A Source Of Metacomprehension Inaccuracy

In the present study we examined the basis of students' self-evaluations of comprehension performance. We manipulated text difficulty to maximize performance variability across reading trials and to minimize the likelihood of giving similar performance evaluations across trials. Students were allowed to acquire task (prior) experience across nine reading trials. A path model analysis was then used to examine the basis of students' self-evaluations within and across trials 10, 11, and 12. The results showed that despite nine learning trials, students did not assess performance based on each individual trial (proximal experience). Rather, self-evaluations were influenced by prior trials (distal experience). Thus, immediate self-evaluations are not assessments of immediate performance but assessments of generalized self-representations of ability formed from distal experience.     

Prior visual inspection and object naming: Two factors that enhance hidden feature inclusion in young children's drawings

It is widely held that young children draw what they know rather than what they see. However, evidence is growing that they can be provoked into making visually realistic drawings. In this study two factors were found to affect the form of visual realism. In Expt 1, 5- and 6-year-olds produced visually realistic drawings of a familiar object when it was neither named nor given to the child to inspect before drawing. On the other hand, prior inspection led to significant hidden feature inclusion at 5 and 6 years, and this applied whether the object drawn was familiar or novel. Seven-year-olds' drawings were visually realistic in all presentation conditions. In Expt 2, 6-year-olds were shown to include the hidden feature if the object was named before drawing. Two conclusions are drawn. It is possible that children draw what they have seen over time rather than what they see at a particular time. Secondly, object naming may lead to drawing from a canonical model tagged by the object's name.     

The cost of treating substance use disorders: individual versus family therapy

This study examined the cost of substance use disorders treatment in a large healthcare organization. A survival analysis demonstrated that family therapy utilised the least number of sessions (M = 2.41) when treating substance use disorders followed by individual therapy (M = 3.38) and mixed therapy (M = 6.40). Family therapy was the least costly of the three types, at $124.55 per episode of care for a client, with individual therapy costing $170.22 and mixed therapy $319.55. The ratio of family therapists utilising family therapy was more than three to one compared to other licensed professionals. The percentages of clients coming back for more than one episode of care are fewest for family therapy (8.9%) followed by mixed therapy (9.5%) and individual therapy (12.0%).