Moore,Ian Alexander: Eckhart,Heidegger, and the Imperative of Releasement

Continental Philosophy Review - In Eckhart, Heidegger, and the Imperative of Releasement, Ian Alexander Moore investigates Martin Heidegger’s use of releasement (Gelassenheit). Moore argues...     

Making Men of Steel: Superhero Exposure and the Development of Hegemonic Masculinity in Children

Sex Roles - Superheroes are extremely popular among children, adolescents, and adults in the United States (and worldwide). However, there is little research on the impact of superhero exposure on...     

Results-blind review: a masked crusader for science

The organizational sciences are entering a confidence crisis where a growing number of scholars recognize our science is imperfect and our knowledge base is potentially flawed. One contributing factor that scholars have identified is the peer-review process; issues such as QRPs, positive outcome biases and publication bias are, in part, a product of the traditional peer-review process and contribute to the questionable credibility of our science. The current paper focuses on the results-blind review as a solution to improve the existing system because it has received little attention yet fits well with the nature of our discipline (e.g., not entirely grant-funded, field-research oriented). Using a mixed-methods approach, we surveyed 203 editorial board members to understand the scientific community’s reactions to the results-blind review initiative and readiness to implement change. Our results suggest that there are noted advantages of the results-blind review process and the scientific community is open to the initiative in our field. However, our data also suggest that there may be some hesitations about the initiative, particularly with implementing a new review process. Based on the results, we offer actionable recommendations for authors, reviewers, and editors regarding the results-blind review.     

Developmental differences in children's context-dependent word learning

In this study, 2.5-, 3-, and 4-year-olds (N = 108) participated in a novel noun generalization task in which background context was manipulated. During the learning phase of each trial, children were presented with exemplars in one or multiple background contexts. At the test, children were asked to generalize to a novel exemplar in either the same or a different context. The 2.5-year-olds’ performance was supported by matching contexts; otherwise, children in this age group demonstrated context dependent generalization. The 3-year-olds’ performance was also supported by matching contexts; however, children in this age group were aided by training in multiple contexts as well. Finally, the 4-year-olds demonstrated high performance in all conditions. The results are discussed in terms of the relationship between word learning and memory processes; both general memory development and memory developments specific to word learning (e.g., retention of linguistic labels) are likely to support word learning and generalization.