Gender Related Naming Practices: Similarities and Differences Between People and their Dogs

We compared final written letters and spoken phonemes and syllable length in the names of male (N = 250) and female (N = 197) Golden Retrievers to determine if the same gender-stereotyping trends occurring in humans also appeared in dog names. Names were taken from a website of the most popular Golden Retriever names in English speaking countries. Both male and female dogs had names ending in letters and phonemes characteristic of their respective human male and female counterparts. Female dogs had more syllables in their names than male dogs and a higher percentage of male dogs had one syllable names. We conclude that the similarities between human and dog naming practices reflect a pervasive gendered naming phonology.     

Gender identity and adjustment in black, Hispanic, and white preadolescents

The generality of S. K. Egan and D. G. Perry's (2001) model of gender identity and adjustment was evaluated by examining associations between gender identity (felt gender typicality, felt gender contentedness, and felt pressure for gender conformity) and social adjustment in 863 White, Black, and Hispanic 5th graders (mean age = 11.1 years). Relations between gender identity and adjustment varied across ethnic/racial groups, indicating that S. K. Egan and D. G. Perry's model requires amendment. It is suggested that the implications of gender identity for adjustment depend on the particular meanings that a child attaches to gender (e.g., the specific attributes the child regards as desirable for each sex); these meanings may vary across and within ethnic/racial groups. Cross-ethnic/racial investigation can aid theory building by pointing to constructs that are neglected in research with a single ethnic/racial group but that are crucial components of basic developmental processes.     

Symbolic significance of initials on longevity

The longevities of deceased major league baseball players who died prior to 1950 (N=3835) and whose initials formed acronyms, words, or names with "positive" or "negative" affect, as rated a priori by two judges, were compared with those for a group of neutral controls matched for birth year and career length, using the Berkeley standardized mortality tables. Players (n=11) with positive initials, e.g., A.C.E., lived a mean of 13 years longer than players (n=30) with negative initials, e.g., D.E.D., or players with neutral initials (n=864). These results corroborated a previous study and suggest positive name symbols are associated with increased longevity in this sample.     

The role of work habits in the motivation of food safety behaviors

The authors considered work habits within an integrated framework of motivated behavior. A distinction made between automatic and controlled action led to 2 measures of work habits: a habit strength measure reflecting the 4 characteristics of automaticity and a measure of work routines under conscious control. Workers at a turkey processing plant (N = 162) responded to an extensive survey of these work habits measures with regard to food safety. Results indicated that attitudes and subjective norms predicted food safety intentions. These intentions, along with perceived behavior control and work habits, predicted reports of food safety behaviors. A mediation analysis indicated that the work routines measure accounted for the variance in self-reported behavior and mediated any effect of the habit strength measure.     

Précis of <Emphasis Type="Italic">A Virtue Epistemology</Emphasis> (Oxford University Press, 2007)

This is a summary of A Virtue Epistemology, the book that is the subject of this book symposium.     

Replies to commentators on <Emphasis Type="Italic">A Virtue Epistemology</Emphasis> (Oxford University Press, 2007)

Paul Boghossian discusses critically my account of intuition as a source of epistemic status. Stewart Cohen takes up my views on skepticism, on dreams, and on epistemic competence and competences and their relation to human knowledge. Hilary Kornblith focuses on my animal/reflective distinction, and, along with Cohen, on my comparison between how dreams might mislead us and how other bad epistemic contexts can do so. In this paper I offer replies to my three critics.

Determining risk in pediatric research with no prospect of direct benefit: time for a national consensus on the interpretation of federal regulations

United States federal regulations for pediatric research with no prospect of direct benefit restrict institutional review board (IRB) approval to procedures presenting: 1) no more than "minimal risk" ( section sign 45CFR46.404); or 2) no more than a "minor increase over minimal risk" if the research is commensurate with the subjects' previous or expected experiences and intended to gain vitally important information about the child's disorder or condition ( section sign 45CFR46.406) (DHHS 2001). During the 25 years since their adoption, these regulations have helped IRBs balance subject protections with the pursuit of scientific knowledge to advance children's welfare. At the same time, inconsistency in IRB application of these regulations to pediatric protocols has been widespread, in part because of the ambiguity of the regulatory language. During the past decade, three federally-charged committees have addressed these ambiguities: 1) the National Human Research Protections Advisory Committee (NHRPAC) (Washington, DC), 2) the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on the Ethical Conduct of Clinical Research Involving Children (Washington, DC); and 3) the United States Department of Health and Human Services Secretary's Advisory Committee for Human Research Protections (SACHRP) (Washington, DC). The committees have reached similar conclusions on interpretation of language within regulations section sign section sign 45CFR46.404 and 406; these conclusions are remarkably consistent with recent international recommendations and those of the original National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1977) report from which current regulations are based. Drawing on the committees' public reports, this article identifies the ethical issues posed by ambiguities in regulatory language, summarizes the committees' deliberations, and calls for a national consensus on recommended criteria.     

The Collective Preference for Shared Information

Decision-making groups prefer to discuss shared information that all members know instead of unshared information that a single member knows. This bias toward discussing shared information can lead groups to make suboptimal decisions when unshared information is critical for good decision making. This preference for discussing shared information may stem from group members' positive evaluations of each other's task capabilities when shared information is communicated. Members who already are perceived as capable (i.e., those high in status, experts, and leaders) need not bolster their image by communicating shared information. Instead, they discuss unshared information more than members perceived as less capable. As members low in status gain respect by communicating shared information, they may risk mentioning unshared information later during discussion. Assigning group leaders, informing members of their expert roles, and allowing ample time for discussion may increase groups' discussion of unshared information.