Heterogeneous heterogeneity by default: Testing categorical moderators in mixed-effects meta-analysis

Categorical moderators are often included in mixed-effects meta-analysis to explain heterogeneity in effect sizes. An assumption in tests of categorical moderator effects is that of a constant between-study variance across all levels of the moderator. Although it rarely receives serious thought, there can be statistical ramifications to upholding this assumption. We propose that researchers should instead default to assuming unequal between-study variances when analysing categorical moderators. To achieve this, we suggest using a mixed-effects location-scale model (MELSM) to allow group-specific estimates for the between-study variance. In two extensive simulation studies, we show that in terms of Type I error and statistical power, little is lost by using the MELSM for moderator tests, but there can be serious costs when an equal variance mixed-effects model (MEM) is used. Most notably, in scenarios with balanced sample sizes or equal between-study variance, the Type I error and power rates are nearly identical between the MEM and the MELSM. On the other hand, with imbalanced sample sizes and unequal variances, the Type I error rate under the MEM can be grossly inflated or overly conservative, whereas the MELSM does comparatively well in controlling the Type I error across the majority of cases. A notable exception where the MELSM did not clearly outperform the MEM was in the case of few studies (e.g., 5). With respect to power, the MELSM had similar or higher power than the MEM in conditions where the latter produced non-inflated Type 1 error rates. Together, our results support the idea that assuming unequal between-study variances is preferred as a default strategy when testing categorical moderators.     

Safety behaviors were associated with greater anxious symptoms during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic

Research shows that people who use safety behaviors are at greater risk factor for anxiety than people who do not use safety behaviors. However, the perception of some safety behaviors changed during the COVID-19 pandemic; behaviors that were once considered unnecessary or excessive were now commonplace (e.g., monitoring bodily symptoms, avoiding crowds). The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which the pandemic changed the status of health-related safety behaviors as a risk factor for symptoms of anxiety. To this end, we tested the effect of safety behavior use on anxious symptoms during the first year of the pandemic using a longitudinal design with 8 time points and participants (n = 233) from over 20 countries. Despite possible changes in their perception, those engaging in high levels of safety behaviors reported the greatest levels of anxious symptoms throughout the pandemic year. However, the outcomes for safety behavior users were not all negative. Safety behavior use at baseline was the only predictor of participants' willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (measured one year later).     

Participation,influence, and satisfaction in group decision making

The hypothesis that attitudinal effects of participation depend on individual differences in motivation was tested in a laboratory experiment with 56 three-man groups (leader and two members). Measures of the attractiveness of power and social acceptance were obtained prior to a group decision task, after which members described their perceived participation, influence, and satisfaction. Results showed that: (a) influence was more strongly related to satisfaction for members with strong, as opposed to weak, power motives; (b) for members with strong affiliation motives, participation was more strongly related to satisfaction than was influence. Relationships varied across satisfaction aspects. It was concluded that participation may be associated with favorable role attitudes through different motive-attainment mechanisms in the group decision-making process.     

Concurrent variation of response bias and sensitivity in an operant-psychophysical test

The yes-no signal detection procedure was applied to a single-response operant paradigm in which rats discriminated between a standard auditory intensity and attenuated comparison values. The payoff matrix was symmetrical (with reinforcing brain stimulation for correct detections and brief time-out for errors), but signal probability and intensity differences were varied to generate a family of isobias and isosensitivity functions. The d’ parameter remained fairly constant across a wide range of bias levels. Isobias functions deviated from a strict matching strategy as discrimination difficulty increased, although an orderly relation was maintained between signal probability value and the degree and direction of response bias.     

Probability learning as a function of momentary reinforcement probability

Pigeons were trained on a probability learning task where the overall reinforcement probability was 0.50 for each response alternative but where the momentary reinforcement probability differed and depended upon the outcome of the preceding trial. In all cases, the maximum reinforcement occurred with a “win-stay, lose-shift” response pattern. When both position and color were relevant cues, the optimal response pattern was learned when the reinforcement probability for repeating the just-reinforced response was 0.80 but not when the probability was 0.65. When only color was relevant, learning occurred much more slowly, and only for subjects trained on large fixed ratio requirements.     

Auditory evoked brain responses: Intensity functions from bipolar human scalp recordings

Average evoked brain responses were computed from four simultaneous recordings during binaural tone stimulation at 10 intensity levels. Amplitudes and latencies were measured for the prominent components, and linear regression coefficients were computed. The results indicate that the sensitivity of the evoked response to stimulus intensity is dependent upon the selection of the appropriate measure. Linear amplitude functions were demonstrated. Additional research relating these responses to psychophysical measures is suggested.     

Successive luminance difference thresholds and brightness as a function of the interstimulus interval and durations of successive flashes

Monocular,successive luminance difference thresholds (ΔI) and brightness matches (PSE) were obtained by the method of constant stimuli for two flashes successively presented to the same retinal area. Variations in interstimulus interval first-flash duration,and second-flash duration were the independent variables investigated. ΔI decreased as a function of ISI,while PSE remained relatively uninfluenced. An intensity-duration reciprocity was observed with increases in either first- or second-flash duration. Equal increases in duration of both flashes led to a constant value of ΔI. A Broca-Sulzer effect was also noted. In another study, a 10-msec, variable-luminance Standard was followed after 500 msec by either a 10-msec or a 320-msec test flash that was compared to the Standard. The results indicated that the rate of change of brightness with changes in luminance of the Standard was faster for the 10-msec flash than for the 320-msec flash. The rate-of-change hypothesis would predict that the 10-msec flash should have the smaller ΔI. The results for two Ss indicated the opposite: AI was smaller for 320-msec than for 10-msec flashes. A modification of the hypothesis was suggested such that it may be the energy increment (Δlt) required for detection that is related to the rate at which brightness changes with energy.