Keep or trade? An experimental study of the exchange paradox

The “exchange paradox”—also referred to in the literature by a variety of other names, notably the “two-envelopes problem”—is notoriously difficult, and experts are not all agreed as to its resolution. Some of the various expressions of the problem are open to more than one interpretation; some are stated in such a way that assumptions are required in order to fill in missing information that is essential to any resolution. In three experiments several versions of the problem were used, in each of which the information given was sufficient to determine an optimal choice strategy when it exists or to justify indifference regarding keeping or trading when such a strategy does not exist. College students who were presented with the various versions of the problem tended to base their choices on simple heuristics and to give little evidence of understanding the probabilistic implications of the differences in the problem statements.     

Dyadic Models for the Study of Health

Dyadic designs have been used in health research to investigate intra‐ and inter‐personal mechanisms of health and well‐being in various types of dyads, including parent–child dyads, siblings, friends, and romantic partners. Although a growing number of researchers are designing studies that capture the interdependent complexities of relationships, many still need more information on how to analyze the data in a way that maximizes its value. Therefore, the purpose of this review paper is twofold: (1) to address some of the ways in which dyadic data analysis is being used in current health research, with an emphasis on research that has employed the Actor‐Partner Interdependence Model, and (2) to propose and explain various methodological and substantive considerations that researchers should consider when using dyadic data analysis in their own research.     

A Structural Approach to the Understanding of Causes, Effects, and Judgment. Review of Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference, by Judea Pearl

Judea Pearl is Professor Emeritus of Computer Science and Statistics and Director of the Cognitive Systems Laboratory at University of California, Los Angeles. He has authored the books Heuristics (1984) and Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems (1988). He has also published close to 300 articles on automated reasoning, learning, and inference. In 1999, he was awarded the IJCAI Research Excellence Award in Artificial Intelligence fundamental work in heuristic search, reasoning under uncertainty, and causality.Susan F. Butler is a doctoral student at Tufts University. Her work is in modeling of judgment and decision making, stochastic processes, and the examination of choice behavior under uncertainty.     

Accuracy of recall among “eyewitnesses” to a simulated robbery: Intrapersonal and stimulus determinants

This study is a laboratory analogue investigation of variables that impinge upon the recall of detail about a simulated act of armed robbery among “eyewitnesses.” Specifically, this study sought to determine (1) whether recall of detail by Ss who watch the videotape of a simulated “armed robbery” taken by surveillance camera in a “convenience” store varies according to (a) the dress and appearance of the presumed “robber,” (b) the gender of the victim of the “robbery,” and/or (c) the gender of the “eyewitness”; and (2) whether such recall varies according to S’s inventoried psychological “needs.” Ss viewed the videotape of the simulated robbery under one of four conditions representing variations in the dress and appearance (“status”) of the alleged offender and the gender of the alleged victim; completed the Personality Adjective Inventory; and responded to a questionnaire concerning details of the alleged offense. Results indicate that the single statistically significant source of variance in accuracy of recall of detail is the experimentally manipulated “status” of the perpetrator; gender of victim and of subject contribute significantly neither in isolation nor in interaction. Inventoried psychological needs for “autonomy” and “change” are significantly but negatively and weakly correlated with accuracy among women Ss, while “change” alone is so correlated among men Ss. Findings are interpreted in accordance with theory and research in experimental social psychology and psychological criminology bearing upon person perception and role expectancy in relation to behavioral stereotypes. This study was supported in part through the Henry Rutgers Scholars Program at Rutgers College of Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey. The authors express their gratitude to Charles Rouse, Steven Gaynor, April Hayes, Erica Gross, Shawn Kimble, Elizabeth Chen, and Stephanie Bonn; Officer Leroy Washington, Rutgers University Police; and most particularly to Dipak Munsaf, proprietor of Krauszer's Food Store in the sixth ward of the city of New Brunswick.     

A personality profile of Mount Everest climbers

The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised was administered to a group of climbers (N=39) who were attempting to summit Mount Everest. The personality profiles for these climbers were characterized by higher scores on the Extraversion (sociability) and Psychoticism (toughmindedness) scales and lower scores on the Neuroticism (anxiety) scales than for the normative sample. This profile is consistent with the pattern typically observed for athletes and notably for higher achieving athletes.     

Is It Worth Lying For? Physiological and Emotional Implications of Recalling Deceptive Affection

This investigation explored the risks of affectionate expressions in romantic relationships by examining the physiological and emotional implications of recalled expressed deceptive affectionate messages to romantic partners. Ninety‐nine participants were assigned to one of three conditions: deceptive affection, honest affection, or plans with a friend (control). Results indicate that individuals' blood pressure and heart rates are not differentially influenced when recalling deceptive affection compared to honest affection or common communication. Similarly, there were no differences in feelings of guilt and shame based on the motive for the deceptive expression. Posthoc analyses compared affectionate conditions (deceptive and honest) to the control condition and revealed no significant physiological differences. Implications for theory, methodological comparisons, and future research are discussed.     

Jus Ad Bellum,Values, and the Contemporary Structure of International Law

In “Religion, Violence, and Human Rights: Protection of Human Rights as Justification for the Use of Armed Force,” James Johnson discusses an important dilemma for contemporary society: when should transnational military force be permitted to protect human rights? Professor Johnson uses the relatively recent doctrine of a “responsibility to protect” as the centerpiece of his paper, characterizing it as a reaction to legal concepts that emerged in the “Westphalian system.” Yet the doctrine, at least as it relates to the use of military force, is not a reaction to that system but, rather, to the relatively recent system of the UN Charter, particularly its relegation to the Security Council of the exclusive authority to determine when military force should be used for purposes other than self‐defense. When the Cold War ended and the Security Council failed to act to protect human rights, the doctrine was born.