How are scientific corrections made?

This paper provides examples drawn from the author’s experience that support the conclusion that errors and deceptions in archival science are often not easily or quickly corrected. The difficulty in correcting errors and deceptions needs wider recognition if it is to be overcome. In addition, the paper discusses how subtle abuses introduce errors into the archival literature.     

Evaluation of the relative effectiveness of methylphenidate and cognitive behavior modification in the treatment of kindergarten-aged hyperactive children

This study of kindergarten-aged hyperactive children evaluated the effects of three modes of treatment in relation to an untreated control group. The treatments were administered over a 3-month period and included cognitive behavior modification, methylphenidate, and the two treatments combined. A follow-up assessment was done approximately 1 year later at the end of the first grade. Analyses of psychological, rating scale observational, and interview data showed that hyperactive children became less symptomatic over time;the data did not provide evidence indicating that any of the treatments studied was more effective than any other or than no treatment at all.This research was supported by grants from the Ontario Mental Health Foundation (Grant No. 701-76/78) and The Hospital for Sick Children Foundation (Grant No. 77-22). The authors wish to thank Mr. Syl Sauro, of the Etobicoke Board of Education, and Mrs. M. Stijovic, of the Etobicoke Community Health Department, for their cooperation.     

The fallacy of “two years below grade level for age” as a diagnostic criterion for reading disorders

The use of grade equivalent scores contrasted against grade placement is widespread in the diagnosis of dyslexia and other reading disabilities. This method substantially overstates disabilities at upper grade levels while underestimating the severity of difficulties in the early grades. Other difficulties and difficulties and distortions of this methods are also pointed out. An accurate, alternative method for reliably determining aptitude/achievement discrepancies is presented and its use discussed.     

Risk taking in achievement-oriented situations: Do people really maximize affect or competence information?

Several studies of choice behavior (risk taking) in achievement-oriented situations are reanalyzed. The usual ways of pooling all choices over trials and subjects conceal the series of subjects' decisions and the dynamics inherent in these decisions. A basic strategy of subjects in an achievement-oriented choice situation seems to be to start with an easy task, choose a more difficult one whenever you succeed, and stay mostly at the same difficulty level whenever you fail. A computer model, in which such simple assumptions are made, generates preference functions over the order of difficulty levels that are indistinguishable from those found in empirical studies. It is concluded that the study of choice behavior in achievement-oriented situations should be based on the analysis of the series of single decisions by one subject. For this we need models that allow the predictions of such decisions and the prediction of action-controlling cognitions and emotions.