Prediction Consistency: A Test of the Equivalence Assumption Across Different Indicators of the Same Construct.

Prominent theoretical constructs such as the Big Five personality factors often inspire the development and use of different inventories. This practice rests on the vital assumption that different indicators equivalently assess the same construct—otherwise, it would often be inappropriate to draw conclusions on the construct level. In comparison to the evidence typically relied on to support this equivalence assumption, we argue that a direct test of prediction consistency will provide further insights: prediction consistency is a necessary condition for the equivalence assumption that indicators from different inventories predict an external criterion to the same extent. Here, we outline guidelines how to design studies to establish prediction consistency and illustrate this approach in an experiment testing the prediction consistency of the Agreeableness indicators from three prominent Big Five inventories. Specifically, we considered prediction consistency with respect to honesty (vs. cheating) as the behavioral criterion for which a specific a priori hypothesis can be derived on theoretical grounds. Results contradicted predictions consistency and thus the equivalence assumption by showing qualitatively different relations to behavioral honesty, thereby also emphasizing that the interchangeability of inventories should generally be subjected to a strict test, rather than assumed. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology     

In Defense of a Probability Based Semantics for Counterfactuals

In a recent paper Lee Walters criticizes a number of philosophers – including Gundersen – for committing a ‘failure in the argumentative strategy’ when they attempt to amend the standard Lewis semantics for counterfactuals in order to avoid the so‐called principle of Conjunction Conditionalization. In this article we defend a Gundersen‐style probability‐based semantics against Walter's major misgivings: that it is not logically conservative, that it is committed to the Connection Hypothesis, and that it cannot deal satisfactory with irrelevant semi‐factuals.     

The World at 7:00: Comparing the Experience of Situations Across 20 Countries

The purpose of this research is to quantitatively compare everyday situational experience around the world. Local collaborators recruited 5,447 members of college communities in 20 countries, who provided data via a Web site in 14 languages. Using the 89 items of the Riverside Situational Q‐sort (RSQ), participants described the situation they experienced the previous evening at 7:00 p.m. Correlations among the average situational profiles of each country ranged from r = .73 to r = .95; the typical situation was described as largely pleasant. Most similar were the United States/Canada; least similar were South Korea/Denmark. Japan had the most homogenous situational experience; South Korea, the least. The 15 RSQ items varying the most across countries described relatively negative aspects of situational experience; the 15 least varying items were more positive. Further analyses correlated RSQ items with national scores on six value dimensions, the Big Five traits, economic output, and population. Individualism, Neuroticism, Openness, and Gross Domestic Product yielded more significant correlations than expected by chance. Psychological research traditionally has paid more attention to the assessment of persons than of situations, a discrepancy that extends to cross‐cultural psychology. The present study demonstrates how cultures vary in situational experience in psychologically meaningful ways.     

Computers as a Source of A Posteriori Knowledge in Mathematics

Electronic computers form an integral part of modern mathematical practice. Several high-profile results have been proven with techniques where computer calculations form an essential part of the proof. In the traditional philosophical literature, such proofs have been taken to constitute a posteriori knowledge. However, this traditional stance has recently been challenged by Mark McEvoy, who claims that computer calculations can constitute a priori mathematical proofs, even in cases where the calculations made by the computer are too numerous to be surveyed by human agents. In this article we point out the deficits of the traditional literature that has called for McEvoy’s correction. We also explain why McEvoy’s defence of mathematical apriorism fails and we discuss how the debate over the epistemological status of computer-assisted mathematics contains several unfortunate conceptual reductions.     

Incidence of Data Duplications in a Randomly Selected Pool of Life Science Publications

Since the solution to many public health problems depends on research, it is critical for the progress and well-being for the patients that we can trust the scientific literature. Misconduct and poor laboratory practice in science threatens the scientific progress, leads to loss of productivity and increased healthcare costs, and endangers lives of patients. Data duplication may represent one of challenges related to these problems. In order to estimate the frequency of data duplication in life science literature, a systematic screen through 120 original scientific articles published in three different cancer related journals [journal impact factor (IF) <5, 5–10 and >20] was completed. The study revealed a surprisingly high proportion of articles containing data duplication. For the IF < 5 and IF > 20 journals, 25 % of the articles were found to contain data duplications. The IF 5–10 journal showed a comparable proportion (22.5 %). The proportion of articles containing duplicated data was comparable between the three journals and no significant correlation to journal IF was found. The editorial offices representing the journals included in this study and the individual authors of the detected articles were contacted to clarify the individual cases. The editorial offices did not reply and only 1 out of 29 cases were apparently clarified by the authors, although no supporting data was supplied. This study questions the reliability of life science literature, it illustrates that data duplications are widespread and independent of journal impact factor and call for a reform of the current peer review and retraction process of scientific publishing.     

Development and Psychometric Evaluation of an Item Bank for Computerized Adaptive Testing of the EORTC Insomnia Dimension in Cancer Patients (EORTC CAT-SL)

To further advance assessment of patient-reported outcomes, the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group has developed computerized adaptive test (CAT) versions of all EORTC Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) scales/items. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate an item bank for CAT measurement of insomnia (CAT-SL). In line with the EORTC guidelines, the developmental process comprised four phases: (I) defining the concept insomnia and literature search, (II) selection and formulation of new items, (III) pre-testing and (IV) field-testing, including psychometric analyses of the final item bank. In phase I, the literature search identified 155 items that were compatible with our conceptualisation of insomnia, including both quantity and quality of sleep. In phase II, following a multistep-approach, this number was reduced to 15 candidate items. Pre-testing of these items in cancer patients (phase III) resulted in an item list of 14 items, which were field-tested among 1094 patients in phase IV. Psychometric evaluations showed that eight items could be retained in a unidimensional model. The final item bank yielded greater measurement precision than the original QLQ-C30 insomnia item. It was estimated that administering two or more items from the insomnia item bank with CAT results in a saving in sample size between approximately 15–25%. The 8-item EORTC CAT-SL item bank facilitates precise and efficient measurement of insomnia as part of the EORTC CAT system of health-related quality life assessment in both clinical research and practice.

     

Multiple Factors and Multiple Mechanisms Determine the Quality of Conscious Experiences: A Reply to Anzulewicz and Wierzchoń

In this Letter to the Editor, we seize the opportunity to respond to the recent comments by Anzulewicz and Wierzchoń, and further clarify and extend the scope of our original paper. We re‐emphasize that conscious experiences come in degrees, and that there are several factors that determine this degree. Endorsing the suggestions of Anzulewicz and Wierzchoń, we discuss that besides low‐level attentional mechanisms, high‐level attentional and non‐attentional mechanisms might also modulate the quality of conscious experiences.