The three-factor structure of the Eysenck personality inventory revealed by a two-step confirmatory procedure

Evidence for the existence of the assumed three-subscale structure of the Eysenck Personality Inventory has been persistent but tenuous. It was suggested that a substantial reason for this may be the discrepancy between the numbers of items in the Lie (L) scale (9 items) and those in the other two scales [Neuroticism (N) and Extraversion (E)] which have 24 items in each. A two-step confirmatory procedure to circumvent this problem was proposed, involving a two-factor analysis of the Neuroticism and Extraversion items, followed by a three-factor analysis of equal numbers of N, E and L scale items. An analysis of the responses of 386 undergraduates demonstrating the proposed procedure revealed in the first step, quite unequivocally, the presence of Neuroticism and Extraversion factors, and in the second step, a third factor clearly congruent with the L scale.     

A cautionary note on using internal cross validation to select the number of clusters

A highly popular method for examining the stability of a data clustering is to split the data into two parts, cluster the observations in Part A, assign the objects in Part B to their nearest centroid in Part A, and then independently cluster the Part B objects. One then examines how close the two partitions are (say, by the Rand measure). Another proposal is to split the data into k parts, and see how their centroids cluster. By means of synthetic data analyses, we demonstrate that these approaches fail to identify the appropriate number of clusters, particularly as sample size becomes large and the variables exhibit higher correlations.The authors express their thanks to the Sol C. Snider Entrepreneurial Center, Wharton School, for support of this project.     

A time sharing cross-sectional study of monolinguals and bilinguals at different levels of second language acquisition

Several methodological factors associated with the concurrent activities (finger-tapping) paradigm were considered in a cross-sectional study investigating cerebral patterns of asymmetry in three groups of English-speaking non-Hispanic dextral males at three levels of second language (Spanish) acquisition and one control group of monolinguals. Results revealed the fluent bilinguals to be bilateral and significantly different from other groups for native language tasks in English. Moreover, a priori contrasts indicate that greater right- than left-hand disruption in concurrent tapping may be typical of monolinguals, but can be influenced by other factors. Monolingual reliability test-retest correlations were .77 and .47.     

Response to Michael Sells

In an era when lies and misrepresentations about historical events easily become firmly rooted, Michael Sells's discussion illustrates the importance of careful historical research as a moral enterprise. In addition to the skills of the historian, however, there is also room in this enterprise for those of the ethicist. In particular, I warn against confusing the truth or falsity of claims about one narrow historical period with larger questions about the moral meaning and significance of those claims. Illustrating this, I argue one cannot assess the legitimacy of competing nationhood claims solely on the basis of the deeds of specific actors. Nor should the actions of a single individual like the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem be converted into a totalizing claim about the rights of the Palestinian people.     

THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS—REQUIESCAT IN PACE

In mid‐June 2009, the Obama administration dissolved the President's Council on Bioethics (PCBE), a group established by President George W. Bush in August 2001 and whose nearly eight‐year life was marked from beginning to end by controversy. While some will regret the PCBE's passing, others will regard the Council as a failed experiment in doing public bioethics.     

Body weight and body image among college women: perception, cognition, and affect

This study examined the relations between body weight and multiple parameters of body image in a nonclinical sample. Thirty-six female undergraduate students with stable body weights served as subjects; 12 were underweight, 12 were normal weight, and 12 were overweight, as determined using recent normative tables. Each subject responded to a general weight information questionnaire and to the Body-Self Relations Questionnaire, a standardized instrument assessing affective, cognitive, and behavioral components of appearance-related body image. A newly developed apparatus and procedure for estimating body size, the Body Image Detection Device, was utilized for perceptual and cognitive measures of body image. Each subject estimated and also subjectively appraised the width of her own body at five points and that of a realistic female mannequin. A caliper was used to record actual widths, and a standard laboratory scale and rule measured weight and height. The general finding of the study was that the perceptual, affective, and cognitive components of body image differed as a function of body weight, but the nature of the differences varied with the measure employed. The pattern of results for the perceptual measure suggest a cautious view of its reliability and validity. The multidimensional approach of our study, in marked contrast to earlier fractionated studies, offers a more integrated perspective on body image and provides new directions for future research.     

The nonequivalence of behavioral and mathematical equivalence.

Sidman and his colleagues derived behavioral tests for stimulus equivalence from the axiom in logic and mathematics that defines a relation of equivalence. The analogy has generated abundant research in which match-to-sample methods have been used almost exclusively to study interesting and complex stimulus control phenomena. It has also stimulated considerable discussion regarding interpretation of the analogy and speculation as to its validity and generality. This article reexamines the Sidman stimulus equivalence analogy in the context of a broader consideration of the mathematical axiom than was included in the original presentation of the analogy and some of the data that have accumulated in the interim. We propose that (a) mathematical and behavioral examples of equivalence relations differ substantially, (b) terminology is being used in ways that can lead to erroneous conclusions about the nature of the stimulus control that develops in stimulus equivalence experiments, and (c) complete analyses of equivalence and other types of stimulus-stimulus relations require more than a simple invocation of the analogy. Implications of our analysis for resolving current issues and prompting new research are discussed.