Age and sex differences in the cooperative and noncooperative behavior of pairs of American children

Game playing behavior of same and mixed sex pairs of 5-, 8-, and 11-year-old American children was compared, using a game in which cooperative behavior maximized reward. Pairs of 8- and 11-year-old children were relatively more cooperative and attained significantly more Joint Reward Goals than 5-year-old pairs. Older pairs were not maximally cooperative, however, in terms of all the dependent measures; in adjusting for initial differences on practice trials, 5-year-olds and 8-year-olds took less time than the 11-year-olds, and 11-year-old pairs of boys took significantly more time than all other pairs. In addition, cooperative behavior increased across trials, especially for the 11-year-old children.     

Characteristics of dropouts, remainers, and refusers at a psychosocial rehabilitation program for the chronically mentally disabled

Thirty-eight chronically mentally disabled patients who were invited to join a newly established, vocationally oriented, day treatment program in Raleigh, North Carolina, served as subjects. We attempted to determine whether demographic and psychosocial characteristics significantly differed among groups of clients who dropped out of, remained in, or refused membership in this community-support program. A variety of demographic, expectancy, psychological, and psychosocial measures were administered to each subject. Most significant was the finding that the subjects' perceived level of help and support from friends was a significant determinant of the level of program participation. Those subjects who refused to participate (refusers) perceived themselves as receiving proportionately less support than did members of the other two groups (dropouts and remainers).     

A supervision approach for teaching structural/strategic therapy in a limited setting

Many counselors are currently undergoing a Kuhnian paradigm shift from linear models of behavioral problem conceptualization to systemic conceptual models. As a result, it has become incumbent on counselor-educators to introduce the systems concept of family therapy to their students within a framework that renders it meaningful not only intellectually but also practically. This paper presents one way of doing this successfully with master's level counselors-in-training who have no live families on which to practice. An overview of systems approaches to family therapy is presented along with a seven-stage supervision approach for teaching structural/strategic therapy in limited situations where the supervision of live families is not practical or possible.     

Profile analysis of standardized intelligence test performance of very low functioning individuals

Practitioners are frequently faced with the need to evaluate the intellectual skills of individuals with very low levels of functioning. Owing to the statistical rarity of these persons, few tests have sufficient range of scores for a detailed analysis of intraindividual differences in performance. This paper describes a method that uses are equivalents and standard scores to recreate the full range of variability in the scores of low-functioning individuals. The method allows for a more complete interpretation of performance that can lead to better educational and therapeutic programming.     

School psychology in Australia

The status of school psychology in Australia is reviewed. Information is presented on the education system, the role of the school psychologist, historical development, special problems, contributions, and future trends in Australian school psychology.     

The role of observing and attention in establishing stimulus control.

Early theorists (Skinner, Spence) interpreted discrimination learning in terms of the strengthening of the response to one stimulus and its weakening to the other. But this analysis does not account for the increasing independence of the two performances as training continues or for increases in control by dimensions of a stimulus other than the one used in training. Correlation of stimuli with different densities of reinforcement produces an increase in the behavior necessary to observe them, and greater observing of and attending to the relevant stimuli may account for the increase in control by these stimuli. The observing analysis also encompasses errorless training, and the selective nature of observing explains the feature-positive effect and the relatively shallow gradients of generalization generated by negative discriminative stimuli. The effectiveness of the observing analysis in handling these special cases adds to the converging lines of evidence supporting its integrative power and thus its validity.     

Probability and delay of reinforcement as factors in discrete-trial choice.

Pigeons chose between two alternatives that differed in the probability of reinforcement and the delay to reinforcement. A peck on the red key always produced a delay of 5 s and then a possible reinforcer. The probability of reinforcement for responding on this key varied from .05 to 1.0 in different conditions. A response on the green key produced a delay of adjustable duration and then a possible reinforcer, with the probability of reinforcement ranging from .25 to 1.0 in different conditions. The green-key delay was increased or decreased many times per session, depending on a subject's previous choices. The purpose of these adjustments was to estimate an indifference point, or a delay that resulted in a subject's choosing each alternative about equally often. In conditions where the probability of reinforcement was five times higher on the green key, the green-key delay averaged about 12 s at the indifference point. In conditions where the probability of reinforcement was twice as high on the green key, the green-key delay at the indifference point was about 8 s with high probabilities and about 6 s with low probabilities. An analysis based on these results and those from studies on delay of reinforcement suggests that pigeons' choices are relatively insensitive to variations in the probability of reinforcement between .2 and 1.0, but quite sensitive to variations in probability between .2 and 0.