Neural predictive mechanisms and their role in cognitive incrementalism

Many neuroscientists view prediction as one of the core brain functions, especially on account of its support of fast movements in complex environments. This leads to the natural question whether predictive knowledge forms the cornerstone of our common-sense understanding of the world. However, there is little consensus as to the exact nature of predictive information and processes, or of the neural mechanisms that realize them. This paper compares procedural versus declarative notions of prediction, examines how the brain appears to carry out predictive functions, and discusses to what degree, and at what level, these neural mechanisms support cognitive incrementalism: the notion that high-level cognition stems from sensorimotor behavior.     

Reflective measurement models,behavior domains,and common causes

Causal theories of measurement view test items as effects of a common cause. Behavior domain theories view test item responses as behaviors sampled from a common domain. A domain score is a composite score over this domain. The question arises whether latent variables can simultaneously constitute domain scores and common causes of item scores. One argument to the contrary holds that behavior domain theory offers more effective guidance for item construction than a causal theory of measurement. A second argument appeals to the apparent circularity of taking a domain score, which is defined in terms of a domain of behaviors, as a cause of those behaviors. Both arguments require qualification and behavior domain theory seems to rely on implicit causal relationships in two respects. Three strategies permit reconciliation of the two theories: One can take a causal structure as providing the basis for a homogeneous domain. One can construct a homogeneous domain and then investigate whether a causal structure explains the homogeneity. Or, one can take the domain score as linked to an existing attribute constrained by indirect measurement.     

Standardized assessment of relationship functioning in OEF/OIF Veterans with and without PTSD

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is associated with difficulties in intimate relationships, with most prior research examining associations with continuous, single-dimension, and often-unstandardized measures of general relationship quality or aggression. Standardized, well-normed assessments that include multiple couple problem areas could provide more precise information about the presence and specific nature of clinically significant concerns in patient care settings. This investigation aimed to replicate findings regarding increased difficulties in relationship functioning among Operations Enduring and Iraqi Freedom Veterans with PTSD and their romantic partners, specifically using a standardized assessment that permits identification of cases of clinically significant general couple distress and difficulties across multiple problem areas. We compared 32 male Veterans with PTSD and 33 without PTSD, and their romantic partners on reports of several problem areas using the revised Marital Satisfaction Inventory (MSI-R). All participants underwent structured diagnostic interviewing. PTSD couples reported clinically significant levels of relationship distress several times more frequently than comparison couples, both for general distress and across all specific problem areas (e.g., aggressive behavior, quality of leisure time together, sexual functioning, conflicts about finances and child rearing). The most notable problem areas for PTSD couples were affective and problem-solving communication. These results replicate associations of PTSD with general couple discord and multiple specific areas of couple difficulties and extend them by documenting the clinical severity of these problems. Mental health providers may consider incorporating standardized couple assessments into their evaluations of Veterans’ functioning. Couple therapies may consider using such measures to prioritize targets for treatment.     

Treating PTSD in active duty service members using cognitive processing therapy or prolonged exposure therapy: Examining everyday practice at a military outpatient clinic

The Institute of Medicine has stressed the need for evaluations of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among active duty service members (AD) using a variety of evaluation approaches (Institute of Medicine, 2012). The current study examined the clinical files of 134 service members who completed treatment for PTSD using either prolonged exposure (PE) or cognitive processing therapy at an outpatient clinic. At the completion of each session, therapists made a clinical rating as to whether or not the session was protocol adherent. The total number of treatment sessions and the proportion of sessions rated as being protocol adherent were calculated. Multi-level models estimated the change in patient PTSD and other psychological symptoms over time as a function of clinician-rated protocol adherence and total number of sessions. Approximately 65% of clinic encounters were rated by therapists as being protocol adherent. Significant reductions in PTSD and psychological symptoms were associated with protocol adherence, and this was particularly true for patients who began treatment above clinical thresholds for both PTSD and other psychological symptoms. However, as the number of sessions increased, the impact of protocol adherence was attenuated. Patient characteristics, including gender, ethnicity, and co-morbidity for other psychiatric disorders were not related to symptom change trajectories over time. These findings suggest that protocol adherence and efficiency in delivery of EBTs for the treatment of PTSD with AD is critical.     

Hypothesis Formulation,Model Interpretation,and Model Equivalence: Implications of a Mereological Causal Interpretation of Structural Equation Models

One can distinguish statistical models used in causal modeling from the causal interpretations that align them with substantive hypotheses. Causal modeling typically assumes an efficient causal interpretation of the statistical model. Causal modeling can also make use of mereological causal interpretations in which the state of the parts determines the state of the whole. This interpretation shares several properties with efficient causal interpretations but also differs in terms of other important properties. The availability of alternative causal interpretations of the same statistical models has implications for hypothesis specification, research design, causal inference, data analysis, and the interpretation of research results.     

Perceived relevance of honesty and agreeableness to situations with non‐correspondent and correspondent outcomes: An interdependence perspective

According to interdependence theory, interpersonal situations that vary in their surface characteristics can be united by similarities in their underlying structure. Likewise, factor analytic approaches to personality combine many traits into a small number of factors. In the current research, we use interdependence theory and existing factor analyses of personality traits to measure people's lay theories about the ways traits and situations interact. We predict that traits representative of honesty–humility/virtue will be rated as more relevant to situations with non‐correspondent outcomes (a gain in one person's outcomes is associated with a loss in the other person's outcomes) than to situations with correspondent outcomes (a gain in one person's outcomes is associated with a gain in the other person's outcomes). Conversely, we predict that traits representative of agreeableness will be rated as more relevant to situations with correspondent outcomes than to situations with non‐correspondent outcomes. An experiment found the expected trait X situation interaction revealing that subjects expect certain types of traits to be most relevant to specific types of situations. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Existentialism and Humanism: Humanity—Know Thyself!

At times, an individual in modernity can feel dehumanised by work, by administration, by technology, and by political power. This experience of being dehumanised can take the individual to an existential awareness of the priority of existence over essence. But what does this existential experience mean? Are there ways in which this experience can reconnect the individual to her being human, or to her being part of humanity? Any such reconnection is further complicated by the suspicion that universal presuppositions concerning ‘humanity’ or ‘human being’ or ‘humanism’ carry pretensions of imperialist grandeur that must be challenged. How, then, might one proceed to connect existential vertigo with a culture of humanism that, while resisting such pretensions, nevertheless can find meaning for the dehumanised individual? In what follows I argue that a concept of modern metaphysics, with an aporetic (Hegelian) logic of subjective experience, can carry this reconnection of the I and the We, offering meaning not in the resolution of their opposition, but in learning that the meaning of their opposition, and the meaning of humanity, is learning, is our education. I argue that it is only within modern educational metaphysics that humanity and the individual Know Thyself.     

The Concept of Experience by John Dewey Revisited: Conceiving, Feeling and ��Enliving��

The concept of experience by John Dewey revisited: conceiving, feeling and ??enliving??. Dewey takes a few steps towards a differentiation of the concept of experience, such as the distinction between primary and secondary experience, or between ordinary (partial, raw, primitive) experience and complete, aesthetic experience. However, he does not provide a systematic elaboration of these distinctions. In the present text, a differentiation of Dewey??s concept of experience is proposed in terms of feeling, ??enliving?? (a neologism proposed in this paper) and conceiving. Feeling refers to the basic mode of experience where action, emotion, cognition and communication constitute an original unity. Enliving, aesthetic experience, constitutes the lifeworld, as a person-in-world experience. Even though enliving is holistic and relational, a certain distance emerges between action, emotion and cognition which allows contemplation and choice. Conceiving, on the other hand, refers to the isolating and abstracting understanding of the world with even greater distance between action, emotion and cognition. Such a differentiation provides a clearer understanding of the scope of education. It avoids the risks of regressive tendencies in the concept of experience, and it helps to include conceiving within the realm of experience.