Action,Control and Sensations of Acting

Sensations of acting and control have been neglected in theory of action. I argue that they form the core of action and are integral and indispensible parts of our actions, participating as they do in feedback loops consisting of our intentions in acting, the bodily movements required for acting and the sensations of acting. These feedback loops underlie all activities in which we engage when we act and generate our control over our movements.The events required for action according to the causal theory, or Searle’s theory, do not add up to agency. I find the agent at work, her engagement in her action, in her sensation of acting.It is often thought that bodily movements are either mere events or actions. I suggest that there is a third possibility: that they are activities which are not actions. Activities, whether they are actions or not, differ from mere events in that they are controlled from within the brain. They are actions only if this control forms agent control, that is, control in which the conscious mind, the agents’ intentions in acting and her sensations of acting, participates.Internally wayward actions are characterized by the fact that the person involved does not have a sensation of action and therefore does not control her movements. In the absence of such a sensation she does not act.     

The Ambiguity of Quantifiers

In the tradition of substructural logics, it has been claimed for a long time that conjunction and inclusive disjunction are ambiguous:we should, in fact, distinguish between ‘lattice’ connectives (also called additive or extensional) and ‘group’ connectives (also called multiplicative or intensional). We argue that an analogous ambiguity affects the quantifiers. Moreover, we show how such a perspective could yield solutions for two well-known logical puzzles: McGee’s counterexample to modus ponens and the lottery paradox.     

On the existence and uniqueness of JML estimates for the partial credit model

A necessary and sufficient condition is given in this paper for the existence and uniqueness of the maximum likelihood (the so-called joint maximum likelihood) estimate of the parameters of the Partial Credit Model. This condition is stated in terms of a structural property of the pattern of the data matrix that can be easily verified on the basis of a simple iterative procedure. The result is proved by using an argument of Haberman (1977). The author wishes to thank the Editor and the anonymous reviewers for their comments that helped to substantially improve the final version of this paper. This research was supported in part by a MURST grant (ex 60%).     

Psychometric Modeling of response speed and accuracy with mixed and conditional regression

Human performance in cognitive testing and experimental psychology is expressed in terms of response speed and accuracy. Data analysis is often limited to either speed or accuracy, and/or to crude summary measures like mean response time (RT) or the percentage correct responses. This paper proposes the use of mixed regression for the psychometric modeling of response speed and accuracy in testing and experiments. Mixed logistic regression of response accuracy extends logistic item response theory modeling to multidimensional models with covariates and interactions. Mixed linear regression of response time extends mixed ANOVA to unbalanced designs with covariates and heterogeneity of variance. Related to mixed regression is conditional regression, which requires no normality assumption, but is limited to unidimensional models. Mixed and conditional methods are both applied to an experimental study of mental rotation. Univariate and bivariate analyzes show how within-subject correlation between response and RT can be distinguished from between-subject correlation, and how latent traits can be detected, given careful item design or content analysis. It is concluded that both response and RT must be recorded in cognitive testing, and that mixed regression is a versatile method for analyzing test data.I am grateful to Rogier Donders for putting his data at my disposal.     

Likelihood inference on the underlying structure of IRT models

The assumptions underlying item response theory (IRT) models may be expressed as a set of equality and inequality constraints on the parameters of a latent class model. It is well known that the same assumptions imply that the parameters of the manifest distribution have to satisfy a more complicated set of inequality constraints which, however, are necessary but not sufficient. In this paper, we describe how the theory for likelihood-based inference under equality and inequality constraints may be used to test the underlying assumptions of IRT models. It turns out that the analysis based directly on the latent structure is simpler and more flexible. In particular, we indicate how several interesting extensions of the Rasch model may be obtained by partial relaxation of the basic constraints. An application to a data set provided by Educational Testing Service is used to illustrate the approach.We thank Dr. Gorman and Dr. Rogers of the Educational Testing Service for providing the data analyzed in Section 4. We also thank three reviewers for comments and suggestions.This revised article was published online in August 2005 with the PDF paginated correctly.     

Fitting Psychometric Models with Methods Based on Automatic Differentiation

Quantitative psychology is concerned with the development and application of mathematical models in the behavioral sciences. Over time, models have become more complex, a consequence of the increasing complexity of research designs and experimental data, which is also a consequence of the utility of mathematical models in the science. As models have become more elaborate, the problems of estimating them have become increasingly challenging. This paper gives an introduction to a computing tool called automatic differentiation that is useful in calculating derivatives needed to estimate a model. As its name implies, automatic differentiation works in a routine way to produce derivatives accurately and quickly. Because so many features of model development require derivatives, the method has considerable potential in psychometric work. This paper reviews several examples to demonstrate how the methodology can be applied. From the Presidential Address delivered at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Tilburg University, The Netherlands, July 5–8, 2005.