Behavioral reputation: a cross-age perspective

This study examined the measurement of peer perceptions of behavioral reputation within the contexts of elementary, middle, and high school environments (Grades 2-12, N = 2,812) through the systematic evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Revised Class Play (A. S. Masten, P. Morison, & D. S. Pellegrini, 1985). Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated that the data did not fit A. S. Masten et al.'s original 3-factor structure. Cross-loading of items and different patterns of association between subscales across age groups (elementary, middle, and high school) contributed to the overall poor fit. Exploratory factor analyses revealed an alternative 4-factor structure as a more reliable and valid means of assessing behavioral reputation regardless of the age of the peer group sampled. Both convergent and divergent patterns of associations emerged across developmental levels.     

How Common is Peer Disagreement? On Self‐Trust and Rational Symmetry

In this paper I offer an argument for a view about the epistemology of peer disagreement, which I call the “Rational Symmetry View”. I argue that this view follows from a natural (if controversial) conception of the epistemology of testimony, together with a basic entitlement to trust our own faculties for belief formation. I then discuss some objections to this view, focusing on its relationship to other well‐known views in the literature. The upshot of this discussion is that, if the Rational Symmetry View is correct, much of the action in the epistemology of disagreement relates—not to how one should treat those one regards as an “epistemic peer” in the sense popular in that literature—but rather to who one should treat as such.