Components of analogical reasoning in a mildly head injured population

This study sought to investigate the effects of mild head injury on a particular type of cognitive ability, verbal analogical reasoning. The performance of 19 individuals with head injuries was compared to a group of 30 control subjects matched for age, education, and gender on 100 verbal analogies. Solution times and error rates were modeled. Unstandardized regression weights for individual subjects were correlated with subjects’ performance on a number of standardized ability tests. Results showed that compared to the control subjects, the head injured subjects: (a) were significantly slower to solve the analogies, and were particularly slow to perform certain processes: encoding/inference and comparison; (b) tended to show greater variability in performance; and (c) had data that had a poorer componential model fit. The data suggest that analogical reasoning is affected by a head injury, and that certain information processes may be responsible for performance deficits.     

The construction of the self: An evolutionary view

Contemporary research on the construction of the self emphasizes the products rather than the process of self-development. Borrowing from the writings of William James and contemporary views of natural selection, we propose a model ofevolutionary self-construction. Grounded in the principles of evolution and the philosophy of pragmatism, evolutionary self-construction proposes a process that guides the seeking of “truth” inpossible selves. According to this view, the self develops in response to uncertainty reduction with the “correct” self identified via the “sentiment of rationality.” Selves presently identified as correct are considered to be “instruments of action” that facilitate the interaction between an individual and the environment. Selected selves can then be developed to one’s best advantage and presented in an optimal fashion. This model helps organize contemporary frameworks around a common theme and embraces affect as a central component in the development of the self. A previous version of this paper was presented at the 98th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA.     

Differential validity by sex in employment settings

The current study meta-analyzes 59 male-female pairs of validity coefficients obtained during revalidation of the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) for evidence of differential validity by sex. Results suggest that general cognitive ability may be slightly more predictive of rated job performance for women than for men in our sample of studies. Moderator analyses examined the effects of occupational sex-dominance and cognitive complexity. Results of these analyses indicate that, in single sex-dominated occupations, tests of general cognitive ability and perceptual ability are more valid for members of the dominant sex, and these differences are more apparent at low-complexity levels. Explanations for the findings are offered in terms of properties of the ratings criterion.An earlier version of this paper was given at the 2nd annual convention of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc., Atlanta, GA. The authors thank Dave Synk for providing the occupation codes for each study.     

Suggestiveness in photospread line-ups: Similarity induces distinctiveness

The present research examined whether line-ups based on target (‘suspect’) face similarity are biased or suggestive. Four experiments are described in which subjects constructed photographic line-ups by selecting foils similar in appearance to a target. Later, another group of subjects who had not seen the faces before (mock witnesses) were asked to pick out the targets from the line-ups. All four experiments showed that mock witnesses selected the target significantly more often than expected by chance, thereby demonstrating suggestiveness. Three alternative line-up construction methods were also evaluated. In these methods, foil selection was based not only on target similarity but also on similarity with one or more of the other line-up faces. Results showed that alternative line-up targets were not selected significantly more often than chance, suggesting that bias was reduced. An overall analysis showed that the alternative line-ups were significantly less suggestive than target-based line-ups. The results indicate that foil selection procedures that incorporate foil-to-foil similarity produce fairer line-ups than those exclusively based on target similarity.     

Receiving and giving support: Effects on relationships and well-being

Sixty-five subjects reported amount of social support given and received, and satisfaction with relationships where support exchanges took place. Negative affect from relationships, psychological symptoms, and happiness were also measured. Multiple regression analyses showed that receiving and giving support was related to some negative feelings toward the relationships concerned. Receiving support was also related to inflated anxiety symptoms. Effects of receiving support on guilt and dependent feelings were moderated by relationship satisfaction. Effects of giving support on anxiety were also moderated by relationship satisfaction. Extraversion and satisfaction with relationships predicted happiness. There were some individual differences in support exchanges. Extraverts gave more support. Women received more support whereas conscientious people received less.     

GRADER: A computer program that recommends student letter grades

GRADER, a computer program that makes student test and/or course letter grade recommendations to instructors, is described. The program uses an algorithm to combine the content mastery (percentage correct) and peer comparison (“curve”) approaches to set grade cutoffs. In addition to standardizing the procedures with which letter grade cutoffs are made, GRADER may help to reduce instructor grading subjectivity and obviate tendencies toward grade inflation or deflation.     

Games teams play: A method for investigating team coordination and performance

Teams are playing an increasingly important role in the workplace. However, reviews of the team performance literature have suggested that there are serious deficiencies in our understanding of team processes and performance (e.g., Dyer, 1984). These difficulties may be attributable, in part, to the lack of laboratory methodologies to investigate team performance. This paper describes the use of low-fidelity simulations as a potentially useful paradigm for researching team coordination and performance. This paradigm is advantageous in that it offers relatively high levels of experimental control and task representation at a low cost.     

History,philosophy, and science teaching: A brief review

School science education is currently the subject of much debate. Historians and philosophers of science should play a role in this debate. Since the late nineteenth century there has been a persistent, if minor, tradition arguing for the incorporation of historical and philosophical dimensions in the teaching of school science. With the current crisis in science teaching, there are encouraging signs that more attention is being paid to this tradition. What is required is much greater collaboration between philosophers, historians, and science educators, particularly in the training of teachers.This article is a shortened version of my 1988, A Role for History and Philosophy in Science Teaching, inEducational Philosophy and Theory 20 (2). All references are to the following History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching: A Bibliography.This special number ofSynthese is part of a large international project on the place of history and philosophy in science teaching. Special issues ofEducational Philosophy and Theory, Interchange, andStudies in Philosophy and Education are being produced. An international conference on the subject will be held at Florida State University in November 1989. Details of the journals and the conference can be obtained from the author.The project commenced while the author was on leave at Florida State University in 1987. It began with a gracious invitation from Jaakko Hintikka to guest edit this number, and was furthered with the support and encouragement of David Gruender. I thank them both, and also the Philosophy Department for its hospitality. Special appreciation is due to the nearly 30 authors who have contributed papers to the project. I hope that their efforts will re-open the needed dialogue between historians, philosophers, and science educators.