Reaction time measures in deception research: Comparing the effects of irrelevant and relevant stimulus–response compatibility

Evidence regarding the validity of reaction time (RT) measures in deception research is mixed. One possible reason for this inconsistency is that structurally different RT paradigms have been used. The aim of this study was to experimentally investigate whether structural differences between RT tasks are related to how effective those tasks are for capturing deception. We achieved this aim by comparing the effectiveness of relevant and irrelevant stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) tasks. We also investigated whether an intended but not yet completed mock crime could be assessed with both tasks. Results showed (1) a larger compatibility effect in the relevant SRC task compared to the irrelevant SRC task, (2) for both the completed and the intended crime. These results were replicated in a second experiment in which a semantic feature (instead of color) was used as critical response feature in the irrelevant SRC task. The findings support the idea that a structural analysis of deception tasks helps to identify RT measures that produce robust group effects, and that strong compatibility effects for both enacted crimes as well as merely intended crimes can be found with RT measures that are based on the manipulation of relevant SRC.     

Mindfulness and acceptance-based group therapy versus traditional cognitive behavioral group therapy for social anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled trial

Recent research has supported the use of mindfulness and acceptance-based interventions for Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD).     

An 18-month follow-up investigation of motor coordination and working memory in primary school children

The aim of the current study was to examine the relationship between motor coordination and visual working memory in children aged 5–11 years. Participants were 18 children with movement difficulty and 41 control children, assessed at baseline and following an 18-month time period. The McCarron Assessment of Neuromuscular Development provided a measure of motor skills and the CogState One-Back task was used to assess visual working memory. Multi-level mixed effects linear regressions were used to assess the relationship between fine motor skills, gross motor skills, and visual working memory. The results revealed that for children with movement difficulty, better fine motor skills at baseline significantly predicted greater One-Back accuracy and greater (i.e., faster) speed at 18-month follow-up. Conversely, fine motor skills at baseline did not predict One-Back accuracy and speed for control children. However, for both groups, greater One-Back accuracy at baseline predicted better fine and gross motor skills at follow-up. These findings have important implications for the assessment and treatment of children referred for motor difficulties and/or working memory difficulties.     

Item grouping and item randomization in personality measurement

This paper describes a study examining the impact of item order in personality measurement on reliability, measurement equivalence and scale-level correlations. A large sample of university students completed one of three forms of the International Personality Item Pool version of the Big Five personality inventory: items sorted at random, items sorted by factor, and items cycled through factors. Results showed that the underlying measurement model and the internal consistency of the IPIP-Big Five scale was unaffected by differences in item order. Also, most of the scale-level correlations among factors were not significantly different across forms. Implications for the administration of tests and interpretation of test scores are discussed, and future research directions are offered.     

Pacifism—Fifty Years Later

I suppose I’m writing this because of my 1965 paper on Pacifism. In that essay I argued that pacifism is self-contradictory. That’s a strong charge, and also not entirely clear. Let’s start by trying to clarify the charge and related ones. Pacifism has traditionally been understood as total opposition to violence, even the use of it in defense of oneself when under attack. I earlier maintained (in my well-known “Pacifism: A Philosophical Analysis” (Narveson, Ethics, 75:4, 259–271, 1965)) that this position is contradictory, if it is intended to mean that one has no right to use violence. While that is perhaps going too far, pacifism as so characterized is surely, as I have later argued, self-defeating in an obvious sense of that expression. But in any case, contemporary theorists who describe their views as pacifist profess to hold no such doctrine—they regard that familiar characterization of pacifism as a caricature. They do express strong opposition to war, but even that is not unlimited. If the chips are genuinely down, they will approve going to war-level self-defense—but they deny that it ever is really necessary, or at least that it is necessary nearly as often as actual war-making behavior among nations would suggest. In this it is not clear that we have a purely philosophical disagreement. How much opposition to war qualifies a view as “pacifist”? That is now very hard to say. After all, all decently liberal thinkers are against violence as a standardly available way of pursuing one’s ends. We all agree that if violence is to be justified, it takes something special. It should be a “last resort,” Just War theorists have classically said, and while ‘last’ is very difficult to pin down, at least, violence should be very far from the first thing a responsible nation thinks of. What’s more, the “something special” is not just that one’s ends are so important. It has to be that the violence would be employed in defense, of self or of other innocent parties under threat. So if there is genuine disagreement, it must be along this line: that we are morally required to make very substantial sacrifices in the pursuits of our otherwise legitimate interests, including our interests in security, in order to avoid using the violence of war. Is this reasonable? I think not. We should, of course, be reasonable, and that includes refraining from violence—except when the violence is necessary to counter the aggressive violence of others. For we reason, on practical matters, in terms of benefits and costs. Agents, especially political agents, can, alas, benefit from violence where that violence is unilateral. Thus it is rational to see to it that it won’t be unilateral. And when it is not unilateral, then the balance is in favor—strongly in favor—of peace. It remains that we must, alas, be able to make war in the possible case that we can’t have peace. When everybody shares the preference for peace, then we can scale down and hopefully even eliminate war-making capability. (Contemporary nations have already scaled down considerably—there have been few wars in the classic sense of military exchanges between states as such in recent times.) But until the scaling down is universal and includes a genuine renunciation of the use of warlike methods to achieve ends other than genuine self-defense, what most of us think of as “pacifism” is a non-option in the near run.     

Sample size determinations for Welch's test in one‐way heteroscedastic ANOVA

For one‐way fixed effects ANOVA, it is well known that the conventional F test of the equality of means is not robust to unequal variances, and numerous methods have been proposed for dealing with heteroscedasticity. On the basis of extensive empirical evidence of Type I error control and power performance, Welch's procedure is frequently recommended as the major alternative to the ANOVA F test under variance heterogeneity. To enhance its practical usefulness, this paper considers an important aspect of Welch's method in determining the sample size necessary to achieve a given power. Simulation studies are conducted to compare two approximate power functions of Welch's test for their accuracy in sample size calculations over a wide variety of model configurations with heteroscedastic structures. The numerical investigations show that Levy's (1978a) approach is clearly more accurate than the formula of Luh and Guo (2011) for the range of model specifications considered here. Accordingly, computer programs are provided to implement the technique recommended by Levy for power calculation and sample size determination within the context of the one‐way heteroscedastic ANOVA model.     

Quantitative autism traits in first degree relatives: evidence for the broader autism phenotype in fathers, but not in mothers and siblings

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms are present in unaffected relatives and individuals from the general population. Results are inconclusive, however, on whether unaffected relatives have higher levels of quantitative autism traits (QAT) or not. This might be due to differences in research populations, because behavioral data and molecular genetic research suggest that the genetic etiology of ASD is different in multiplex and simplex families. We compared 117 unaffected siblings and 276 parents of at least one child with ASD with 280 children and 595 adults from the general population on the presence of QAT using the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS). Mean SRS scores for siblings, control children, parents and control adults were 25.4, 26.6, 33.7 and 32.9. Fathers of children with ASD showed significantly higher levels of QAT than controls, but siblings and mothers did not. We could not detect a statistically significant difference in SRS scores between relatives from simplex and multiplex families. These results do not support the theory of differential (genetic) etiology in multiplex and simplex families and suggest that a carried genetic risk is generally not expressed phenotypically in most relatives, except in fathers.     

From racial discrimination to risky sex: prospective relations involving peers and parents

This study investigated how early experience with racial discrimination affected the subsequent risky sexual behaviors of a diverse sample of African American youths (N = 745). The analyses focused on 3 risk-promoting factors thought to mediate the hypothesized discrimination → risky sex relation: negative affect, affiliation with deviant peers, and favorable attitudes toward risky sex. In addition, attentive parenting was examined as a protective factor. Analyses using structural equation modeling revealed that youths who perceived more racial discrimination at age 10 or 11 were engaging in more sexual risk taking at age 18 or 19. This relation was mediated by the hypothesized risk-promoting factors via pathways that were consistent with our conceptual model. Results also indicated a prospective reciprocal relation between parenting and children's deviant affiliations: deviant peer affiliations at age 10 or 11 predicted more attentive parenting behaviors by the parents; this response from the parents, in turn, predicted relatively fewer deviant affiliations when the youths were 15 or 16. Study findings are discussed in terms of their relevance to the disproportionately high rates of sexually transmitted infections among African Americans.