Do transgender children (gender) stereotype less than their peers and siblings?

In the present work, we ask whether socially transitioned, transgender children differ from other children in their endorsement of gender stereotypes and response to others' gender nonconformity. We compare transgender children (N = 56) to a group of siblings of transgender children (N = 37), and a group of unrelated control participants (N = 56) during middle childhood (ages 6–8 years old). Our results indicate that transgender children and the siblings of transgender children endorse gender stereotypes less than the control group. Further, transgender children see violations of gender stereotypes as more acceptable, and they are more willing to indicate a desire to befriend and attend school with someone who violates gender stereotypes than the control participants. These results held after statistically controlling for demographic differences between families with and without transgender children. We discuss several possible reasons that can explain these differences.     

The personal and the subpersonal in the theory of mind debate

It is a widely accepted assumption within the philosophy of mind and psychology that our ability for complex social interaction is based on the mastery of a common folk psychology, that is to say that social cognition consists in reasoning about the mental states of others in order to predict and explain their behavior. This, in turn, requires the possession of mental-state concepts, such as the concepts belief and desire. In recent years, this standard conception of social cognition has been called into question by proponents of so-called ‘direct-perception’ approaches to social cognition (e.g., Gallagher 2001, 2005, 2007, 2012; Gallagher and Hutto 2008; Zahavi 2005, 2011) and by those who argue that the ‘received view’ implies a degree of computational complexity that is implausible (e.g., Bermúdez 2003; Apperly and Butterfill 2009). In response, it has been argued that these attacks on the classical view of social cognition have no bite at the subpersonal level of explanation, and that it is the latter which is at issue in the debate in question (e.g., Herschbach 2008; Spaulding 2010, 2015). In this paper, I critically examine this response by considering in more detail the distinction between personal and subpersonal level explanations. There are two main ways in which the distinction has been developed (Drayson 2014). I will argue that on either of these, the response proposed by defenders of the received view is unconvincing. This shows that the dispute between the standard conception and alternative approaches to mindreading is a dispute concerning personal-level explanations - what is at stake in the debate between proponents of the classical view of social cognition and their critics is how we, as persons, navigate our social world. I will conclude by proposing a pluralistic approach to social cognition, which is better able to do justice to the multi-faceted nature of our social interactions as well as being able to account for recent empirical findings regarding the social cognitive abilities of young infants.     

Two Kinds of Definition in Spinoza's Ethics

Spinoza scholars have claimed that we are faced with a dilemma: either Spinoza's definitions in his Ethics are real, in spite of indications to the contrary, or the definitions are nominal and the propositions derived from them are false. I argue that Spinoza did not recognize the distinction between real and nominal definitions. Rather, Spinoza classified definitions according to whether they require a priori or a posteriori justification, which is a classification distinct from either the real/nominal or the intensional/extensional classification. I argue that Spinoza uses both a priori and a posteriori definitions in the Ethics and that recognizing both types of definitions allows us to understand Spinoza's geometric method in a new way. We can now understand the geometric method as two methods, one resulting in propositions that Spinoza considers to be absolutely certain and another resulting in propositions that Spinoza does not consider certain. The latter method makes use of a posteriori definitions and postulates, whereas the former method uses only a priori definitions and axioms.     

Parents May Hold the Keys to Success in Immersion Treatment of Adolescent Obesity

This study examined the potential impact of parents on the long-term results of an immersion program for the treatment of adolescent obesity. Teenagers participated in a 4- to 8-week therapeutic camp. Those who continued losing weight 8- to 12-months postcamp were identified as “Losers”; those who regained weight were considered “Gainers.” Parents from both groups were interviewed about their own current lifestyle habits 1 to 1.5 years after camp ended. Results indicate that more of the initially overweight parents from the Loser group lost weight during the follow-up period than the overweight parents of Gainers. Losers' parents also reported better implementation of several aspects of the weight control program. The present results suggest that helping parents adopt lifestyle changes for themselves, even within the context of relatively short immersion treatments, may maximize outcomes for obese teenagers.     

Switch detection in preschoolers' cognitive flexibility

The current study addressed the role of switch detection in cognitive flexibility by testing the effect of transition cues (i.e., cues that directly signal the need to switch or maintain a given task goal) in a cued set-shifting paradigm at 5 years of age. Children performed better, especially on switch trials, when transition cues were combined with traditional task cues (i.e., cues that directly signal the relevant task on a given trial) relative to conditions without transition cues. This effect was not influenced by explicit knowledge of transition cues or transition cue transparency, suggesting that transition cues did not need to be semantically processed to be beneficial. These findings reveal that young children’s difficulties in set-shifting situations stem partially from failures to monitor for the need to switch.     

Do men with excessive alcohol consumption and social stability have an addictive personality?

The existence of an "addictive" personality has been extensively debated. The current study investigated personality in male individuals with excessive alcohol consumption (n=100) in comparison to a population-based control group (n=131). The individuals with excessive alcohol consumption were recruited by advertisements in a regional daily newspaper and controls from a population based Swedish Twin Registry. Personality was assessed by the Karolinska Scales of Personality (KSP). Comparisons were made with normative data. Furthermore, by using a multivariate projection-based approach (Principal Component Analysis; PCA), hidden structures of traits and possible relationships among the individuals with excessive consumption and the controls was investigated. The individuals with excessive alcohol consumption as well as the controls had mean values within the normative range in all scales of the KSP. Moreover, the PCA analysis revealed no systematic between-group separation. Taken together, this result demonstrates that male individuals with excessive alcohol consumption do not have a personality different from that of a general population, which supports the notion of no "addictive personality".     

Attributions for spousal behavior in relation to criticism and perceived criticism

This study examined relations between spousal attributions and criticism in a sample of 118 married couples. Spouses rated general perceived criticism (PC) and their own expressed criticism as well as interaction-specific PC from a videotaped discussion. Independent judges also coded criticism from the discussion. Spouses’ self-reported causal and responsibility attributions for hypothetical spousal negative behavior were related to all types of criticism. Attributions were also associated with unique variance in spouses’ reports of general PC and criticism, even after controlling either for judges’ or partners’ ratings of criticism and marital adjustment. General PC and expressed criticism appear to reflect more than either the amount of criticism present or feelings about the marriage; rather, general PC and expressed criticism are uniquely associated with the cause and responsibility ascribed to partners’ behavior.