A cognitive analysis of number-series problems: Sources of individual differences in performance

Two experiments were conducted to identify the roles of three hypothesized procedures in the solution of simple number-series problems and to determine whether individual differences in these solution procedures are related to performance on a number-series subtest from a standardized test of intelligence. The three procedures are recognition of memorized series, calculation, and checking. Subjects verified whether number sequences formed rule-based series. True series included both memorized counting series (e.g., “5 10 1520”) and unfamiliar noncounting series (e.g., “14 710”). False series could not be described by simple rules. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that (1) counting series were verified more quickly than were noncounting series, and (2) partial counting information in false series facilitated rejection. In Experiment 2, reliable differences in recognition of memorized sequences and calculational efficiency were found between individuals who scored well on a standardized test of number-series completion and those who scored poorly. The results provide a basis for understanding how individual differences in knowledge influence performance on problems often used to assess inductive reasoning skill.     

The development and evaluation of an online computer-assisted Rorschach Inkblot Test

An interactive computer program was developed in the BASIC language to present the performance and inquiry phases of the Rorschach Inkblot Test. As the subjects handled the traditional cards they entered their perceptions into the computer database, guided by instructions presented on the computer display. No assumptions were made about the percepts, but the Klopfer scoring questions were asked directly by the computer during the inquiry. The program scored the test as the subject answered the scoring questions on the keyboard. Thirty subjects were assessed using a test-retest design. One subgroup was tested first by a psychologist, and the other was tested first by the computer. The determinants of the psychologist and computer testing situations were found to be correlated and overall not significantly different except in location and time scores where the media differed.     

Separating cue relevance from cue importance within models of judgment and decision making

Many investigations concerned with human decision making have centered their attention on the issues of cue integration and cue importance. Unfortunately, an equally important issue—that of cue relevance—has been either neglected or equated with the importance issue. Two experiments tested the ability of information integration theory (N. H. Anderson, 1981, Foundations of information integration theory, New York: Academic Press) to disentangle cue relevance and cue importance formally as well as empirically. The decision environment was divided into two components: aspects of the information present during a decision (information context) and aspects of the situation surrounding a decision (situation context). It was hypothesized that variations in information context would affect cue importance while changes in situation context would affect cue relevance. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that the weight parameter (w) of information integration theory would reflect the information context manipulations but not situation context manipulations. Results supported previous findings showing the influence of information context on w. As predicted situation context did not affect w; however, it did affect the variability of the responses to a cue's values. The relationship between perceived variability and situation context suggests that the scale dispersion parameter σ of information integration theory may be used as a measure of relevance (K. L. Norman, 1980, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 289–310).     

Caregivers in day-care centers: Does training matter?

Training for caregivers in day-care was investigated for its relationship to caregivers' attitudes toward children and their behavior in interactions with children. The sample consisted of 59 caregivers in 22 day-care centers on the island of Bermuda. Four different levels of training were included: 1) no training; 2) two courses of the Bermuda College training program; 3) the entire four-course Bermuda College training program; and 4) a 4-year college degree in Early Childhood Education. Caregivers with half or all the Bermuda College training were less authoritarian in their childrearing attitudes than caregivers with no training, and were rated higher on Positive Interaction and lower on Detachment in their interactions with children. Caregivers with a 4-year ECE degree were different from the other three groups; their childrearing attitudes were less authoritarian, and in interactions with children they were rated higher on Positive Interaction and lower on Punitiveness and Detachment.     

Some comments on the projectibility of anthropological hypotheses: Samoa briefly revisited

The purpose of this article is to examine the applicability of the theory of projection for Anthropological hypotheses. The claim is made that Goodman's classic statement of the problem does not apply in its entirety to actual Anthropological hypotheses. The recent Freeman-Mead debate is employed as a framework for the discussion, illustrating that the issue of projectibility, while central for the social sciences, is best used as a backdrop to illustrate several important methodological problems. For Anthropology, and other related social sciences, the central methodological problem, which is directly related to the projectibility one, is the development and justification of evidence-rules that can be used for a theory of confirmation. A preliminary attempt is then made to articulate the nature of these rules within the general Hempelian framework of qualitative confirmation.