Computer-generated psychological reports: a look at the modern psychometric machine

The proliferation of computer-generated psychological reports prompts an examination of the presuppositions of such reports and what they offer in the way of understanding individual clients. This topic is approached primarily through a review of some basics of psychological testing and psychological assessment. Major differences are noted between these two approaches to evaluating clients: They are different processes, and they yield different products. Assessment is a complex set of activities that seeks solutions to specific problems, whereas testing fits a straightforward actuarial paradigm. Testing is readily adapted to an automated data processing system, whereas the complex of assessment procedures cannot be so managed. Serious questions about the validity of computer reports are raised, however, and ethical concerns are expressed over the use of these reports by persons without adequate psychological training to understand them correctly. Limited uses for computer reports are suggested along with the need for further studies of validity and ethics.     

The representation of nonuniform motion: induced movement

Induced motion occurs when there is a misallocation of nonuniform motion. Theories of induced motion are reviewed with respect to the model for uniform motion recently proposed by Swanston, Wade, and Day. Theories based on single processes operating at one of the retinocentric, orbitocentric, egocentric, or geocentric levels are not able to account for all aspects of the phenomenon. It is therefore suggested that induced motion is a consequence of combining two different types of motion signals: one provides information by registering the motion with respect to the retina, orbit, and egocentre; the other provides information only on the relational motions between the pattern elements. Simple rules are given for defining a frame of reference for the relational motion process, which can result in a reallocation of the motion signals. It is proposed that the two signals in combination are weighted differentially, with the greater influence coming from the relational signals. Procedures for determining the weighting factors are described, and predictions from the model are examined.     

The development of sex differences in young children's activities at home: The effect of the social context

Randomly scheduled spot observations of 83 zero to six-year-old American middle-class children were used to investigate factors affecting the development of sex differences in young children's activities in and near their home. Sex and age differences in children's typical play and nonplay activities and in the people with whom they did activities were examined. The results showed that there were fewer sex differences in children's activities, activity partners, and general social settings than expected. Girls spent more time engaged in housework and school-related activities than boys, while boys spent more time in social gross motor play with other children and in self-care activities than girls. Children spent a surprisingly large amount of their time with members of their immediate family — particularly their mother and one other sibling. Boys and girls did not differ, however, in the time they were in settings or doing activities with their father, with their mother, or with same-or mixed-sex child groups.This research was supported by an award to the author from the Wisconsin Alumnae Research Foundation at the University of Wisconsin — Madison. The author would also like to acknowledge the research and editorial assistance of Daniel J. Walsh. In addition, Aletha Huston, Beatrice B. Whiting, and Gary G. Price provided valuable advice on this and earlier versions of this paper.     

It's not who you are but who you're with: Self-Confidence in achievement settings

This study examined the effects of two social cues on women's and men's self-confidence: the sex and performance of another in an achievement setting. Before trying to solve 60 anagrams, women expected to perform more poorly than men. In addition, both sexes expected to perform more poorly when paired with a male confederate than when paired with a female confederate. The effect of the partner's sex showed up in anagram performance: people with a female partner solved more anagrams than people with a male partner. The effect of subject's sex on performance was unexpected: women solved more anagrams than men. After the task, sex differences in self-confidence disappeared; neither sex of subject nor sex of partner influenced self-confidence. The partner's performance, however, had a strong effect on everyone: people were less self-confident if they had worked with a high-scoring partner. The pattern of results suggests that sex-of-subject differences in self-confidence, while important, are less powerful than the effects wielded by the sex of others in achievement settings.