Developing an Online Early Detection System for School Attendance Problems: Results From a Research-Community Partnership

School refusal and other school attendance problems are vexing problems for school-aged youth, families, school personnel, and clinicians. However, few resources exist to detect problematic attendance. The current report describes three steps of a research-community partnership to develop an early identification program to detect youth at risk for problematic attendance. First, a survey was conducted to estimate the scope and cost of school refusal across grades K–12. School administrators estimated relatively few youth exhibiting significant school refusal (missing 5 or more days per year) but estimated the costs associated with services for these youth to be very high (mean cost of in-district programs: $94,052; mean cost of out-of-district placements: $496,657). Second, elementary school counselors were tasked with tracking absenteeism among at-risk youth using an online attendance tracking prototype. Counselors identified a high number of youth who showed elevated absences, lates, or early departures (17.2% of enrolled students), and counselor ratings were significantly related to whether the student (a) had received an individualized education plan or 504 plan, (b) had a sibling with similar attendance problems, (c) was older, or (d) had divorced or separated parents. In a final step, counselor feedback was sought and revisions were incorporated in the attendance tracker. Findings reinforce the prevalence and cost of school attendance problems, provide guidance for using technology to monitor attendance and related indices (tardies, early departures), and direct attention to youth factors that may be useful in identifying youth at risk for poor attendance.     

Moral responsibility for actions: epistemic and freedom conditions

I will argue that a desert-based justification for treating a person in a certain way is a justification that holds this treatment to be justified simply by what the person is like and what he or she has done, independent of (1) the fact that treating the person in this way will have good effects (or that treating people like him or her in this way will have such effects); (2) the fact that this treatment is called for by some (justified) institution or practice; or (3) the fact that the person could have avoided being subject to this treatment by choosing appropriately, and therefore cannot complain of it. I will explore the implications of this understanding of desert for the role of desert-based justifications of blame, punishment, and economic reward.     

Luck and Free Will

This essay sketches a problem about luck for typical incompatibilist views of free will posed in Alfred Mele, Free Will and Luck (2006), and examines recent reactions to that problem. Reactions featuring appeals to agent causation receive special attention. Because the problem is focused on decision making, the control that agents have over what they decide is a central topic. Other topics discussed include the nature of lucky action and differences between directly and indirectly free actions.     

Cognitive and neural determinants of response strategy in the dual-solution plus-maze task

Response strategy in the dual-solution plus maze is regarded as a form of stimulus-response learning. In this study, by using an outcome devaluation procedure, we show that it can be based on both action-outcome and stimulus-response habit learning, depending on the amount of training that the animals receive. Furthermore, we show that deactivation of the dorso-medial and the dorso-lateral striatum with Botulinum neurotoxin A, mimicked or abolished, respectively, the effects of practice on the sensitivity of the response strategy to outcome devaluation. These findings have relevant implications for the understanding of the learning mechanisms underlying different overt behaviors in this widely used maze task.     

Direct Versus Indirect: Control,Moral Responsibility,and Free Action

This article has two primary aims. The first is to identify relationships among direct control, direct moral responsibility for an action, and directly free action. The second is to provide a partial map depicting the bearing of some familiar competing views about moral responsibility and free action – traditional compatibilism, semicompatibilism, and event-causal libertarianism – on differences in conceptions of direct and indirect species of moral responsibility and free action.     

Self-deception and selectivity

Philosophical Studies - This article explores the alleged “selectivity problem” for Alfred Mele’s deflationary position on self-deception, a problem that can allegedly be solved...