Linguistic and conceptual influences on adjective acquisition in 24- and 36-month-olds

Two hundred forty English-speaking toddlers (24- and 36-month-olds) heard novel adjectives applied to familiar objects (Experiment 1) and novel objects (Experiment 2). Children were successful in mapping adjectives to target properties only when information provided by the noun, in conjunction with participants' knowledge of the objects, provided coherent category information: when basic-level nouns or superordinate-level nouns were used with familiar objects, when novel basic-level nouns were used with novel objects, and--for 36-month-olds--when the nouns were underspecified with respect to category (thing or one) but participants could nonetheless infer a category from pragmatic and conceptual knowledge. These results provide evidence concerning how nouns influence adjective learning, and they support the notion that toddlers consider pragmatic factors when learning new words.     

When objects lose their meaning: what happens to their use?

The 8 patients involved in this study were impaired on tests assessing knowledge of objects and on the demonstration of their use. The patients' success in object use was significantly correlated with their knowledge about the objects, providing further evidence that conceptual knowledge plays a key role in object use. Having a recipient present improved performance in the moderately impaired patients, suggesting that a certain level of conceptual knowledge must remain for the additional information to be beneficial. Although overall accuracy in using the target objects was not related to our measures of affordance, the specific aspects of use afforded by the objects' structures were relatively impervious to semantic impairment, suggesting a role for affordance information when object-specific knowledge is disrupted. The patients' familiarity with the objects was an important predictor of performance. Finally, despite good performance on tests of mechanical problem solving, the patients showed very little evidence of employing these skills in their interactions with real objects.     

Adjectives really do modify nouns: the incremental and restricted nature of early adjective acquisition

By 24 months, most children spontaneously and correctly use adjectives. Yet prior laboratory research that has studied lexical acquisition in young children reports that children up to 3-years-old map novel adjectives to object properties only in very limited situations (Child Development 59 (1988) 411; Child Development 64 (1993) 1651; Child Development 71 (2000) 649; Developmental Psychology 36 (2000) 571; Child Development 69 (1998) 1313). In Experiments 1 and 2 we introduced 36-month-olds (Experiment 1) and 24-month-olds (Experiment 2) to novel adjectives while providing rich referential and syntactic information to indicate what the novel words mean. Specifically, we used a given novel adjective to describe multiple familiar objects which shared a salient property; in addition we used the adjectives in full noun phrases, not in conjunction with pronouns. Under these conditions, both groups mapped novel adjectives onto object properties. In Experiment 3 we asked whether the rich referential information was responsible for the successful outcome of the previous two experiments; we introduced novel adjectives to 2- and 3-year-olds as in Experiments 1 and 2, but the adjectives modified nouns of vague (very general) reference ("one", or "thing"). Under these conditions the children failed. We suggest that young word learners require access to the taxonomy of the object type so that the relevant property can be identified. The taxonomically specific nouns of Experiments 1 and 2 accomplish this, whereas the more general, semantically bleached nominals in Experiment 3 do not. Taken together with related findings in the literature, these findings favor an account of lexical acquisition in which layers of information become available incrementally, as a consequence of solving prior parts of the learning problem.     

Commercialism and Universities: An Ethical Analysis

This paper questions the ethicality of commercial relationships between universities and external donors. By examining cases such as technology transfer and the outside funding of research interests, we identify possible conflicts of interest between the external provider of financial support and academic institutions. The reality today is that university administrators, who have significant decision-making powers, proactively seek large corporate sources of funding that may compromise academic values including academic freedom and the ability to make institutional decisions without the influence of commercial interests. For example, Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola have provided extensive funding to universities in return for exclusivity rights to market their product on campuses even though such products may not be healthy alternatives to other soft drinks. Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may have opposing interests to faculty and universities if the results of research do not meet the expectations of the sponsors. Curricula issues may be slanted to promote the interests of a corporation or other provider of outside funding. Corporate partnerships between universities and companies such as Nike raise ethical questions when students or other members of the campus community object to the acceptance of financial support from a company that allegedly practices anti-social labor practices in developing countries. On the other hand, corporate funding can be used to supplement diminishing financial resources available to academic institutions, especially for public universities. One benefit of external funding is that it supports pharmaceutical and technology-oriented research and development into new products and processes that have the potential to serve the public good. One cost of such funding arrangements is that the acceptance of financial support from commercial interests solely to market their products on campus restricts the choices available to students that should exist in a free market economy such as in the U.S. The ethicality of the relationship between universities and commercial interests is a matter of concern because of the potential influence of providers of external funds to universities that can compromise academic freedom and objective decision making.     

The Eating Attitudes Test: validation with DSM-IV eating disorder criteria

The Eating Attitudes Test (EAT; Garner & Garfinkel, 1979) is one of the most widely used self-report eating disorder instruments. Originally developed to diagnose anorexia nervosa, it is often used in nonclinical samples where it has a high false-positive rate, which is likely due to changes in diagnostic criteria. Because the EAT has not been validated with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) criteria, we examined its criterion validity for discriminating between nonclinical women with and without an undifferentiated DSM-IV eating disorder diagnosis. We also examined differences in mean EAT scores among eating-disordered, symptomatic, and asymptomatic participants. Results show that the EAT has an accuracy rate of at least 90% when used to differentially diagnose those with and without eating disorders and that mean EAT scores differed among eating-disordered, symptomatic, and asymptomatic participants.     

The Value of Integration: Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Meets Ego Psychology in a Psychotherapy Group for Children

ABSTRACT

Psychotherapy integration requires us to look beyond the confines of a particular theoretical or technical approach towards other perspectives. Integrative work with children, in particular, meets the socio-emotional needs of the child while simultaneously modeling behaviors and skills. This paper presents an explicitly integrative approach to child group psychotherapy: Relationships. Individuals. Skills. Engagement (RISE) Group. We begin with an in-depth discussion of the RISE group structure illustrated by clinical examples (the “what”) followed by a review of the theory and treatment modalities that inform the approach (the “why” and “how”). The RISE group is grounded in two theoretical perspectives (psychoanalytic principles and ego psychology) and draws upon clinical techniques from multiple treatment modalities (including cognitive behavior therapy, psychodynamic play therapy and dialectical behavior therapy). Combined, the merger of these perspectives results in a multilevel intervention that forges pathways to mastery and competence within the child. Finally, we discuss the value and limitations of integration as applied to group psychotherapy for children.     

When more is not merrier: shared stressful experiences amplify

ABSTRACT

Sharing experiences with others, even without communication, can amplify those experiences. We investigated whether shared stressful experiences amplify. Participants completed the Cold Pressor Task at the same time as a confederate, or while the confederate completed another task. Importantly, participants in the shared (vs. unshared) condition experienced more sensory pain characteristics and reported more stress over time in relation to the task. Importantly, they reported thinking more about the confederate’s thoughts and feelings. This mentalizing sometimes mediated effects, suggesting the task amplified when participants constructed mental representations of others’ CPT experience (e.g. that it hurts) and incorporated it into their own responses.     

DOES "FEMINIST" PLUS "THERAPIST" EQUAL "FEMINIST THERAPIST"?

This research examined the therapy behaviors self-identified feminist therapists engaged in. Practicing therapists (N = 101) were asked to endorse various feminist self-labels and to indicate how often they engaged in a variety of feminist (as assessed by the Feminist Therapy Behaviors-Revised [FTB-R] scale; and other therapy behaviors with both women and men clients. The following results were found. First, incrementally specific feminist self-labeling by therapists improved the prediction of therapy behaviors reflecting the notion that the personal is political. Second, the most strongly identified feminist therapists were distinguished from other therapists by their attention to issues of oppression (e.g., sexism, racism, heterosexism) and socialization. Third, therapists reported engaging in FTB-R behaviors with men clients almost as much as with women clients. And finally, FTB-R and other therapy behaviors emerged as distinct, both in terms of the underlying structure of therapists' responses and in terms of the links to feminist self-labeling.