Attributional patterns and perceptions of math and science among fifth-grade through seventh-grade girls and boys

A culturally and economically diverse group of fifth to seventh graders (n = 361) from Boston-area public schools rated their perceptions for liking and difficulty of core academic subjects, including math and science, and their attributions for explaining performance on a math test. Inconsistent with earlier work, girls and boys reported similar perceptions of core subjects, with all students reporting a relatively high liking of math and science. Girls' and boys' attributional patterns for success in math were somewhat consistent with earlier findings, but not their attributions for lack of success. Observations of the math and science classrooms in the study indicated that most teachers, aware of gender equity issues, attempted to teach their students in a gender-fair manner. This factor may account for differences between current findings and those from past studies.Special thanks to Dr. Adele Wolfson for her advice and support. Thanks also to Dr. Lee Cuba and Lillian Sun for their assistance with statistical analyses; to Dr. Beth Hennessey for help with the measure; to Drs. Ken Hawes, Barbara Beatty, and Susan Reverby for connections into schools; to Dr. Martha Pott for suggestions on the original document; to the teachers and principals who granted permission to conduct the research; and to the student participants. Appreciation is also extended to an anonymous reviewer for insightful comments.     

Print Me an Organ? Ethical and Regulatory Issues Emerging from 3D Bioprinting in Medicine

Recent developments of three-dimensional printing of biomaterials (3D bioprinting) in medicine have been portrayed as demonstrating the potential to transform some medical treatments, including providing new responses to organ damage or organ failure. However, beyond the hype and before 3D bioprinted organs are ready to be transplanted into humans, several important ethical concerns and regulatory questions need to be addressed. This article starts by raising general ethical concerns associated with the use of bioprinting in medicine, then it focuses on more particular ethical issues related to experimental testing on humans, and the lack of current international regulatory directives to guide these experiments. Accordingly, this article (1) considers whether there is a limit as to what should be bioprinted in medicine; (2) examines key risks of significant harm associated with testing 3D bioprinting for humans; (3) investigates the clinical trial paradigm used to test 3D bioprinting; (4) analyses ethical questions of irreversibility, loss of treatment opportunity and replicability; (5) explores the current lack of a specific framework for the regulation and testing of 3D bioprinting treatments.     

Disciplinary breadth and interdisciplinary knowledge production

As the complexity of the challenges presented by our interactions with our planet continues to grow, we must develop new modes of knowledge production. In these modes, distinctions between multidisciplinary and inter-disciplinary activities and processes have renewed importance. There are at least two distinct types of interdisciplinary activities distinguished by the disciplinary breadth they attempt to bridge. In the narrow case, reductionist processes reveal a common underlying principle or process which can serve as a Rosetta stone. In the broad case, no such common arbiter exists. Investigators must develop integrating vocabulary in the context of the full breadth of their work. His primary activities are the fostering of university-wide interdisciplinary research and curriculum programs focused on global change with the goal of developing Columbia into a world leader in issues related to global stewardship.     

Adaptation of the Aesop’s Fable paradigm for use with raccoons (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Procyon lotor</Emphasis>): considerations for future application in non-avian and non-primate species

To gain a better understanding of the evolution of animal cognition, it is necessary to test and compare the cognitive abilities of a broad array of taxa. Meaningful inter-species comparisons are best achieved by employing universal paradigms that standardize testing among species. Many cognitive paradigms, however, have been tested in only a few taxa, mostly birds and primates. One such example, known as the Aesop’s Fable paradigm, is designed to assess causal understanding in animals using water displacement. To evaluate the universal effectiveness of the Aesop’s Fable paradigm, we applied this paradigm to a previously untested taxon, the raccoon (Procyon lotor). We first trained captive raccoons to drop stones into a tube of water to retrieve a floating food reward. Next, we presented successful raccoons with objects that differed in the amount of water they displaced to determine whether raccoons could select the most functional option. Raccoons performed differently than corvids and human children did in previous studies of Aesop’s Fable, and we found raccoons to be innovative in many aspects of this task. We suggest that raccoon performance in this paradigm reflected differences in tangential factors, such as behavior, morphology, and testing procedures, rather than cognitive deficiencies. We also present insight into previously undocumented challenges that should better inform future Aesop’s Fable studies incorporating more diverse taxa.     

Social Convention Revisited

This article will compare and contrast two very different accounts of convention: the game-theoretical account of Lewis in Convention, and the account initially proposed by Margaret Gilbert (the present author) in chapter six of On Social Facts, and further elaborated here. Gilbert’s account is not a variant of Lewis’s. It was arrived at in part as the result of a detailed critique of Lewis’s account in relation to a central everyday concept of a social convention. An account of convention need not be judged by that standard. Perhaps it reveals the nature of an important phenomenon. Looked at in that light, these very different accounts are not incompatible. Indeed, neither should be ignored if one is seeking to understand the way in which human beings arrive at some degree of social order.     

Expect the unexpected: failure to anticipate similarities leads to an intergroup forecasting error

People often expect interactions with outgroup members to go poorly, but little research examines the accuracy of these expectations, reasons why expectations might be negatively biased, and ways to bring expectations in line with experiences. The authors found that intergroup interactions were more positive than people expected them to be (Pilot Study, Study 1). One reason for this intergroup forecasting error is that people focus on their dissimilarities with outgroup members (Study 1). When the authors focused White participants' attention on the ways they were similar to a Black participant, their intergroup expectations changed to match their positive experiences (Studies 2 & 3). Regardless of focus, Whites expected to have pleasant intragroup interactions, and they were accurate (Study 4).