basic-level and superordinate concepts. No hierarchical structure was built into the network. In Experiment and Simulation 1, the graded structure of categories (typicality ratings) is accounted for by the flat attractor network. Experiment and Simulation 2 show that, as with basic-level concepts, such a network predicts feature verification latencies for superordinate concepts ( vegetable ). In Experiment and Simulation 3, counterintuitive results regarding the temporal dynamics of similarity in semantic priming are explained by the model. By treating both types of concepts the same in terms of representation, learning, and computations, the model provides new insights into semantic memory.     

A new perspective on visual word processing efficiency

As a fundamental part of our daily lives, visual word processing has received much attention in the psychological literature. Despite the well established advantage of perceiving letters in a word or in a pseudoword over letters alone or in random sequences using accuracy, a comparable effect using response times has been elusive. Some researchers continue to question whether the advantage due to word context is perceptual. We use the capacity coefficient, a well established, response time based measure of efficiency to provide evidence of word processing as a particularly efficient perceptual process to complement those results from the accuracy domain.     

Traits in Transition: The Structure of Parent‐Reported Personality Traits from Early Childhood to Early Adulthood

The present research was conducted to map the hierarchical structure of youths' personality traits, to identify the foundational level of this structure, and to test whether the meanings of some youth personality dimensions shift with age. We addressed these issues by analyzing personality parent reports describing a cross‐sectional sample of 16,000 children, adolescents, and young adults (ages 3 to 20). These parent reports were made using a broadband measure of youths' personal characteristics, the common‐language California Child Q‐Set. Analyses of the full sample and comparisons of 16 age groups supported three main conclusions. First, the hierarchical structure of youths' personality traits both resembles and differs from the adult personality hierarchy in important ways. Second, a set of six dimensions—Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness to Experience, and Activity—may constitute the foundational level of the youth personality hierarchy from middle childhood through adolescence. This “Little Six” structure represents a union of the most prominent personality and temperament dimensions. Third, the meanings of some youth personality dimensions (e.g., Activity, Conscientiousness) shift systematically with age. These findings advance our understanding of when and how personality structure develops during the first two decades of life.