Normative data on the Missouri Children's Picture Series and the Missouri Children's Behavior Checklist with southern black children

Normative data are presented for Southern black children on two objective personality inventories for children: the Missouri Children's Picture Series (MCPS), a child picture-sorting task, and the Missouri Children's Behavior Checklist (MBCL), a parent rating scale. The MCPS was administered to 615 black children attending public schools in a low socioeconomic area of the southeast United States. Parents returned the MBCL on 437 of the children. Means and standard deviations on eight MCPS personality scales and six MCBL behavior rating scales are presented for black males and females at ages 5 through 16, and effects of age, sex, and various scale intercorrelations are discussed. Results suggest systematic age and sex differences on the various scales for black children that are quite atypical when compared with the MCPS in other samples. Various empirical questions regarding the validity of these instruments when used with Southern black children are raised.     

Grouping strategies, peer influence, and free time as classroom management techniques with first- and third-grade children

This study systematically investigated the effects of different procedures on classroom behaviors ranging from teacher designated seating groups and seating groups based on sociometric data to peer encouragement and free time reinforcers. Subjects were first- and third-grade children in classrooms using a Follow Through program model. Data were taken on the attending behavior of the children in small groups arranged by the teacher. The level of appropriate attending behavior was low and did not increase when the groups were restructured based on sociometric data. The introduction of instructions to the peer groups to help the child with his or her work brought about a major increase in the third-grade subjects' appropriate behavior. Appropriate attending behavior for the first-grade children did not increase to the predetermined acceptable level until a free time period for each peer group was made contingent upon the appropriate behavior of the subject in each group. Frequencies of verbal interactions suggested peer attention has an effect on the appropriateness of peer interactions.     

Pre‐registration is a Game Changer. But,Like Random Assignment,it is Neither Necessary Nor Sufficient for Credible Science

We identify 15 claims Pham and Oh (2020) make to argue against pre‐registration. We agree with 7 of the claims, but think that none of them justify delaying the encouragement and adoption of pre‐registration. Moreover, while the claim they make in their title is correct—pre‐registration is neither necessary nor sufficient for a credible science—this is also true of many our science’s most valuable tools, such as random assignment. Indeed, both random assignment and pre‐registration lead to more credible research. Pre‐registration is a game changer.     

Pre‐registration: Why and How

In this article, we (1) discuss the reasons why pre‐registration is a good idea, both for the field and individual researchers, (2) respond to arguments against pre‐registration, (3) describe how to best write and review a pre‐registration, and (4) comment on pre‐registration’s rapidly accelerating popularity. Along the way, we describe the (big) problem that pre‐registration can solve (i.e., false positives caused by p‐hacking), while also offering viable solutions to the problems that pre‐registration cannot solve (e.g., hidden confounds or fraud). Pre‐registration does not guarantee that every published finding will be true, but without it you can safely bet that many more will be false. It is time for our field to embrace pre‐registration, while taking steps to ensure that it is done right.     

Adolescent Psychopathy and Personality Theory—the Interpersonal Circumplex: Expanding Evidence of a Nomological Net

The construct validity of psychopathy was examined in a sample of 114 male and female young offenders (M_age = 15.16) at a southeastern detention center. The interpersonal circumplex served as a framework of general personality from which to examine the construct of adolescent psychopathy. A supplementary analysis of the psychopathy measures and the Big 5 factors of personality was also conducted using a matrix approach. Measures included: (a) Antisocial Process Screening Device (P. J. Frick & R. D. Hare, 2001); (b) Child Psychopathy Scale (D. R. Lynam, 1996); (c) Psychopathy Checklist—Youth Version (A. E. Forth, D. S. Kosson, & R. D. Hare, 2003); and (d) Interpersonal Adjective Scales Revised—Big 5 Version (P. Trapnell & J. S. Wiggins, 1991; J. S. Wiggins, 1995). Results showed substantial convergence among the three psychopathy measures. In addition, meaningful associations between psychopathy and constructs within the interpersonal circumplex and broader domains of the Big 5 were obtained. Two psychopathy scales correlated to a higher degree than expected with neuroticism. These findings provide evidence linking personality theory to the concept of child and adolescent psychopathy, thereby adding to its construct validity. However, they do so with the caveat that youth may also be displaying some characteristics of neuroticism, suggesting that worry and anxiety may accompany psychopathic features in earlier developmental stages. The implications of the current study are discussed.     

The binocular combination of chromatic contrast

How is chromatic contrast combined binocularly? One index of binocularity is the binocular contrast summation ratio (BCSR), which is the improvement in contrast sensitivity with binocular rather than monocular presentation. Simmons and Kingdom (1998, Vision Research 38 1063-1071) noted that BCSRs with some red-green isoluminant stimuli were suggestive of full linear summation. This suggestion was investigated further in four subjects by measuring binocular and monocular contrast thresholds for the detection of 0.5 cycle deg(1) isoluminant (red-green) and isochromatic (yellow-black) Gabor patches. These Gabor patches had either vertically or horizontally oriented carrier gratings and were either dichoptically in phase (same coloured bars in binocular correspondence) or in dichoptic anti-phase (opposite coloured bars in binocular correspondence). Full linear summation would be indicated by BCSRs of 2 for the in-phase and close to 0 for the anti-phase conditions. Mean BCSRs at isoluminance were 1.93 and 0.90, respectively, for the in-phase and anti-phase stimuli with horizontal carriers, the former being consistent with full linear summation, but the latter not. Despite these results, BCSRs obtained with isoluminant and isochromatic stimuli under similar conditions were not statistically distinguishable from each other, although there was a tendency for summation at isoluminance with in-phase stimuli to be higher and anti-phase stimuli to be lower. These data fall short of demonstrating full linear summation of chromatic contrast between the eyes under all presentation conditions, but they do indicate that there are strong binocular interactions at red-green isoluminance, which are similar to, and possibly even stronger than, those obtained with luminance stimuli.     

Variation in black anti-white bias and target distancing cues: factors that influence perceptions of "ambiguously racist" behavior

Experiment 1 indicated that when the White supervisor's negative treatment of a Black subordinate was unconstrained, participant race had no impact on attributions. Conversely, when the treatment was constrained, Black participants reported greater racist attributions than did White participants. Experiment 2 indicated that when the supervisor reported no response or a minimal negative response (i.e., indicating that he did not support his actions) after his negative treatment of the Black subordinate, Black participants reported greater racist attributions than did White participants. Conversely, when the supervisor's negative treatment was followed by a more extreme negative response, participant race had no impact on attributions. Experiment 3 indicated that Black participants were less likely than White participants to perceive a minimal negative response as reflecting a White supervisor's lack of support for his negative actions. Conversely, participant race had no impact on attributions of a Black supervisor's negative actions.