Respective contributions of inhibition and knowledge levels in class inclusion development: a negative priming study

Dempster ( Dempster, 1995 ; Dempster & Corkill, 1999 ) proposed that developmental changes in performance on Piagetian tasks could be related to changes in inhibitory efficiency more than to logical development. In this study, the negative priming paradigm was adapted to the class inclusion task in order to investigate the role of inhibition and knowledge levels in the development of class inclusion. Participants were pre‐tested on two inclusion tasks, the standard Piagetian task and Markman's modification task, and assigned to different knowledge levels: empirical, and logical necessity. Children were then tested on a priming version of the class inclusion task. Results showed a negative priming effect, indicating that the irrelevant ‘subclass comparison strategy’ was actively inhibited during the processing of the class inclusion task. This effect was found to vary as a function of knowledge levels, indicating that the need for inhibition was reduced when children had attained logical necessity.     

Dialogue Concerning Natural Appropriation

Two utilitarian defenses, traceable to Bentham and Mill, arecommonly offered for patents. It is contended that patents induce innovation, and thatpatents induce disclosure of innovation. Patents on some or all of the human genomepose particular challenges for these defenses. In the first instance, patents on nucleotidesequences entail the perverse notion of human reproduction qua infringement. In the second place, when such patents are available (as is presently the case), the two defenses involve a counterfactual claim, viz., that if there were no such patents, biotechnological progress would wane. Even if these challenges are met, concerns about respect for humanity generate opposition to property interests in compounds manipulated outside the human body but significantly homologous to compounds found in humans. This stance about things human might appear to commit the fallacy of division. In a dialogue between a Kantian and a utilitarian, arguments for and against property interests in the human genome are presented.     

Competing stimulus assessments: A systematic review

The current review summarizes the literature on competing stimulus assessments (CSAs). CSAs are pretreatment assessments designed to systematically identify stimuli that reduce problem behavior (PB), ostensibly through reinforcer competition or substitution. We report on the participant characteristics, outcomes, and predictive validity of published CSAs that included (a) no-stimulus control trial(s), (b) test trials during which each stimulus was available singly and noncontingently, and (c) measurement of PB and stimulus engagement or contact. Results showed that CSAs have broad utility across a variety of topographies and functions of PB. In the majority of CSA applications for which extended analyses, or validations, were performed, stimuli shown to reduce PB during the CSA produced similar reductions during extended analysis. This was the case regardless of topography or function of PB, or whether the stimuli were assumed to be “matched” to the stimulation thought to be produced by PB. Implications for future research are discussed.