On the importance of being first: Serial order effects in the interaction between action plans and ongoing actions

When we plan sequences of actions, we must hold some elements of the sequence in working memory (WM) while we execute others. Research shows that execution of an action can be delayed if it partly overlaps (vs. does not overlap) with another action plan maintained in WM (partial repetition cost). However, it is not known whether all features of the action maintained in WM interfere equally with current actions. Most serial models of memory and action assume that interference will be equal, because all action features in the sequence should be activated to an equal degree in parallel; others assume that action features earlier in the sequence will interfere more than those later in the sequence, because earlier features will be more active. Using a partial repetition paradigm, this study examined whether serial position of action features in action sequences maintained in WM have an influence on current actions. Two stimulus events occurred in a sequence, and participants planned and maintained an action sequence to the first event (action A) in WM while executing a speeded response to the second event (action B). Results showed delayed execution of action B when it matched the first feature in the action A sequence (partial repetition cost), but not when it matched the last feature. These findings suggest that serial order is represented in the action plan prior to response execution, consistent with models that assume that serial order is represented by a primacy gradient of parallel feature activation prior to action execution.     

Lay beliefs about the causes of and solutions to dehumanization and prejudice: do nonexperts recognize the role of human–animal relations?

We investigate laypeople's beliefs about the causes of and solutions to out‐group dehumanization and prejudice. Specifically, we examine whether nonexperts recognize the role that beliefs in the human–animal divide play in the formation and reduction of intergroup biases, as observed empirically in the interspecies model of prejudice. Interestingly, despite evidence in the present study that human–animal divide beliefs predict greater dehumanization and prejudice, participants strongly rejected the human–animal divide as a probable cause of (or solution to) dehumanization or prejudice. We conclude with a meta‐analytic test of the relation between human–animal divide and prejudice (mean r = .34) in the literature, establishing the human–animal divide as an important but largely unrecognized prejudice precursor. Applied implications for the development and implementation of prejudice interventions are considered.     

How Sacrifice Impacts the Giver and the Recipient: Insights From Approach‐Avoidance Motivational Theory

This study investigated how sacrificing for approach versus avoidance goals shapes the giver's and the recipient's emotions and relationship quality. A sample of 80 dating couples participated in a three‐part study in which they discussed sacrifice in the laboratory (Part 1), reported on their daily sacrifices for 14 days (Part 2), and completed a follow‐up survey 3 months later (Part 3). When partners discussed a sacrifice they had made for approach goals, they experienced greater relationship quality, whereas when they discussed a sacrifice they had made for avoidance goals, they experienced poorer relationship quality. These effects were replicated with outside observer reports. On days when partners sacrificed for approach goals, both partners experienced increased relationship quality, but on days when people sacrificed for avoidance goals, the giver experienced decreased relationship quality. These effects were mediated by positive and negative emotions, respectively. Approach sacrifice goals predicted increases in relationship quality and avoidance sacrifice goals predicted decreases in relationship quality, as reported by both partners 3 months later. Sacrifice per se does not help or harm relationships, but the goals that people pursue when they give up their own interests can critically shape the quality of intimate bonds.     

Perfectionism,Stress, Daily Hassles,Hopelessness, and Suicide Potential in Depressed Psychiatric Adolescents

The current study examined dimensions of perfectionism, stress, hopelessness, and suicidality in a sample of adolescent psychiatric patients diagnosed with depression. This study evaluated the unique contribution of perfectionism in predicting suicidality after considering other predictors (i.e., hopelessness, depression) and it also examined the diathesis-stress model of perfectionism and suicide. A sample of 55 adolescents (41 females, mean age = 15.53, 25.5 % ethnic/racial minorities) who were psychiatric patients completed measures including the Child-Adolescent Perfectionism Scale, subjective and objective indices of life stress, daily hassles, depression, hopelessness, suicide ideation, prior attempts and suicide potential. In addition, other informants (i.e., adolescents’ parents) completed a diagnostic interview and an interview assessing major stressful experiences. Socially prescribed perfectionism (i.e., the perception that others require perfection of oneself) predicted concurrent levels of suicide potential and this association with suicide potential held even after controlling for the variances accounted for by depression and hopelessness. Hierarchical regression analyses provided partial support for the diathesis-stress model, that is, socially prescribed perfectionism interacted with daily hassles to predict concurrent suicide potential even after controlling for depression, hopelessness, and prior suicide attempt. Together, these findings suggest that socially prescribed perfectionism acts as a vulnerability factor that is predictive of suicide potential or risk among clinically depressed adolescents.     

Applying Recent Argumentation Methods to Some Ancient Examples of Plausible Reasoning

Plausible (eikotic) reasoning known from ancient Greek (late Academic) skeptical philosophy is shown to be a clear notion that can be analyzed by argumentation methods, and that is important for argumentation studies. It is shown how there is a continuous thread running from the Sophists to the skeptical philosopher Carneades, through remarks of Locke and Bentham on the subject, to recent research in artificial intelligence. Eleven characteristics of plausible reasoning are specified by analyzing key examples of it recognized as important in ancient Greek skeptical philosophy using an artificial intelligence model called the Carneades Argumentation System (CAS). By applying CAS to ancient examples it is shown how plausible reasoning is especially useful for gaining a better understanding of evidential reasoning in law, and argued that it can also be applied to everyday argumentation. Our analysis of the snake and rope example of Carneades is also used to point out some ways CAS needs to be extended if it is to more fully model the views of this ancient philosopher on argumentation.     

Word skipping during sentence reading: effects of lexicality on parafoveal processing

Two experiments examined how lexical status affects the targeting of saccades during reading by using the boundary technique to vary independently the content of a letter string when seen in parafoveal preview and when directly fixated. Experiment 1 measured the skipping rate for a target word embedded in a sentence under three parafoveal preview conditions: full preview (e.g., brain–brain), pseudohomophone preview (e.g., brane–brain), and orthographic nonword control preview (e.g., brant–brain); in the first condition, the preview string was always an English word, while in the second and third conditions, it was always a nonword. Experiment 2 investigated three conditions where the preview string was always a word: full preview (e.g., beach–beach), homophone preview (e.g., beech–beach), and orthographic control preview (e.g., bench–beach). None of the letter string manipulations used to create the preview conditions in the experiments disrupted sublexical orthographic or phonological patterns. In Experiment 1, higher skipping rates were observed for the full (lexical) preview condition, which consisted of a word, than for the nonword preview conditions (pseudohomophone and orthographic control). In contrast, Experiment 2 showed no difference in skipping rates across the three types of lexical preview conditions (full, homophone, and orthographic control), although preview type did influence reading times. This pattern indicates that skipping not only depends on the presence of disrupted sublexical patterns of orthography or phonology, but also is critically dependent on processes that are sensitive to the lexical status of letter strings in the parafovea.     

Characterizing belief bias in syllogistic reasoning: A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of ROC data

The belief-bias effect is one of the most-studied biases in reasoning. A recent study of the phenomenon using the signal detection theory (SDT) model called into question all theoretical accounts of belief bias by demonstrating that belief-based differences in the ability to discriminate between valid and invalid syllogisms may be an artifact stemming from the use of inappropriate linear measurement models such as analysis of variance (Dube et al., Psychological Review, 117(3), 831–863, 2010). The discrepancy between Dube et al.’s, Psychological Review, 117(3), 831–863 (2010) results and the previous three decades of work, together with former’s methodological criticisms suggests the need to revisit earlier results, this time collecting confidence-rating responses. Using a hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis, we reanalyzed a corpus of 22 confidence-rating studies (N =?993). The results indicated that extensive replications using confidence-rating data are unnecessary as the observed receiver operating characteristic functions are not systematically asymmetric. These results were subsequently corroborated by a novel experimental design based on SDT’s generalized area theorem. Although the meta-analysis confirms that believability does not influence discriminability unconditionally, it also confirmed previous results that factors such as individual differences mediate the effect. The main point is that data from previous and future studies can be safely analyzed using appropriate hierarchical methods that do not require confidence ratings. More generally, our results set a new standard for analyzing data and evaluating theories in reasoning. Important methodological and theoretical considerations for future work on belief bias and related domains are discussed.