Bayesian rules of updating

This paper discusses the Bayesian updating rules of ordinary and Jeffrey conditionalisation. Their justification has been a topic of interest for the last quarter century, and several strategies proposed. None has been accepted as conclusive, and it is argued here that this is for a good reason; for by extending the domain of the probability function to include propositions describing the agent's present and future degrees of belief one can systematically generate a class of counterexamples to the rules. Dynamic Dutch Book and other arguments for them are examined critically. A concluding discussion attempts to put these results in perspective within the Bayesian approach.This paper was completed with assistance from a Mind Association Fellowship. I would like to thank the Mind Association, and also Paul Castell for his patient advice on previous drafts.     

The influence of texture on judgments of slant and relative distance in a picture with suggested depth

Six surfaces from natural environments with different visual textures were photographed at angles of 60, 65, and 70 deg from perpendicular. Measurements were taken of 24 Ss’ judgments of the inferred angles of slant and inferred midpoints of the six textured surfaces represented in the photographs which were viewed in the frontoparallel plane. Judgments of both slant and relative distance within the photographs were influenced by represented angle of slant and by variations in surface texture.     

Variations in size judgements as a function of surface texture

Adult subjects made monocular size judgements in two experiments in which the independent variables of surface texture and restrictions on viewing conditions were manipulated. Texture density gradients of stimulation had a significant influence of size judgements only under the less reduced conditions of observation when subjects could see other textured surfaces beyond the surfaces over which judgements were made. Identical manipulations of surface texture had earlier been found to have a highly significant influence on relative distance judgements (Newman, 1971). The principally negative results were thus taken to imply that subjects extract different information from the texture density gradient when judging size from that extracted when judging relative distance.     

Reducing delusional speech in chronic, paranoid schizophrenics

Four schizophrenic patients with paranoid and grandiose delusions who had been hospitalized for an average of 17 yr were exposed to social reinforcement contingencies in a multiple baseline design. During the baseline period, each patient was interviewed for four 10-min sessions each day. The elapsed time from onset of conversation to onset of delusional talk was recorded. At the end of each day, the patients engaged in a 30-min informal chat with a nurse-therapist while relaxing with coffee, snacks, and cigarettes. The intervention introduced two contingencies: (1) The 10-min interviews were terminated as soon as the patient began talking delusionally; (2) The patients earned time for their evening chat by talking rationally during their daytime interviews. Increases of from 200 to 600% in the amount of rational talk exhibited during the interviews occurred as the contingencies were introduced for each patient sequentially over time. These increases were maintained in three patients when the amount of reinforcement was halved, but declined when the patients were confronted directly with their delusional ideas. A modest amount of generalization occurred from the day-time interviews to the evening chats but did not extend to the behavior of the patients on the ward.     

The layman's use of trait and behavioral information to predict behavior

This study investigated conditions that determine subjects' preferences for information about another person's traits versus his specific past behavior in order to predict his future behavior. The similarity-dissimilarity between the situation for which past behavior was available and the one to which predictions had to be made strongly influenced the choice of specific behavioral information versus more general trait information. As expected, behavioral information was preferred most when the situation to which behavior had to be predicted was highly similar to the one for which the past behavioral data were available. On the other hand, more general trait information was preferred in predicting to situations that were not directly similar to those for which past behavioral information was available. The effect of the temporal span covered by available information was also explored.     

Correction for Range Restriction in Meta‐Analysis Revisited: Improvements and Implications for Organizational Research

In this study, we present a more accurate method for correcting for range restriction (Case V) that expands upon Bryant and Gokhale's (1972) method. We further present detailed steps to incorporate the Case V method into Schmidt and Hunter's (2015) psychometric meta‐analysis methods (both individual correction and artifact distribution approaches). We then evaluate the accuracy of the Case V method vis‐à‐vis existing methods. Monte‐Carlo simulation results indicate that the Case V method provides very accurate estimates for the mean true score correlation and reasonably accurate estimates for the true standard deviation. More important, Case V almost always provides more accurate results than alternative methods (particularly, Case IV). To illustrate how the Case V method works with real data, we conduct a reanalysis of Judge, Heller, and Mount's (2002) meta‐analysis examining the relationships between the Big 5 personality traits and job satisfaction. Results indicate that the true score correlations between the Big 5 traits and job satisfaction have been underestimated, whereas their true standard deviations have been overestimated. Implications for range restriction corrections in organizational research are discussed.     

Resolving the paradox of shame: Differentiating among specific appraisal-feeling combinations explains pro-social and self-defensive motivation

Research has shown that people can respond both self-defensively and pro-socially when they experience shame. We address this paradox by differentiating among specific appraisals (of specific self-defect and concern for condemnation) and feelings (of shame, inferiority, and rejection) often reported as part of shame. In two Experiments (Study 1: N = 85; Study 2: N = 112), manipulations that put participants’ social-image at risk increased their appraisal of concern for condemnation. In Study 2, a manipulation of moral failure increased participants’ appraisal that they suffered a specific self-defect. In both studies, mediation analyses showed that effects of the social-image at risk manipulation on self-defensive motivation were explained by appraisal of concern for condemnation and felt rejection. In contrast, the effect of the moral failure manipulation on pro-social motivation in Study 2 was explained by appraisal of a specific self-defect and felt shame. Thus, distinguishing among the appraisals and feelings tied to shame enabled clearer prediction of pro-social and self-defensive responses to moral failure with and without risk to social-image.     

How Pseudo-hypotheses Defeat a Non-Bayesian Theory of Evidence: Reply to Bandyopadhyay,Taper, and Brittan

Bandyopadhyay, Taper, and Brittan (BTB) advance a measure of evidential support that first appeared in the statistical and philosophical literature four decades ago and have been extensively discussed since. I have argued elsewhere, however, that it is vulnerable to a simple counterexample. BTB claim that the counterexample is flawed because it conflates evidence with confirmation. In this reply, I argue that the counterexample stands, and is fatal to their theory.