A machine-level software program for the generation of aversive conditioning schedules using the KIM-1 microprocessor

A microprocessor system can be used both to control aversive conditioning (classical, signaled and Sidman avoidance, and conflict) experiments and to acquire behavioral data in multiple subjects at a fraction of the cost of solid state systems. The software described in this paper can be used to program tones and shocks and count responses, independently, in up to 12 animals simultaneously.     

Balancing the ledger: An application of Nagy's theories to the study of continuity and change among generations

This study uses an interpretive interview method to examine the micro-processes of generational continuity and change among a group of social activists. Boszormenyi-Nagy's theory of responsibility between generations, alternative models outside the family, and choice are used to explain the instances of change. Implications for research and practice are addressed.     

Suicidal Behaviors in Surviving Monozygotic and Dizygotic Co‐Twins: Is the Nature of the Co‐Twin's Cause of Death a Factor?

Genetically informative samples can address hereditary and experiential influences on suicide‐related behaviors. The frequency of suicide‐related behaviors was compared in twins from two survivor groups: (1) those whose co‐twins' deaths were suicides (monozygotic [MZ]: n = 47; dizygotic [DZ]: n = 31), and (2) those whose co‐twins' deaths were nonsuicides (MZ: n = 347; DZ: n = 170). The frequency of suicide attempts among suicide survivors was significantly higher in MZ than DZ twins, while the frequency of suicide attempts among nonsuicide twin survivors did not differ between MZ and DZ twins. Twin concordance for suicide attempts more likely reflects a genetic predisposition than a behavioral reaction to the loss.     

Single-Stage Prediction Models Do Not Explain the Magnitude of Syntactic Disambiguation Difficulty

The disambiguation of a syntactically ambiguous sentence in favor of a less preferred parse can lead to slower reading at the disambiguation point. This phenomenon, referred to as a garden-path effect, has motivated models in which readers initially maintain only a subset of the possible parses of the sentence, and subsequently require time-consuming reanalysis to reconstruct a discarded parse. A more recent proposal argues that the garden-path effect can be reduced to surprisal arising in a fully parallel parser: words consistent with the initially dispreferred but ultimately correct parse are simply less predictable than those consistent with the incorrect parse. Since predictability has pervasive effects in reading far beyond garden-path sentences, this account, which dispenses with reanalysis mechanisms, is more parsimonious. Crucially, it predicts a linear effect of surprisal: the garden-path effect is expected to be proportional to the difference in word surprisal between the ultimately correct and ultimately incorrect interpretations. To test this prediction, we used recurrent neural network language models to estimate word-by-word surprisal for three temporarily ambiguous constructions. We then estimated the slowdown attributed to each bit of surprisal from human self-paced reading times, and used that quantity to predict syntactic disambiguation difficulty. Surprisal successfully predicted the existence of garden-path effects, but drastically underpredicted their magnitude, and failed to predict their relative severity across constructions. We conclude that a full explanation of syntactic disambiguation difficulty may require recovery mechanisms beyond predictability.     

On the evaluation of one-sided evidence

We examine predictions and judgments of confidence based on one-sided evidence. Some subjects saw arguments for only one side of a legal dispute while other subjects (called ‘jurors’) saw arguments for both sides. Subjects predicted the number of jurors who favored the plaintiff in each case. Subjects who saw only one side made predictions that were biased in favor of that side. Furthermore, they were more confident but generally less accurate than subjects who saw both sides. The results indicate that people do not compensate sufficiently for missing information even when it is painfully obvious that the information available to them is incomplete. A simple manipulation that required subjects to evaluate the relative strength of the opponent's side greatly reduced the tendency to underweigh missing evidence.     

Experimental evaluation of matching via a commercially available basketball video game

Many recent nonlaboratory-based quantitative analyses of behavior have relied on archival competitive sporting data. However, the ratio-based reinforcement schedules in most athletic competitions and the correlational nature of archival data analyses raise concern over the contributions of such findings to the behavior analytic literature. The current experiment evaluated whether matching in a human operant paradigm would approximate matching observed in nonlaboratory-based sports data. To this end, we used in-game attributes to parametrically manipulate 2- and 3-point shooting in a commercially available basketball video game. The behavior of 6 of 9 participants conformed to the generalized matching equation. These results suggest matching in sporting contexts may be a product of restricted nonindependent concurrent random-ratio schedules. Implications of this experiment, including those in applied behavior analysis and potential influence on gamification, are discussed.     

Metasemantic ethics

The idea that experts (especially scientific experts) play a privileged role in determining the meanings of our words and the contents of our concepts has become commonplace since the work of Hilary Putnam, Tyler Burge, and others in the 1970s. But if experts have the power to determine what our words mean, they can do so responsibly or irresponsibly, from good motivations or bad, justly or unjustly, with good or bad effects. This paper distinguishes three families of metasemantic views based on their attitudes towards bad behaviour by meaning-fixing experts, and draws a series of distinctions relevant for the normative evaluation of meaning-determining actions.