Assessing elements of women's decisions about mammography.

We investigated motivational and cognitive processes of behavior change with respect to mammography screening. One hundred forty-two women (ages 40 and older) recruited from three worksites answered a 41-item questionnaire consisting of statements based on constructs from the transtheoretical model of behavior change. Principal-components analysis identified two factors: a six-item component representing positive perceptions of mammography (Pros) and a six-item component representing avoidance of mammography (Cons). Analysis of variance showed that Pros, Cons, and a derived Decisional Balance measure (Pros minus Cons) were associated with stage of mammography adoption. Results are consistent with applications of the model to smoking cessation. The model is also discussed as it relates to other theories of behavior change and as a general strategy for analyzing perceptual data pertinent to health-related actions and intentions for behavioral change.     

Preschool children's eye‐movements during pictorial recall

We investigated eye‐movements during preschool children's pictorial recall of seen objects. Thirteen 3‐ to 4‐year‐old children completed a perceptual encoding and a pictorial recall task. First, they were exposed to 16 pictorial objects, which were positioned in one of four distinct areas on the computer screen. Subsequently, they had to recall these pictorial objects from memory in order to respond to specific questions about visual details. We found that children spent more time fixating the areas in which the pictorial objects were previously displayed. We conclude that as early as age 3–4 years old, children show specific eye‐movements when they recall pictorial contents of previously seen objects.     

Is I Guaranteed to Refer?

Abstract: One claim about I , regularly made and almost universally endorsed, is that uses of the term are logically guaranteed to refer successfully (if they refer at all). The claim is only rarely formulated perspicuously or argued for. Such obscurity helps disguise the fact that those who profess to advance the claim actually turn out to support not a logical guarantee at all but merely high security through fortunate coincidence. This is not surprising. For we have no good reason to accept the claim – granted, any use of I is apt to refer successfully; but that can be explained by pragmatic features of its use. And we have some reason to reject the claim – it is notoriously difficult to see how genuine reference and guaranteed success do not exclude each other when considered as properties of the logic of any term.