Expertise and error in diagnostic reasoning

An investigation is presented in which a computer simulation model (DIAGNOSER) is used to develop and test predictions for behavior of subjects in a task of medical diagnosis. The first experiment employed a process-tracing methodology in order to compare hypothesis generation and evaluation behavior of DIAGNOSER with individuals at different levels of expertise (students, trainees, experts). A second experiment performed with only DIAGNOSER identified conditions under which errors in reasoning in the first experiment could be related to interpretation of specific data items. Predictions derived from DIAGNOSER's performance were tested in a third experiment with a new sample of subjects. Data from the three experiments indicated that (1) form of diagnostic reasoning was similar for all subjects trained in medicine and for the simulation model, (2) substance of diagnostic reasoning employed by the simulation model was parable with that of the more expert subjects, and (3) errors in subjects' reasoning were attributable to deficiencies in disease knowledge and the interpretation of specific patient data cues predicted by the simulation model.     

Considering self‐interests and symbolism together: How instrumental and value‐expressive motives interact to influence supervisors’ justice behavior

Drawing upon functional theories of attitudes and the organizational justice literature, the current research suggests that people's attitudes toward justice likely serve an instrumental function (grounded in self‐interest, rewards maximization, and punishment minimization) as well as a value‐expressive function (grounded in the expression of self‐concept and values). Importantly, these two functions co‐exist and interact to influence supervisors’ justice behavior and the consistency of such behavior via supervisors’ justification for unjust behavior. Findings from a set of experimental and correlational studies confirmed these predictions. The positive effects of supervisors’ value‐expressive function on justice behavior and its consistency were stronger when their instrumental function was lower (vs. higher), and justification for unjust behavior mediated these effects. Also, supplementary analyses showed that the consistency of supervisors’ justice behavior positively predicted subordinates’ overall justice perceptions beyond the effects of the overall level of justice behavior. We conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.     

Exploring the Factor Structure of the Social Cognition and Object Relations–Global Rating Method: Support for Two- and Three-Factor Models

The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scales–Global Rating Method (SCORS–G) contains 8 scales for coding narrative content. This study explores the factor structure of this measure using college (n = 171), outpatient (n = 239), and inpatient (n = 78) samples. Participants told stories to the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT; Murray, 1943) cards. Stories were transcribed and coded by blind raters using the SCORS–G. Cases were randomly assigned to an exploratory or validation group. Exploratory factor analysis with the exploratory group suggested 2- and 3-factor models. The Emotional Investment in Relationships (EIR) scale did not obtain a primary loading on any factor and was not included in subsequentmodels. After modifications, confirmatory factor analysis indicated good-to-adequate fit for 2- and 3-factor models. Both models showed good fit in the validation group and met criteria for invariance across models. Findings indicated that some SCORS–G scales tap cognitive-structural elements, whereas others assess affective-relational components of narratives. We found mild support separating the affective-relational scales in terms of internal representations for the self and others and relationships. The results reported here indicate that clinicians and researchers can calculate a separate cognitive-structural composite score and an affective-relational composite score when using the SCORS–G to rate TAT stories.     

Applied Problem Solving in Children with ADHD: The Mediating Roles of Working Memory and Mathematical Calculation

The difficulties children with ADHD experience solving applied math problems are well documented; however, the independent and/or interactive contributions of cognitive processes underlying these difficulties are not fully understood and warrant scrutiny. The current study examines two primary cognitive processes integral to children’s ability to solve applied math problems: working memory (WM) and math calculation skills (i.e., the ability to utilize specific facts, skills, or processes related to basic math operations stored in long-term memory). Thirty-six boys with ADHD-combined presentation and 33 typically developing (TD) boys aged 8–12 years old were administered multiple counterbalanced tasks to assess upper (central executive [CE]) and lower level (phonological [PH STM] and visuospatial [VS STM] short-term memory) WM processes, and standardized measures of mathematical abilities. Bias-corrected, bootstrapped mediation analyses revealed that CE ability fully mediated between-group differences in applied problem solving whereas math calculation ability partially mediated the relation. Neither PH STM nor VS STM was a significant mediator. When modeled together via serial mediation analysis, CE in tandem with math calculation ability fully mediated the relation, explained 79% of the variance, and provided a more parsimonious explication of applied mathematical problem solving differences among children with ADHD. Results suggest that interventions designed to address applied math difficulties in children with ADHD will likely benefit from targeting basic knowledge of math facts and skills while simultaneously promoting the active interplay of these skills with CE processes.     

“It's ok if it's hidden”: The discursive construction of everyday racism for refugees and asylum seekers in Wales

Wales has a long history of migration; however, the introduction of dispersed asylum seekers in 2001 has led to Wales becoming a more superdiverse nation. Wales has often been positioned as a more “tolerant nation” than England; however, the increasingly superdiverse nature of Wales in a postdevolution era may now be calling this tolerance thesis into question. Models of refugee and asylum seeker integration suggest that the absence of racism plays a key role in integration. This paper reports the findings of research that centres on refugee and asylum seeker integration in Wales. Nineteen interviews were conducted with refugees and asylum seekers who had been living in Wales for between 1 month and 12 years. Each interview was analysed using a discursive psychology approach. In this paper, I show that the interviewees appeared to negotiate a dilemma when talking about experiencing potentially racist incidents within the interviews, constructing them as trivial so as not to appear critical of the protection they have received in Wales. The findings also highlight the more everyday and banal forms of racism that are regularly experienced by refugees and asylum seekers living in Wales.     

Metacognition in argument generation: the misperceived relationship between emotional investment and argument quality

Overestimation of one’s ability to argue their position on socio-political issues may partially underlie the current climate of political extremism in the U.S. Yet very little is known about what factors influence overestimation in argumentation of socio-political issues. Across three experiments, emotional investment substantially increased participants’ overestimation. Potential confounding factors like topic complexity and familiarity were ruled out as alternative explanations (Experiments 1–3). Belief-based cues were established as a mechanism underlying the relationship between emotional investment and overestimation in a measurement-of-mediation (Experiment 2) and manipulation-of-mediator (Experiment 3) design. Representing a new bias blind spot, participants believed emotional investment helps them argue better than it helps others (Experiments 2 and 3); where in reality emotional investment harmed or had no effect on argument quality. These studies highlight misguided beliefs about emotional investment as a factor underlying metacognitive miscalibration in the context of socio-political issues.