Bayesian just-so stories in psychology and neuroscience

According to Bayesian theories in psychology and neuroscience, minds and brains are (near) optimal in solving a wide range of tasks. We challenge this view and argue that more traditional, non-Bayesian approaches are more promising. We make 3 main arguments. First, we show that the empirical evidence for Bayesian theories in psychology is weak. This weakness relates to the many arbitrary ways that priors, likelihoods, and utility functions can be altered in order to account for the data that are obtained, making the models unfalsifiable. It further relates to the fact that Bayesian theories are rarely better at predicting data compared with alternative (and simpler) non-Bayesian theories. Second, we show that the empirical evidence for Bayesian theories in neuroscience is weaker still. There are impressive mathematical analyses showing how populations of neurons could compute in a Bayesian manner but little or no evidence that they do. Third, we challenge the general scientific approach that characterizes Bayesian theorizing in cognitive science. A common premise is that theories in psychology should largely be constrained by a rational analysis of what the mind ought to do. We question this claim and argue that many of the important constraints come from biological, evolutionary, and processing (algorithmic) considerations that have no adaptive relevance to the problem per se. In our view, these factors have contributed to the development of many Bayesian "just so" stories in psychology and neuroscience; that is, mathematical analyses of cognition that can be used to explain almost any behavior as optimal.     

Widening the boundaries of the production effect

Words that are read aloud are more memorable than words that are read silently. The boundaries of this production effect (MacLeod, Gopie, Hourihan, Neary, & Ozubko, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 671-685, 2010) have been found to extend beyond speech. MacLeod and colleagues demonstrated that mouthing also facilitates memory, leading them to speculate that any distinct, item-specific response should result in a production effect. In Experiment 1, we found support for this conjecture: Relative to silent reading, three unique productions-spelling, writing, and typing-all boosted explicit memory. In Experiment 2, we tested the sensitivity of the production effect. Although mouthing, writing, and whispering all improved explicit memory when compared to silent reading, these other production modalities were not as beneficial as speech. We argue that the enhanced distinctiveness of speech relative to other productions-and of other productions relative to silent reading-underlies this pattern of results.     

Production benefits learning: The production effect endures and improves memory for text

The production effect is the superior retention of material read aloud relative to material read silently during an encoding episode. Thus far it has been explored using isolated words tested almost immediately. The goal of this study was to assess the efficacy of production as a study strategy, addressing: (a) whether the production benefit endures beyond a short session, (b) whether production can boost memory for more complex material, and (c) whether production transfers to educationally relevant tests. In Experiment 1 a 1-week retention interval was included, and a production effect was observed. In Experiment 2 a production effect was observed for both word pairs and sentence stimuli. In Experiment 3 educationally relevant essays were read and tested with a fill-in-the-blanks test: Memory was superior for questions that probed information that had been read aloud relative to information that had been read silently. We conclude that the production benefit is enduring and generalises to text and different test formats, indicating that production constitutes a worthwhile study strategy.     

Counselling in the workplace: How time‐limited counselling can effect change in well‐being

Background: Many employers provide counselling support on work and personal issues for their employees, but in times of economic pressure such services can be at risk if their effectiveness is not demonstrated. Aim: To evaluate whether time‐limited counselling in a workplace can effect sustained change in well‐being. Method: The study was carried out by a staff counselling team in a university setting. The Warwick‐Edinburgh Mental Well‐being Scale (WEMWBS) was completed by clients at the beginning and end of counselling, and at three and six months following. A non‐treatment comparison group completed the survey at the same intervals. Results: The results of our investigation show clearly that the effect of time‐limited counselling (average seven sessions) on distressed clients is positive. The evidence of our treatment group suggests that they acquire an increased sense of well‐being as a result of the experience of counselling with a significant statistical difference between pre‐and post‐counselling treatment group scores on the WEMWBS and consistently higher scores found post counselling. The improvement was maintained at the same level for at least six months following the end of counselling. Conclusions: The provision of time‐limited counselling by employers is an effective support for personal difficulties affecting work.     

Induced processing biases have causal effects on anxiety

After briefly describing the nature of emotional processing biases associated with vulnerability to anxiety, and a model of how they may be produced, we review new data on the experimental induction of attentional and interpretative biases. We show that these biases can be readily induced in the laboratory, in the absence of mood changes. However, induced biases exert effects on the processing of new information and cause congruent changes in state anxiety when they influence how emotionally significant information is encoded. We can therefore conclude that biases have causal effects on vulnerability to anxiety via their influence on how significant events are processed. Finally, we discuss how our model might account for the acquisition of processing bias and for when they can influence anxiety.     

Biased interpretation in perfectionistic concerns: an experimental investigation

Background and objectives: Perfectionism is associated with the development and maintenance of several disorders. Given the importance of perfectionism understanding the biased information processes that underpin it is critical. The present study tested the hypothesis that heightened concern over mistakes subscale scores of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale are characterized by a tendency to impose emotionally negative interpretations on perfectionism-relevant situations.

Method and design: Seventy-six non-clinical, general population participants’ were presented with interpretations of scenarios where a protagonist was described as achieving well above what was required, but fell short of their own high standard. Using a within-subjects, quasi-experimental design, we assessed interpretations of these scenarios by examining the degree to which participants rated test sentences as being likely implications of the original scenarios.

Results: A generalized linear mixed model revealed higher concern over mistakes scores were associated with an increased tendency to rate negative target test sentences as being similar to the original perfectionism-relevant scenarios, and a reduced tendency to rate positive target test sentences as being similar to these original scenarios.

Conclusions: The findings provide support for the cognitive–behavioral model of perfectionism. These findings support the inclusion of strategies in cognitive–behavioral treatment of perfectionism to reduce interpretation bias.