Utility of Behavior Ratings by Examiners During Assessments of Preschool Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

This study examines the clinical utility of behavior ratings made by nonclinician examiners during assessments of preschool children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD). Matched samples of children with (n = 127) and without (n = 125) AD/HD were utilized to test the internal, convergent, concurrent, and incremental validity of ratings completed by examiners on the Hillside Behavior Rating Scale (HBRS). Results indicated that HBRS ratings were internally consistent, possessed sufficient interrater reliability, and were significantly associated with parent and teacher reports of AD/HD when controlling for age, gender, intelligence, and symptoms of other psychopathology. HBRS ratings also were significantly associated with other measures of functioning, and provided a significant increment in the prediction of impairment over parent and teacher report alone. These findings suggest that behavioral ratings during testing provide a unique source of clinical information that may be useful as a supplement to parent and teacher reports.     

Can Bartlett’s repeated reproduction experiments be replicated?

Surprisingly, Bartlett's (1932) famous repeated reproduction experiments, in which he found systematically increasing errors in recall from the same people tested over time, have never been successfully replicated. Several studies have attempted partial replications, which were unsuccessful, and their authors concluded that the original observations might not be replicable. We conducted a study modeled closely after Bartlett's procedures: Subjects studied "The War of the Ghosts," took an initial test 15 min later, and then took a delayed test after 1 week. A follow-up test was conducted 6 months later on as many subjects as could be obtained. We did replicate Bartlett's results, in that (1) subjects forgot the story over delays but (2) introduced rationalization and distortion into their accounts of the story, with increases in the proportion of material distorted as retention interval increased. Subjects also imported new propositions at long delays, further confirming Bartlett's empirical observations and conclusions. Bartlett's repeated reproduction results can be replicated.     

Sweet-cheeks vs. pea-brain: embodiment,valence, and task all influence the emotional salience of language

Previous research has found that more embodied insults (e.g. numbskull) are identified faster and more accurately than less embodied insults (e.g. idiot). The linguistic processing of embodied compliments has not been well explored. In the present study, participants completed two tasks where they identified insults and compliments, respectively. Half of the stimuli were more embodied than the other half. We examined the late positive potential (LPP) component of event-related potentials in early (400–500?ms), middle (500–600?ms), and late (600–700?ms) time windows. Increased embodiment resulted in improved response accuracy to compliments in both tasks, whereas it only improved accuracy for insults in the compliment detection task. More embodied stimuli elicited a larger LPP than less embodied stimuli in the early time window. Insults generated a larger LPP in the late time window in the insult task; compliments generated a larger LPP in the early window in the compliment task. These results indicate that electrophysiological correlates of emotional language perception are sensitive to both top-down and bottom-up processes.     

Splitting a Difference of Opinion: The Shift to Negotiation

Negotiation is not only used to settle differences of interest but also to settle differences of opinion. Discussants who are unable to resolve their difference about the objective worth of a policy or action proposal may be willing to abandon their attempts to convince the other and search instead for a compromise that would, for each of them, though only a second choice yet be preferable to a lasting conflict. Our questions are: First, when is it sensible to enter into negotiations and when would this be unwarranted or even fallacious? Second, what is the nature of a compromise? What does it mean to settle instead of resolve a difference of opinion, and what might be the dialectical consequences of mistaking a compromise for a substantial resolution? Our main aim is to contribute to the theory of argumentation within the context of negotiation and compromise formation and to show how arguing disputants can shift to negotiation in a dialectically virtuous way.     

Treatment Outcome of 18-Month, Day Hospital Mentalization-Based Treatment (MBT) in Patients with Severe Borderline Personality Disorder in the Netherlands

Psychoanalytically oriented day hospital therapy, later manualized and named mentalization-based treatment (MBT), has proven to be a (cost-) effective treatment for patients with severe borderline personality disorder and a high degree of psychiatric comorbidity (BPD) in the United Kingdom (UK). As to yet it has not been shown whether manualized day hospital MBT would yield similar results when conducted by an independent institute outside the UK. We investigated the applicability and treatment outcome of 18-month, manualized day hospital MBT in the Netherlands by means of a prospective cohort study with 45 Dutch patients with severe BPD and a high degree of comorbid Axis I and Axis II disorders. Outcomes were assessed each six months. Symptom distress, social and interpersonal functioning, and personality pathology and functioning all improved significantly, with effect sizes between 0.7 and 1.7. Suicide attempts, acts of self-harm, and care consumption were also significantly reduced. The results indicate that MBT can effectively be implemented in an independent treatment institute outside the UK. This study also supports the clinical effectiveness of manualized day hospital MBT in patients with severe BPD and a high degree of psychiatric comorbidity.