Do the EPR correlations pose a problem for causal decision theory?

We argue that causal decision theory (CDT) is no worse off than evidential decision theory (EDT) in handling entanglement, regardless of one’s preferred interpretation of quantum mechanics. In recent works, Ahmed (Evidence, decision, and causality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014) and Ahmed and Caulton (Synthese, 191(18): 4315–4352, 2014) have claimed the opposite; we argue that they are mistaken. Bell-type experiments are not instances of Newcomb problems, so CDT and EDT do not diverge in their recommendations. We highlight the fact that a Causal Decision Theorist should take all lawlike correlations into account, including potentially acausal entanglement correlations. This paper also provides a brief introduction to CDT with a motivating “small” Newcomb problem. The main point of our argument is that quantum theory does not provide grounds for favouring EDT over CDT.

     

The effects of choice-making on the problem behaviors of high school students with intellectual disabilities

This investigation was conducted in an effort to systematically extend the emerging data base having to do with choice-making opportunities and the behavior of students with disabilities. In particular, the current analyses examined the effects of choice-making on the problem behavior and task engagement of three high school students with intellectual disabilities as the students performed domestic and vocational activities. Multiple baseline and reversal designs demonstrated that the choice conditions reduced problem behaviors and increased task engagement for all participants. Data having to do with student affect and task productivity were less consistent. The findings on the relationship between choice making and problem behavior replicate and extend a growing literature on the desirable effects of choice-making for individuals with disabilities. The results are discussed in terms of recent developments in behavioral support, as well as the need for ongoing conceptual and applied research.     

MOTIVATING AUTISTIC CHILDREN THROUGH STIMULUS VARIATION

This study evaluated the differential effectiveness of two methods of presenting discrimination tasks when teaching autistic children. In a constant task condition, the common method of presenting a single task throughout a session was used. In a varied task condition, the same task was interspersed with a variety of other tasks from the children's clinic curricula. Results showed declining trends in correct responding during the constant task condition, with substantially improved and stable responding during the varied task condition. In addition, naive observers judged the children to be more enthusiastic, interested, happier, and better behaved during the varied task sessions. These results suggest that “boredom” may be a particularly important variable to control in the treatment of autistic children, and that particular care may be necessary when defining criteria for task acquisition. The results are discussed in relation to the literature on increased responsivity to stimulus novelty and variation.     

INTERTRIAL INTERVAL DURATION AND LEARNING IN AUTISTIC CHILDREN

This study investigated the influence of intertrial interval duration on the performance of autistic children during teaching situations. The children were taught under the same conditions existing in their regular programs, except that the length of time between trials was systematically manipulated. With both multiple baseline and repeated reversal designs, two lengths of intertrial interval were employed: short intervals with the S^D for any given trial presented approximately one second following the reinforcer for the previous trial versus long intervals with the S^D presented four or more seconds following the reinforcer for the previous trial. The results showed that: (1) the short intertrial intervals always produced higher levels of correct responding than the long intervals; and (2) there were improving trends in performance and rapid acquisition with the short intertrial intervals, in contrast to minimal or no change with the long intervals. The results are discussed in terms of utilizing information about child and task characteristics in terms of selecting optimal intervals. The data suggest that manipulations made between trials have a large influence on autistic children's learning.