The Socratic Augustine

Augustine is both one of the great dogmatic thinkers in our Western tradition and also one of the most Socratic. How can that be? I suggest that Augustine is given to puzzling over questions of the form “How is it possible that p?”– for example, “How is it possible to measure time when no length of time is ever present to be measured?” Moreover, he asks questions of this form even when he is in no doubt that p is the case. (Thus he is in no doubt that we can measure periods of time even though, strictly speaking, no period of time is ever present.) I suggest further that we can learn something about good teaching from studying Augustine's Socratic-style inquiry.     

The Development of Early Externalizing Problems Among Children from Low-Income Families: A Transformational Perspective

The present study examined pathways leading to early externalizing problems from age 1 to 31/2 in a design that took advantage of our knowledge of normative progression and normative socialization as well as findings from research on risk. A sample of 130 low-income participants was followed longitudinally from 12 to 42 months using observational measures of developmentally salient parenting and child disruptive behavior to predict early externalizing problems. Results are best accommodated by concepts such as transformation and transaction from developmental psychology. For boys, both child and parent variables predicted later externalizing. For girls and boys, the interaction between child noncompliance and maternal rejection was significant.     

Relations between infant irritability and maternal responsiveness in low-income families

Relations between infant irritability and maternal responsiveness at 12 and18 months were investigated in low-income mother-infant dyads. Emphasis was placed on whether results varied according to measurement strategies, infant gender, or level of maternal social support and satisfaction with that support. Irritability was measured separately through observation and maternal report, responsiveness was measured observationally, and maternal social support and satisfaction were self-reported via questionnaire. Concurrent relations between irritability and responsiveness were, in general, negative and were larger when irritability was measured observationally rather than by maternal report. Correlations were similar across gender. No longitudinal relations were found between irritability and responsiveness. Amount of maternal social support was weakly related to responsiveness and to responses to infant irritability, and the nature of these relations was unexpected. Irritability-responsiveness relations varied as a function of measurement strategies, which may in part explain mixed findings in the empirical literature.     

A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF ATTRIBUTION OF RESPONSIBILITY1

Etude interculturelle de la notion de responsabilité. — Le but de cette recherche est de comparer quel est le degré de responsabilité attribué à une personne par des enfants de trois nationalités différentes : Cuba, Porto Rico, USA. Dans chaque pays, quatre échantillons ont été constitués selon l'âge : 7–8, 9–10, 11–13 et 16–18 ans. Les enfants répondent à un questionnaire composé de 40 courtes histoires dans lesquelles on a fait varier : 1) la part prise par la personne dans la causalité des événements (5 degrés : simple association, implication directe, prévision, intention, justification); 2) la nature, bonne ou mauvaise, des conséquences; 3) l'importance, grande ou faible, des conséquences. Les résultats montrent que les degrés de causalité, la nature et l'importance des conséquences affectent grandement le niveau de responsabilité attribué, à tous les âges et dans les trois pays; on observe également des interactions significatives entre ces variables. Conformément à l'hypothèse, le degré de responsabilité attribué croît avec l'intentionalité et décroît avec la justification; il est généralement plus élevé lorsque les conséquences sont plus importantes et, de même, lorsque les conséquences sont néfastes. Cependant, les interactions significatives qu'on peut observer indiquent que Peffet de chacune des variables est, à quelque degré, influencé par les deux autres. La nationalité entraîne un effet global significatif pour un seul âge; mais elle est en interaction avec les variables liées à la causalité et aux conséquences dans tous les groupes. En général, les sujets latins (Cubains et Portoricains) font des distinctions plus fines que les Américains entre les degrés de causalité lorsque les conséquences sont bénéfiques; ceci est particulierement apparent pour les sujets les plus jeunes. II est difficile d'interpréter les différences entre nationalités : la meilleure explication reléve sans doute des différences dans les relations familiales et dans la maniere d'élever les enfants.