Correlates of adult and child perceptions of social competency

In this study, the relationship between two commonly used measures of social competency, peer ratings of perceived status and adult ratings of assertiveness, were examined. In Phase I, high and low sociometric status children were videotaped responding to a series of role-play scenes; performance on these scenes was then rated retrospectively by adults for overall assertiveness. In Phase II, a second group of children who were unfamiliar with the videotaped children observed the taped scenes and provided ratings of likability, intelligence, working together, and attractiveness. In general, results revealed that children and adults differed in their ratings of the videotaped children. Further, boys used different cues in their ratings than did girls. More specifically, the sociometric status of girls was related to perceived attractiveness, whereas the sociometric status of boys was more closely related to perceived intelligence. Such findings suggest that children and adults look for and use different cues in their judgments. Given these differences, it is concluded that child and adult ratings should not be used interchangeably in the assessment of, and evaluation of, social competency in children.Portions of this research were supported by a grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services.     

Assessing sex differences in behavioural flexibility in an endangered bird species: the Southern ground-hornbill (Bucorvus leadbeateri)

Animal Cognition - Since ecology influences the expression of cognitive traits, intra-specific variation in ecological demands can drive differences in cognition. This is often the case, for...     

Predictors of COVID-19 precautionary behaviors to protect people with disabilities

Disability is conceptualized using one of two major frameworks: the medical and the social model of disability. The medical model of disability describes disability as an individual issue in which the appropriate intervention is to remove the disability. The social model of disability describes disability as a social construction in which the appropriate intervention is societal change to increase accessibility. This study drew on models of disability to understand predictors of engagement in COVID-precautionary behavior prior to the vaccine to protect people with disabilities (PWD) from contracting COVID-19. Participants (n = 720) with and without disabilities (n = 77 and n = 633, respectively) completed an online questionnaire measuring disability beliefs, attitudes toward PWD, concerns about PWD contracting COVID-19, and engagement in behavior protecting PWD from contracting COVID-19. Medical model beliefs were negatively associated with behavior. In addition, negative attitudes toward PWD and low concern about PWD contracting COVID-19 fully accounted for the relationship. Social model beliefs were positively associated with behavior. In addition, positive attitudes toward PWD and greater concern about PWD contracting COVID-19 partially explained the relationship. These findings suggest that framing disability as a social construction rather than a medical issue could promote greater public health behavior to protect PWD from contracting COVID.     

Response

We argue that Shogan's critique, as well as that of Fox, fails to engage with the central focus of our article, which was to characterize and evaluate different approaches to lesbian ethics and to propose an alternative to the more familiar approaches.     

An evaluation of the reliability of probability judgments across response modes and over time

Despite the importance of probability assessment methods in behavioral decision theory and decision analysis, little attention has been directed at evaluating their reliability and validity. In fact, no comprehensive study of reliability has been undertaken. Since reliability is a necessary condition for validity, this oversight is significant. The present study was motivated by that oversight. We investigated the reliability of probability measures derived from three response modes: numerical probabilities, pie diagrams, and odds. Unlike previous studies, the experiment was designed to distinguish systematic deviations in probability judgments, such as those due to experience or practice, from random deviations. It was found that subjects assessed probabilities reliably for all three assessment methods regardless of the reliability measures employed. However, a small but statistically significant decrease over time in the magnitudes of assessed probabilities was observed. This effect was linked to a decrease in subjects overconfidence during the course of the experiment.