Belief attribution in science: Folk psychology under theoretical stress

Some eliminativists have predicted that a developed neuroscience will eradicate the principles and theoretical kinds (belief, desire, etc.) implicit in our ordinary practices of mental state attribution. Prevailing defenses of common-sense psychology infer its basic integrity from its familiarity and instrumental success in everyday social commerce. Such common-sense defenses charge that eliminativist arguments are self-defeating in their folk psychological appeal to the belief that eliminativism is true. I argue that eliminativism is untouched by this simple charge of inconsistency, and introduce a different dialectical strategy for arguing against the eliminativist. In keeping with the naturalistic trend in the sociology and philosophy of science, I show that neuroscientists routinely rely on folk psychological procedures of intentional state attribution in applying epistemically reliable standards of scientific evaluation. These scientific contexts place ordinary procedures of attribution under greater stress, producing evidence of folk psychological success that is less equivocal than the evidence in mundane settings. Therefore, the dependence of science on folk psychology, when combined with an independently plausible explanatory constraint on reduction and an independently motivated notion of theoretical stress, allows us to reconstitute the charge of (neurophilic) eliminativist inconsistency in a more sophisticated form.This research was supported by a National Science Foundation Predoctoral Fellowship (RCD87-58409). I completed the paper during an enjoyable year as a Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow at Bryn Mawr College. I am indebted to Richard Boyd, Sydney Shoemaker, and Robert Stalnaker for their detailed appraisals of the ideas presented here. I am especially grateful to Richard Boyd for many long conversations and specific suggestions. Anthony Appiah, Paul Churchland, Phil Gasper, Frank Keil, Dick Moran, Dave Reichling, Frank Wilson, and Rob Wilson improved the final product either through comments, conversation, or both. Finally, two anonymous referees for Synthese provided very useful recommendations for improvement.     

Infant mental health: Monitoring our movement into the twenty-first century

At a time when our guidance is increasingly sought by parents, courts, and social policy planners, it is critical that infant mental health professionals establish clearer standards for training, engage in more rigorous self-monitoring of our clinical and our research efforts, and recognize the extraordinary risks for bias in all of our work. It is not necessary that we speak with one voice. In fact, our field has been enriched by its transdisciplinary nature and by its many points of view. But it is critical that we offer assessments, engage in treatment, conduct our research, and do our teaching free of uncontrolled contamination by our own unresolved childhood experiences, our idealizations, our needs for control: in short, that we be truly open to the data and truly available to the families. Examples are offered of the risks if we fail, and a call is made for careful transdisciplinary training, supervision, individual psychotherapy, and collegial monitoring for infant mental health clinicians, researchers, and educators, alike.     

The philosophical legacy of Meehl (1978): confirmation theory, theory quality, and scientific epistemology

The reach and impact of Paul Meehl’s work is extraordinary. Focusing on his “Theoretical Risks and Tabular Asterisks”, I trace three consequences of his findings. The first is the influence of his work on confirmation theory in the philosophy of science, in which he provided a more sophisticated alternative to Popperianism, despite some affinities with it. The second is a clear focus on the evaluation of theory quality as an explanation for the success of hard vs. soft theories. The third is a very deep critique of the practices of contemporary epistemology; his research recommends the replacement of demonstrably unreliable, subjective judgments about justification and knowledge with simple predictive models that outperform human experts. This is an impressive array of intellectual contributions to psychology and philosophy. As influential as his work was, it is just now beginning to receive attention commensurate with its merits.     

Important Elements of Aftercare Services for Youth Departing Group Homes

Aftercare services have been suggested to improve the outcomes of youth who depart group homes. The purpose of this study was to collect views from social service agency leaders about the aftercare supports they believed were most important for youth departing group homes. This project used a survey method and gathered views from 38 agency leaders who were 28–66 years of age, with an average of 21 years of experience working with residential care programs in 23 states across the United States. Participants ranked seven support domains (i.e., family, education, mental health, relationships, physical health, safety, and independent living) and rated 56 specific aftercare supports based on importance for youth who were departing group homes and returning to their homes/schools prior to high school graduation. Results suggested family, safety, and mental health supports were the most important domains of support for aftercare. Specific aftercare items that were rated critically important included support for self-harm/suicidal thoughts, accessing mental health services, coping with trauma, and managing medication for behavior/mental health. Tables are provided for the complete list of 56 specific support ratings. The findings are summarized and limitations are discussed. Also included are the implications the findings could have regarding future research on the design of aftercare services.     

Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: Two Studies of Convergent Validity

As the field of mental health services shifts its focus to early intervention, the need to develop valid and reliable measures of young children's behavioral functioning is clear. Traditional assessment instruments have focused on deficits, problems, and pathologies to the exclusion of strengths and competencies. However, assessing child strengths provides parents, direct service providers, and educators with a more holistic view of the child's functioning and an understanding of skills from which individualized treatment and education plans may be written. The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS; Epstein & Sharma, 1998) is a strength-based instrument designed to identify children's behavioral and emotional strengths. The psychometrics of the BERS has been demonstrated through several studies; however, the focus has mainly been on older age students. We sought to assess the convergent validity of the BERS with kindergarten children. The results of these two studies provide further support of the psychometric characteristics of the BERS and indicate its appropriateness with young children.     

Children with ADHD in Residential Care

Little is known about the characteristics or functioning of children with ADHD in residential care as compared to their non-ADHD peers. This study evaluated data on 538 children with (n = 125) and without (n = 413) ADHD in residential care to determine demographic, mental health, behavioral, and treatment (i.e., medication use) characteristics. Results revealed that both groups presented elevated risks, however, scores for children with ADHD indicated even greater levels of need. Specifically, differences were found between the two groups on demographics (e.g., family reunification status, restrictiveness of prior out-of-home placements), behavior (e.g., attention problems, rule-breaking and aggressive behaviors) and medication status. Findings suggest there is a need for aftercare services to help support families as children transition from care, interventions to address behavior, and medication management through assessment and monitoring.