Characterizing belief bias in syllogistic reasoning: A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of ROC data

The belief-bias effect is one of the most-studied biases in reasoning. A recent study of the phenomenon using the signal detection theory (SDT) model called into question all theoretical accounts of belief bias by demonstrating that belief-based differences in the ability to discriminate between valid and invalid syllogisms may be an artifact stemming from the use of inappropriate linear measurement models such as analysis of variance (Dube et al., Psychological Review, 117(3), 831–863, 2010). The discrepancy between Dube et al.’s, Psychological Review, 117(3), 831–863 (2010) results and the previous three decades of work, together with former’s methodological criticisms suggests the need to revisit earlier results, this time collecting confidence-rating responses. Using a hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis, we reanalyzed a corpus of 22 confidence-rating studies (N =?993). The results indicated that extensive replications using confidence-rating data are unnecessary as the observed receiver operating characteristic functions are not systematically asymmetric. These results were subsequently corroborated by a novel experimental design based on SDT’s generalized area theorem. Although the meta-analysis confirms that believability does not influence discriminability unconditionally, it also confirmed previous results that factors such as individual differences mediate the effect. The main point is that data from previous and future studies can be safely analyzed using appropriate hierarchical methods that do not require confidence ratings. More generally, our results set a new standard for analyzing data and evaluating theories in reasoning. Important methodological and theoretical considerations for future work on belief bias and related domains are discussed.     

The Guise of the Bad in Augustine’s Pear Theft

In the second book of his Confessions, Augustine of Hippo presents his famous juvenile Pear Theft as an apparent case of acting under the guise of the bad. At least since Thomas Aquinas’ influential interpretation, scholars have usually taken Augustine’s detailed discussion of the case to be dispelling this “guise of the guise of the bad”, and to offer a solid “guise of the good”-explanation. This paper addresses an important challenge to this view: Augustine offers two different “guise of the good”-explanations in his text rather than just one, and the two explanations seem to be mutually exclusive. A number of more recent attempts to reconcile Augustine’s two lines of explanation are discussed and found wanting, and a new suggestion is made. The proposed solution focuses on the Pear Theft as a joint action, and it departs from the Aquinian interpretation in that it accounts for a way in which the “guise of the bad”-hypothesis survives the explanation.     

Did They Earn It? Observing Unearned Luxury Consumption Decreases Brand Attitude When Observers Value Fairness

People frequently observe others’ consumption, making inferences about both the consumer and the consumed brands. Although these observations are often beneficial for brands, this research demonstrates that observing luxury brand consumers whose consumption arose from unearned (vs. earned) financial resources reduces observers’ brand attitudes when observers place a high value on fairness. When fairness values are high, observers do not perceive luxury brand consumers who use unearned (vs. earned) consumption resources as prestigious, and in turn, lower prestige perceptions adversely affect observers’ brand evaluations for luxury brands. Consistent with our theorizing regarding the signaling of prestige, the joint effect of consumers’ consumption resources and observers’ fairness values on observers’ brand attitudes does not hold for nonluxury brands, which are not associated with prestige and thereby are not denigrated when the consumer is not perceived as prestigious. This research sheds light on the role of moral values in marketplace judgments of luxury consumption and brand attitude by considering the influence of consumption resources on observers’ judgments.     

Parameters of Time-out: Research Update and Comparison to Parenting Programs,Books, and Online Recommendations

In reviews published more than 30 years ago, eight parameters important to the use of time-out were identified and available research was summarized. The purpose of the current paper is to provide an updated summary of existing research for each parameter of time-out. Within each parameter, we conducted a thorough review of the published literature and identified all peer-reviewed articles addressing each parameter. We identified and summarized a total of 46 articles across the eight parameters, including 32 not cited in previous reviews. Sufficient findings were available to draw conclusions regarding time-out warning, schedule of time-out, contingent versus noncontingent release, and duration. Tentative conclusions based on only a few studies could be drawn in regard to instructional versus physical administration and verbalized reason for time-out. No conclusions could be drawn regarding time-out signal and specific time-out location. While we know much more today regarding effective implementation of time-out, there is a clear need for further exploration within these identified parameters. In addition to summarizing the literature, we reviewed recommendations made by behavioral parent training programs, parenting books, and parenting Web sites, and compared how well their recommendations matched current research based on the conclusions drawn from our review. We found that parenting sources made strong and specific recommendations on several of the parameters that were either not consistent with available research or simply lacked a sufficient research base.     

Combinatorial Bitstring Semantics for Arbitrary Logical Fragments

Logical geometry systematically studies Aristotelian diagrams, such as the classical square of oppositions and its extensions. These investigations rely heavily on the use of bitstrings, which are compact combinatorial representations of formulas that allow us to quickly determine their Aristotelian relations. However, because of their general nature, bitstrings can be applied to a wide variety of topics in philosophical logic beyond those of logical geometry. Hence, the main aim of this paper is to present a systematic technique for assigning bitstrings to arbitrary finite fragments of formulas in arbitrary logical systems, and to study the logical and combinatorial properties of this technique. It is based on the partition of logical space that is induced by a given fragment, and sheds new light on a number of interesting issues, such as the logic-dependence of the Aristotelian relations and the subtle interplay between the Aristotelian and Boolean structure of logical fragments. Finally, the bitstring technique also allows us to systematically analyze fragments from contemporary logical systems, such as public announcement logic, which could not be done before.     

Nonlinear Predictive Models for Multiple Mediation Analysis: With an Application to Explore Ethnic Disparities in Anxiety and Depression Among Cancer Survivors

Mediation analysis allows the examination of effects of a third variable (mediator/confounder) in the causal pathway between an exposure and an outcome. The general multiple mediation analysis method (MMA), proposed by Yu et al., improves traditional methods (e.g., estimation of natural and controlled direct effects) to enable consideration of multiple mediators/confounders simultaneously and the use of linear and nonlinear predictive models for estimating mediation/confounding effects. Previous studies find that compared with non-Hispanic cancer survivors, Hispanic survivors are more likely to endure anxiety and depression after cancer diagnoses. In this paper, we applied MMA on MY-Health study to identify mediators/confounders and quantify the indirect effect of each identified mediator/confounder in explaining ethnic disparities in anxiety and depression among cancer survivors who enrolled in the study. We considered a number of socio-demographic variables, tumor characteristics, and treatment factors as potential mediators/confounders and found that most of the ethnic differences in anxiety or depression between Hispanic and non-Hispanic white cancer survivors were explained by younger diagnosis age, lower education level, lower proportions of employment, less likely of being born in the USA, less insurance, and less social support among Hispanic patients.