Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases

A cognitive-ecological approach to judgment biases is presented and substantiated by recent empirical evidence. Latent properties of the environment are not amenable to direct assessment but have to be inferred from empirical samples that provide the interface between cognition and the environment. The sampling process may draw on the external world or on internal memories. For systematic reasons (proximity, salience, and focus of attention), the resulting samples tend to be biased (selective, skewed, or conditional on information search strategies). Because people lack the metacognitive ability to understand and control for sampling constraints (predictor sampling, criterion sampling, selective-outcome sampling, etc.), the sampling biases carry over to subsequent judgments. Within this framework, alternative accounts are offered for a number of judgment biases, such as base-rate neglect, confirmation bias, illusory correlation, pseudo-contingency, Simpson's paradox, outgroup devaluation, and pragmatic-confusion effects.     

On belief bias in syllogistic reasoning

A multinomial model is used to disentangle the respective contributions of reasoning processes and response bias in conclusion-acceptance data that exhibit belief bias. A model-based meta-analysis of 22 studies reveals that such data are structurally too sparse to allow discrimination of different accounts of belief bias. Four experiments are conducted to obtain richer data, allowing deeper tests through the use of the multinomial model. None of the current accounts of belief bias is consistent with the complex pattern of results. A new theory of belief bias is proposed that assumes that most reasoners construct only one mental model representing the premises as well as the conclusion or, in the case of an unbelievable conclusion, its logical negation. New predictions derived from the theory are confirmed in 4 additional studies.     

Assessing social dysfunction: the contributions of laboratory and performance-based measures

Reviewed research studies in which laboratory and performance-based measures were used with success to identify problematic social interaction patterns and social skills deficits associated with poor peer relationships. However, the clinical utility of these measures remains an empirical question. In this article, social competence is conceptualized as an organizational construct, reflecting the child's capacity to integrate behavioral, cognitive, and affective skills to adapt flexibly to diverse social contexts and demands. Correspondingly, performance-based measures of social functioning that include complex social interaction stimuli and require integrative responses appear more likely to demonstrate social validity than measures focused on isolated behaviors or cognitions. Research studies are reviewed that involve observations of children in three types of analogue social situations: play groups, friendship pairs, and social-challenge situations. In addition, studies that have utilized performance-based measures to screen and evaluate children for social skills training programs are reviewed. We conclude that performance-based measures are unlikely to be useful in determining whether a child is experiencing social dysfunction but may enhance the clinical analysis of the nature of the child's social difficulties. We identify gaps in the current knowledge regarding the clinical utility of performance-based measures of social dysfunction, along with directions for future research.     

Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents: normative data and further evidence of construct validity

Replicates and extends prior work with the Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SAS-A) by providing psychometric data, further evidence of construct validity, and large-sample based normative data. Participants were 2,937 students (1,431 boys and 1,506 girls) in Grades 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11. Students completed the SAS-A, the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS), and the Children's Depression Inventory (CDI). Results replicated a three-factor structure for the SAS-A, with good internal consistencies for its subscales. Normative data were subdivided by sex and grade group. Construct validity included replication of prior relations with general anxiety (RCMAS) and depressive symptomatology (CDI). Implications of these results for further use and norming of the SAS-A are discussed.