We favor formal models of heuristics rather than lists of loose dichotomies: a reply to Evans and Over

In their comment on Marewski et al. (good judgments do not require complex cognition, 2009) Evans and Over (heuristic thinking and human intelligence: a commentary on Marewski, Gaissmaier and Gigerenzer, 2009) conjectured that heuristics can often lead to biases and are not error free. This is a most surprising critique. The computational models of heuristics we have tested allow for quantitative predictions of how many errors a given heuristic will make, and we and others have measured the amount of error by analysis, computer simulation, and experiment. This is clear progress over simply giving heuristics labels, such as availability, that do not allow for quantitative comparisons of errors. Evans and Over argue that the reason people rely on heuristics is the accuracy-effort trade-off. However, the comparison between heuristics and more effortful strategies, such as multiple regression, has shown that there are many situations in which a heuristic is more accurate with less effort. Finally, we do not see how the fast and frugal heuristics program could benefit from a dual-process framework unless the dual-process framework is made more precise. Instead, the dual-process framework could benefit if its two “black boxes” (Type 1 and Type 2 processes) were substituted by computational models of both heuristics and other processes.     

Measuring religious attitudes: reliability and validity of the German version of the Systems of Belief Inventory (SBI-15R-D) in a representative sample

Forgiveness is a core value within Christianity and many other religions, but it is unclear whether valuing forgiveness results in individuals being more forgiving. This study examines the effect of Christian religious belief on forgiveness; tests the theoretical speculation that trust fosters forgiveness; explores the effect of cynicism, and examines age effects on forgiveness with a British sample. Christian clergy (N?=?209), general population samples of Christians (N?=?176), and a group with NRA (N?=?65) completed the Heartland Forgiveness Scale measuring forgiveness of self, others, and situations, and measures of trust, cynicism, and the importance of forgiveness. The clergy score higher on total forgiveness, forgiveness of self, others, and situations; rate forgiveness as being more important; are more trusting; and are less cynical than the Christian and no religious affiliation (NRA) samples in the general population. While the Christian sample value forgiveness more than the NRA group, they are not more forgiving on any of the measures tested. Age is a significant predictor only for situational forgiveness. Trust is not a positive mediator of forgiveness for any of the participant groups, and neither is cynicism a negative mediator of forgiveness.     

Epistemic Two-Dimensionalism and Empirical Presuppositions

This note argues that Laura Schroeter's [2005] critique of David Chalmers's epistemic two-dimensional semantics is not touched by a reply by Edward Elliott, Kelvin McQueen, and Clas Weber [2013].     

Ambulante Psychotherapie in Deutschland aus Sicht der Patienten

This study analyzed the provision of outpatient psychotherapy services in Germany in typical practice settings. In a representative survey (from June 2008 to September 2009) 1,212 subjects who received outpatient psychotherapy during the past 6 years were questioned about their experiences with outpatient psychotherapy via telephone interviews. Socio-economic data, reasons for seeking treatment, access paths, financial resources and psychosocial support data were collected. Therapeutic settings and modalities and concomitant medication treatment are described. The findings illustrate the problem of multiple psychiatric morbidity in the clinical practice and confirm the urgent need for patient access to professional psychotherapeutic services. Improving access to these services requires close cooperation between care providers.     

The neural correlates of reward-related trial-and-error learning: an fMRI study with a probabilistic learning task

This fMRI study investigated the neural correlates of reward-related trial-and-error learning in association with changing degrees of stimulus-outcome predictabilities. We found that decreasing predictability was associated with increasing activation in a frontoparietal network. Only maximum predictability was associated with signal decreases across the learning process. The receipt of monetary reward revealed activation in the striatum and associated frontoparietal regions. Present data indicate that during reward-related learning, high uncertainty forces areas relevant for cognitive control to remain activated. In contrast, learning on the basis of predictable stimulus-outcome associations enables the brain to reduce resources in association with the processes of prediction.     

Transfer of adaptation between ocular saccades and arm movements

Previous studies found little or no transfer of adaptation from reactive saccades to arm pointing movements, which suggests that the two motor systems rely on distinct adaptive mechanisms. However, this conclusion is based on experiments about the adaptation of response amplitudes, which is known to follow somewhat different principles than the adaptation of response directions. In the present study, we therefore investigate whether adapting the direction of reactive saccades will transfer to arm movements. We also test transfer in the opposite direction, from the arm to the eyes. Participants executed aimed saccades or arm movements from a central starting point towards visual targets in the participants' frontal plane. Targets were presented in eight possible locations along a circle of 20 cm radius about the starting point; each remained for 200 ms in one position, and was then displaced along the circle by -15 degrees . Participants from group E adapted to these double-stepped targets while executing eye movements, and were then tested for transfer while executing arm movements. The reciprocal design was used in participants from group A. Adaptive change in group A was about 14 degrees , while in group E it was only about 7 degrees . Transfer of adaptation was substantial, and was more pronounced when using the arm (i.e., eye-to-arm transfer in group E) rather than the eyes (i.e., arm-to-eye transfer in group A). Strong aftereffects were yielded in both groups. This pattern of findings implies that the adaptive change observed in our study was mainly based on recalibration rather than on cognitive strategies (strong aftereffects), that eyes and arm had access to a common adaptive mechanism (substantial transfer), and that the arm had better access than the eyes (larger adaptation and transfer when using the arm). When considering this outcome along with the available literature, it appears that arm and eyes may rely sometimes on a common and sometimes on distinct adaptive mechanisms, depending on the adapted parameter and on the nature of the motor task.     

Alternating Adaptation of Eye and Hand Movements to Opposite Directed Double Steps

Eye and hand movements can adapt to a variety of sensorimotor discordances. Studies on adaptation of movement directions suggest that the oculomotor and the hand motor system access the same adaptive mechanism related to the polarity of a discordance, because concurrent adaptations to opposite directed discordances strongly interfere. The authors scrutinized whether participants adapt their hand and eye movements to opposite directions (clockwise/counterclockwise) when both motor systems are alternatingly exposed to opposite directed double steps, and whether such adaptation is influenced by the allocation of effector to adaptation direction. The results showed that hand and eye movements adapted to opposite directions, but adaptation was biased to the counterclockwise direction. Aftereffects emerged nearly unbiased and independently for both motor systems. The authors conclude that the oculomotor and the hand motor system use independent mechanisms when they adapt to opposite polarities, although they interact during adaptation or concurrent performance.     

An Indirect Paper-and-Pencil Measure of Prejudice: A German Version of the Racial Argument Scale

Prejudices against minorities are still a cause of inter-ethnic conflict and violence, although their expression has changed from blatant to more subtle forms. There has been a shortage of valid and reliable German-language scales for the measurement of contemporary racial prejudices. The Racial Argument Scale (RAS; Saucier & Miller Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35:433–450, 2003) measures contemporary prejudice indirectly by asking respondents to judge how well given arguments support a conclusion. This scale was adapted to the German context with Turks as the target group. A validation study using a diverse sample of German adults (N = 194) attests to the reliability and construct validity of the German RAS (RAS-G). The adapted instrument is thus suitable for the indirect measurement of prejudice in German-speaking samples.