A Paradigm for Studying the Accuracy of Self-Reports of Risk Behavior Relevant to AIDS: Empirical Perspectives on Stability, Recall Bias, and Transitory Influences

Despite the importance of the issue for AIDS-related research, there is a paucity of studies that have addressed the issue of the validity of self-reports of patterns of risk behavior over time. This article frames issues of measurement in the context of cognitive psychology and presents a research paradigm that investigators can use to explore issues of accuracy, bias, and stability in self-reports. The paradigm also permits the analysis of transitory influences on risk behavior, influences which have been minimized in current AIDS research. Preliminary data are presented that support the feasibility of the method and which are suggestive of important considerations in the development of valid measures in national surveys.     

A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Substantive and Contextual Mediation Tactics1

The effectiveness of three mediation tactics was compared in two laboratory studies. It was hypothesized that a content mediation procedure which involved identifying the priorities of both parties and suggesting a trade-off of low for high priority issues would be most effective in helping to resolve the dispute, followed by an issue identification mediation procedure in which priorities were identified but no suggestions were made. A positive framing mediation procedure in which the benefits of a negotiated settlement were emphasized was expected to be somewhat less effective. In Study 1, 64 students played the role of company negotiator and interacted with a programmed citizen group negotiator. All three mediation tactics produced more satisfactory outcomes (higher joint payoffs) than did a no-mediation condition. In Study 2, 46 pairs of students negotiated with one another and received content mediation, issue identification mediation, positive framing mediation, or no mediation. Negotiators receiving content mediation achieved more satisfactory outcomes (higher joint profits) than did negotiators in the other 3 conditions. Results are discussed in terms of a contingency model of mediation effectiveness.     

The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (PC-DISC v.3.0): Parents and Adolescents Suggest Reasons for Expecting Discrepant Answers

To identify reasons for discrepancies between parent and child reports of child/adolescents's psychiatric symptoms, parents and adolescents (51 pairs) were asked to guess what the other would answer to questions from the PC-DISC about the adolescent's psychiatric symptoms, and to explain why they expected disagreement when the answer they provided for the other was different from their own. Adolescents' explanations for expecting (1) parental denial of symptoms the adolescent reported were: the parent was unaware of, forgot about, assumed the adolescent could not have, or trivialized the symptom; and (2) parental report of symptoms the adolescent denied were: the parent misread or exaggerated the adolescent's symptom, had too high expectations for the adolescent's behavior, put a negative label on or did not trust the adolescent. Parents' reasons for expecting their children to (1) deny symptoms the parents reported were: the adolescent did not remember how s/he felt, lied, did not recognize or minimized the importance or frequency of the symptom; and (2) report symptoms the parents denied were: the adolescent lied, exaggerated the importance of or interpreted the symptom differently.Support for this work was provided by National Institute of Drug Abuse grant number DA-05585 (Dr. Cottler, P.I.), and National Institute of Mental Health grants numbers MH-31302 (Dr. R. C. Cloninger, P.I.) and MH-17104 (Dr. Cottler, P.I.).Address all correspondence, including reprint requests, to Michelle Bidaut-Russell, Ph.D, MPH, MPE, Department of Psychiatry, Box 8134, Washington University School of Medicine, 4940 Children's Place, St. Louis, Missouri 63110.     

Naturalism, scientism and the independence of epistemology

Naturalists seek continuity between epistemology and science. Critics argue this illegitimately expands science into epistemology and commits the fallacy of scientism. Must naturalists commit this fallacy? I defend a conception of naturalized epistemology which upholds the non-identity of epistemic ends, norms, and concepts with scientific evidential ends, norms, and concepts. I argue it enables naturalists to avoid three leading scientistic fallacies: dogmatism, one dimensionalism, and granting science an epistemic monopoly.     

Book reviews

Science as Salvation: a Modern Myth and its Meaning, Mary Midgley, 1994. London, Routledge x +256pp., Hb 04 15062713, £35; Pb 04 15107733, £8.99

Philosophical Naturalism, David Papineau, 1993 Oxford, Basil Blackwell xii +219pp., Hb 0631189025, £40; Pb 0631189033, £14.99

F. H. Bradley, Writings on Logic and Metaphysics, James W. Allard & Guy Stock (Eds), 1994. Oxford, Clarendon Press xv+357pp, Hb 0–198–24445–2, £40.00; Pb 0–198–24438‐X, £14.95

Invariance and Heuristics: Essays in Honour of Heinz Post, Steven French & Harmke Kamminga (Eds), 1993 Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 148 Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

Beyond Reason: Essays on the Philosophy of Paul Feyerabend, GONZALO MUNÉVAR (Ed.), 1991. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers xxi + 535pp., hb, ISBN 0–7923–1272–4, £104.20

World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science, Paul Horwich (Ed.), 1993. Cambridge, MA, Bradford Books/MIT Press vi + 356pp., pb, ISBN 0262581388, £14.95

Realism Rescued: How Scientific Progress is Possible, Jerold L. Aronson, Rom Harré & Eileen Cornell Way, 1994 London, Duckworth vii +213pp., Hb 0715624768, £30.00

Scientific Nihilism: On the Loss and Recovery of Physical Explanation, Daniel Athearn, 1994. State University of New York Press, Albany ix + 387pp., Hb ISBN 0–7914–1807–3, £52

Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology, William Lane Craig & Quentin Smith, 1993. Oxford, Clarendon Press x +342pp., Hb 0198263481, £35; Pb 019826383X, £13.95     

GUIDED VISUAL SEARCH IS A LEFT-HEMISPHERE PROCESS IN SPLIT-BRAIN PATIENTS

Abstract— Previous research has shown that split-brain (callosotomy) patients search through visual displays twice as fast as normal observers when items are divided evenly between visual hemifields, as though each disconnected hemisphere possessed its own attentional scanning system (Luck, Hillyard, Mangun, & Gazzaniga, 1989, 1994) Results from 3 split-brain patients in the present study indicate that the ability to limit search to a relevant subset of the visual display is lateralized to the left cerebral hemisphere. This ability to perform guided search was not shown in the right hemisphere, even when the search time in that hemisphere was superior to search time in the left Furthermore, guided search was observed for both hemifields in normal control observers. These findings suggest that, as with higher cognitive processes such as language, strategic visuospatial attentional processes are preferentially lateralized to the left cerebral hemisphere. The findings also imply that the callosum mediates guided search in the right hemisphere of normal subjects