Changes in Defensiveness and in Affective Distress Following Inpatient Treatment of Eating Disorders: Rorschach Comprehensive System and Self-Report Measures

Our objective in this study was to develop a Chinese version of the Responses to Stress Questionnaire (RSQ; Connor-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Thomsen, and Saltzman, 2000) and to evaluate its reliability and validity. The Chinese (C) RSQ (RSQ–C) exhibited moderate internal consistency and moderate test–retest reliability. Results of the confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the fit of a 3-factor model of voluntary coping and a separate 2-factor model of involuntary responses to stress were acceptable for the Chinese university sample. With regard to predictive validity, the Primary and Secondary Control Engagement Coping factors were associated with lower levels of depressive and anxious symptoms, whereas the Disengagement, Involuntary Engagement, and Involuntary Disengagement Coping factors were associated with higher levels of such symptoms.     

Kurt Gödel and the Foundations of Mathematics: Horizons of Truth

MEDIEVAL LOGICS

P. 0 . LEWRY (ed.), The rise of British logic. Acts of the sixth European Symposium on mediaeval logic and semantics, Balliol College, Oxford, 19-24 June 1983. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1985. xii+421 pp. $34.50.

L. M. ,DE RIJK, La philosophie au moyen cige. Translated from the Dutch by P.Swiggers, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985. xi + 244 pp. 50 Hfl.

RAIMUNDUS LULLUS, Die neue Logik. Logica nova. Textkritisch herausgegeben von Charles Lohr. Übersetzt von Vittorio Hösle und Walburga Büchel. Mit einer Einführung von Vittorio Hosle. (Lateinisch-deutsch.) Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1985. xciv + 3 17s. 64DM.

PAULUS VENETUS, Logica parva. Translation of the 1472 edition, with introduction and notes by Alan R. Perreiah. Miinchen and Wein: Philosophia Verlag, 1984. 372 pp. DM 138.

E. J. ASHWORTH, Studies in post-medieval semantics. London: Variorum Reprints, 1985. x + 342 pp. £32.00.

D. GABBAY and F. GUENTHNER (eds.), Handbook of philosophical logic. Volume 2: Extensions of classical logic. Dordrecht, Boston and Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1984. xi + 779 pp. Dfl. 31 5/$12O.OO/£80.25.

THOMAS M. SEEBOHM, Philosophie der Logik. Freiburg: Alber, 1984. 364 pp. DM 74.

WERNER STELZNER, Epistemische Logik. Zur logischen Analyse von Akzeptationsformen.Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1984. 206 pp. No price stated.

JAMES BOGEN and JAMES E. MCGUIRE (eds.), How things are: studies in predication and the history and philosophy of science. (Philosophical studies series in philosophy, Volume 29.) Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1985. 345 pp. US $46.00.

GEORG HENRIK VON WRIGHT, Truth, knowledge, and modality. (Philosophical papers, Volume 3.) Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984. ix + 155 pp. 15.00.

JEAN VAN HEIJENOORT, Selected essays. Naples: Bibliopolis, 1985. 166 pp. No price stated.

H. WANG, Beyond analytic philosophy. Doing justice to what we know. Cambridge (Massachusetts) and London: The MIT Press, 1986. xii + 273pp. No price stated.

TEXTBOOKS

R. L.VAUGHT, Set theory: an introduction. Boston, Basel, Stuttgart: Birkhäuser, 1985. x+141 pp. SFr. 76.

W. H. NEWTON-SMITH, Logic: An introductory course. London, Melbourne and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985. x+ 230 pp. £5.95 (paper).

MISCELLANEOUS

PIERRE DUHEM, Medieval cosmology. Edited and translated by Roger Ariew.Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1985. xxxi+ 601 pp. £24.75.

DAVID A. WHITE, Logic and ontology in Heidegger. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1985. xiv + 245 pp. $22.50.

J. W. DEGEN, Systeme der kumulativen Logik. Miinchen und Wien: Philosophia Verlag (Reihe Analytica), 1983. 265pp. DM 128.

GABRIELE LOLLI, La ragioni jisiche e la dimonstrazioni matematiche. Bologna: I1 Mulino, 1985. 365 pp. 30,000 lire.     

Dialogue and Synthesis: Developing Consensus in Visitor Research Methodology

ABSTRACT

This brief synthesis presents the main points of agreement between Dawson and Jensen's article, “‘Towards a ‘Contextual Turn’ in Visitor Studies: Evaluating Visitor Segmentation and Identity-Related Motivations” (this issue) and Falk's reply, “Contextualizing Falk's Identity-Related Visitor Motivation Model” (this issue), and it highlights important considerations for future research.     

Imitation in rats: Initial responding and transfer evidence

In two experiments, rats observed a conspecific demonstrator pushing a single manipulandum, a joystick, to the right or to the left for food reward before being given access to the joystick, for the first time, from a different orientation. In Experiment 1, rats that had observed left-pushing made more of their first three responses to the left than did rats that had observed right-pushing. In Experiment 2 the axis of joystick movement was rotated through 90° between observation and testing for half of the animals. These rats, like those that were tested with the joystick in the position it had occupied during demonstrator responding, showed a significant tendency to push the joystick in the same direction relative to their own bodies as had their demonstrators. These results, which cannot be explained in terms of stimulus-reinforcer learning, provide evidence that rats are capable of imitation, i.e. response, or response-reinforcer, learning by observation.     

Performance on ratio and interval schedules with matched reinforcement rates

In the first study, rats were trained to pull a chain on a schedule (RPI) that regulates the probability of reinforcement to maintain a constant average reinforcement rate without differentially reinforcing long inter-response times (IRTs). Although the response rate was sensitive to the overall rate of reinforcement, performance was unaffected by variations between 1 and 50 in the IRT memory size used in programming the schedule. In the second study, two groups of animals performed on either a random-interval (RI) schedule or a RPI schedule, with reinforcement rates determined by those generated by a third group performing on a random ratio (RR) 20 schedule. The RI group responded at a lower rate than the RPI group, which, in turn, responded at a lower rate than the RR group, even though the three groups experienced comparable rates of reinforcement. The fact that the RPI group responded at a lower rate than the RR group suggests that the standard response rate difference observed between ratio and interval schedules, which have been matched for reinforcement rate, cannot be attributed solely to the fact that conventional interval schedules differentially reinforce long IRTs.