A Social Dilemma Analysis of Commuting Preferences: The Roles of Social Value Orientation and Trust1

The current research advances a social dilemma analysis of commuting, examining the roles of preexisting personality differences in social value orientation (i.e., prosocial vs. proself orientation) and trust (i.e., a general belief in the honesty and cooperative intentions of others) in determining preferences for collectively desirable commuting options: preferences for commuting by public transportation (Study 1) and carpooling (Study 2). Consistent with predictions, both studies revealed that, relative to p of prosocials, preferences of proselfs were more strongly associated with beliefs about the relative efficiency of cars (i.e., an outcome affecting personal well-being). Also, greater preferences for collectively desirable actions were observed among prosocials with high trust—relative to prosocials with low trust and proselfs with high or low trust—providing support for the claim that 2 conditions (i.e., prosocial goals and trust in others) must be met to obtain collectively desirable commuting preferences.     

Predicting Adolescents' Initiation of Intercourse and Contraceptive Use

This paper examines whether variables consistent with problem behavior theory predict grade of onset of first intercourse and adoption of effective contraception. A total sample of 3,419 Wisconsin adolescents in Grades 7, 9, and 11 participated in a survey of health-related behaviors administered 3 times across a 6-year period. The sample is 87% White. Multiple regression methods generated different models for onset of sexual intercourse vs. contraceptive adoption. Consistent with problem behavior theory, sexual onset is predicted by the adolescent's behavioral system, perceived peer substance use/abuse, importance of friends, and extent to which the adolescent felt harried and believed it was okay to break laws. Contraceptive adoption is predicted by family structure, socioeconomic variables, and self-esteem. Age and gender model differences emerged.     

Empirically defined symptom scales using the DISC 2.3

Empirically defined scales of depressive, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional-defiant disorder, and conduct symptoms from the lay-administered National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC), version 2.3, and evidence of their reliability and validity, are presented. The scales were developed using factor analyses of data obtained from an epidemiologic survey of over 1,200 children drawn from four sites across the U.S. and Puerto Rico (the NIMH Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders, or MECA Study). Their psychometric properties were tested in a subsample of children reinterviewed by clinicians. The findings support the use of these continuous measures. The scales are strongly related to the diagnostic categories and show good test-retest reliability. The scales can be used to characterize severity in children with diagnoses and to describe problems and symptoms in children without diagnoses. Because these scales can measure gradations in symptomatology, they may be more useful than categorical measures. Like categorical measures, the scales based on the DISC are greatly influenced by the informant, whether child or parent.This research was supported by grant MH-46732 from the National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland.The MECA Program is an epidemiologic methodology study performed by four independent research teams in collaboration with staff of the Division of Clinical Research, which was reorganized in 1992 with components now in the Division of Epidemiology and Services Research and the Division of Clinical and Treatment Research, of the NIMH, Rockville, Maryland. The NIMH Principal Collaborators are Darrel A. Regier, MD, MPH, Ben Z. Locke, MSPH, Peter S. Jensen, MD, William E. Narrow, MD, MPH, and Donald S. Rae, MA; the NIMH Project Officer was William J. Huber. The Principal Investigators and Coinvestigators from the four sites are as follows: Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, UO1 MH46725: Mina K. Dulcan, MD, Benjamin B. Lahey, PhD, Donna J. Brogan, PhD, Sherryl Goodman, PhD, and Elaine Flagg, PhD; Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene at New York State Psychiatric Institute (Columbia University), New York, New York, UO1 MH46718: Hector R. Bird, MD, David Shaffer, MD, Myrna Weissman, PhD, Patricia Cohen, PhD, Denise Kandel, PhD, Christina Hoven, PhD, Mark Davies, MPH, Madelyn S. Gould, PhD, and Agnes Whitaker, MD; Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, UO1MH46717: Mary Schwab-Stone, MD, Philip J. Leaf, PhD, Sarah Horwitz, PhD, and Judith H. Lichtman, MPH; University of Puerto Rico, San Juan, Puerto Rico, UO1 MH46732: Glorisa Canino, PhD, Maritza Rubio-Stipec, MA, Milagros Bravo, PhD, Margarita Alegría, PhD, Julio Ribera, PhD, Sarah Huertas, MD, and Michael Woodbury, MD.The authors gratefully acknowledge Zenaida González and José Martínez who performed the data nalayses, as well as Elizabeth Pastrana, and Felícita Laboy, secretaries, for their valuable contributions to this work.     

An investigation of the validity of the SPSI and SPSI-R in differentiating high-suicidal from depressed,low-suicidal college students

The present study examined the validity of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory (SPSI) and SPSI—Revised in differentiating 65 high-suicidal from 63 depressed, low-suicidal college students. Results from multivariate analyses indicated overall differences in problem-solving between these two groups as measured by the SPSI but not by the SPSI-R. Further examination of these differences revealed the high-suicidal group was different in problem-solving orientation, rather than problem-solving skills, compared to the depressed, low-suicidal group. However, when depression was statistically controlled in hierarchical regression analyses, none of the problem-solving measures predicted group membership. The superiority of the SPSI to the SPSI-R in differentiating these two groups appears to be accounted for by the elimination of 28 items in the revised version, many of which measure orientation to problem-solving. Also explored was the possibility that objective measures of problem-solving provide a better prediction of adjustment than do self-report measures.     

THE VISUAL SYSTEM'S MEASUREMENT OF INVARIANTS NEED NOT ITSELF BE INVARIANT

Abstract— When two shapes that differ in orientation or size have to be compared or objects have to be recognized from different viewpoints, the response time and error rate art systematically affected by the size of the geometric difference. In this report, we argue that these effects are not necessarily solid evidence for the use of mental transformations and against the use of invariants by the visual system. We report an experiment in which observers were asked to give affine-invariant coordinates of a point located in an affine frame defined by three other points. The angle subtended by the coordinate axes and the ratio of the lengths of their unit vectors systematically affected the measurement errors. This finding demonstrates that the visual system's measurement of invariants need not itself be invariant.     

A critical review of theS/L reliability index

The meaning and properties of a commonly used index of reliability, S/L,were examined critically. It was found that the index does not reflect any conventional concept of reliability. When used for an identical behavioral observation session, it is not statistically correlated with other reliability indices. Within an observation session, the standardizing measure of Lis beyond the control of the investigator. Furthermore, the reason for the choice of Las the standard is unclear. The role of chance agreement in S/Lis not known. The exact interpretation of the index depends on which observer reports L.Overall the conceptual and mathematical meaning of S/Lis dubious. It is suggested that the S/Lindex should not be used until its nature is shown to be a measure of reliability. Other approaches such as the intraclass correlations and generalizability coefficients should be used instead.The authors are indebted to Johnny Matson for his critique of an earlier version of this paper.     

Philosophy of medicine in the Netherlands

This report explores the relationship between philosophy and medicine in the Netherlands. In Section 1 we outline the ups and downs of medico-philosophical research in our country: pre-war flourishing, post-war decline, and modern renaissance. In Section 2 we review recent Dutch literature in the philosophy of medicine. The topics dealt with include methodology of medical science, alternative medicine, the basic concepts of medicine, anthropological medicine, medicalization, medicine and culture, and health care ethics.