Natural laws and the problem of provisos

Hempel and Giere contend that the existence of provisos poses grave difficulties for any regularity account of physical law. However, Hempel and Giere rely upon a mistaken conception of the way in which statements acquire their content. By correcting this mistake, I remove the problem Hempel and Giere identify but reveal a different problem that provisos pose for a regularity account — indeed, for any account of physical law according to which the state of affairs described by a law-statement presupposes a Humean regularity. These considerations suggest a normative analysis of law-statements. On this view, law-statements are not distinguished from accidental generalizations by the kind of Humean regularities they describe because a law-statement need not describe any Humean regularity. Rather, a law-statement says that in certain contexts, one ought to regard the assertion of a given type of claim, if made with justification, as a proper way to justify a claim of a certain other kind.     

Latent Structure of the Sources of Mathematics Self-Efficacy

General social cognitive theory and its career-specific elaborations posit four primary sources through which self-efficacy beliefs are acquired and modified: personal performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and physiological states and reactions. We present two studies exploring the dimensionality of these sources within the context of career-relevant mathematics activities. In Study 1, 295 college students completed measures of the source variables. Testing two- through five-factor models, we found strongest support for a four-factor latent structure of the efficacy sources. In Study 2, involving 481 high school students, a five-factor model fit the data well. We also found evidence of a higher order factor structure in both samples. Several directions for further research on the sources of efficacy information are considered, along with implications for career and academic interventions.     

Ideological Beliefs About Family Practices: Contemporary Perspectives Among North Indian Families

Ninety-two dual-wage and 103 single-wage Indian families with a preschool-age child residing in extended and nuclear households provided assessments regarding their beliefs about the division of household chores, financial responsibilities, childcare, and filial obligations. Analysis focused on possible differences in belief structures that may be attributed to the gender of the parent, family structural living arrangement, and maternal employment outside of the home. Husbands and wives did not differ in ideological beliefs on any of the components assessed, but differences did emerge as a function of family structural arrangements and whether or not the wife worked outside of the home. Data are discussed in terms of possible changes in ideological beliefs about family functions and practices and the broader socio-cultural factors operating within Indian society.