Effects of age on the mother-child interactions of ADD-H and normal boys

The interactions of 60 ADD-H boys with their mothers were compared to those of 60 normal boys during both freeplay and task situations. Both groups were equally subdivided into five age levels (years 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9). In free play, ADDH boys played more independently of and were more negative toward their mothers, while their mothers gave more commands and initiated fewer interactions than normal motherchild dyads. There were no effects of age in this setting. During the task setting, ADD H boys were less compliant, sustained their compliance for shorter time periods, and were more negative and off task than the normal boys. Mothers of ADD-H boys gave more commands, were more negative, initiated fewer interactions, and responded with greater control over both compliance and offtask behavior than did normal mothers. Several age effects were noted suggesting that older boys in both groups were more compliant while their mothers gave fewer commands and controlled their compliance less than the motherchild dyads of younger boys. While the interactions of ADD-H boys appear to improve with age, the boys continue to display a developmental lag in social behavior that is more evident with increasing situational demands.This research was supported by NIMH Grant MH32334-01 to the first author and by funds provided by the Department of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin. The authors are grateful to Ann Thompson for her assistance with the compilation of the data.     

The source of belief bias effects in syllogistic reasoning.

In studies of the belief bias effect in syllogistic reasoning, an interaction between logical validity and the believability of the conclusion has been found; in essence, logic has a larger effect on unbelievable than on believable conclusions. Two main explanations have been proposed for this finding. The selective scrutiny account claims that people focus on the conclusion and only engage in logical processing if this is found to be unbelievable; while the misinterpreted necessity account claims that subjects misunderstand what is meant by logical necessity and respond on the basis of believability when indeterminate syllogisms are presented. Experiments 1 and 2 compared the predictions of these two theories by examining whether the interaction would disappear if only determinate syllogisms were used. It did, thus providing strong support for the misinterpreted necessity explanation. However, the results are also consistent with a version of the mental models theory, and so Experiment 3 was carried out to compare these two explanations. The mental models theory received strong support, as it did also in the follow-up Experiments 4 and 5. It is concluded that people try to construct a mental model of the premises but, if there is a believable conclusion consistent with the first model they produce, then they fail to construct alternative models.     

The development of a family forgiveness scale

The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure forgiveness in the intergenerational family. In the final scale the contructs were defined as: (1) realization, (2) recognition, (3) reparation, (4), restitution, and (5) resolution. A detailed four-step procedure was used to provide the scale with construct, content and predictive validity. This paper describes a four-stage process to develop the scale, data supporting the validity and reliability of the scale, and the final version of the instrument.     

Home advantage in Turkish professional soccer

Home advantage is known to play an important role in the outcome of professional soccer games and to vary considerably worldwide. In the Turkish Super League over the last 12 years, 61.5% of the total points gained have been won by the home team, a figure similar to the worldwide average and to the Premier League in England. It is lower (57.7%) for games played between teams from Istanbul and especially high for games involving teams from cities in the more remote and ethnically distinct parts of Turkey (Van and Diyarbakir). Match performance data show that although home teams in Turkey take 26% more shots at goal than away teams, the success rates for shots do not differ. For fouls and disciplinary cards, home and away teams do not differ significantly in Turkey, a finding that differs from games in England, perhaps due to less referee bias.     

Can Virtuous Actions be Both Habitual and Rational?

Virtuous actions seem to be both habitual and rational. But if we combine an intuitive understanding of habituality with the currently predominant paradigm of rational action, these two features of virtuous actions are hard to reconcile. Intuitively, acting habitually is acting as one has before in similar contexts, and automatically, that is, without thinking about it. Meanwhile, contemporary philosophers tend to assume the truth of what I call the reasons theory of rational action, which states that all rational actions are actions for reasons. Whilst interpretations of this phrase are disputed, I argue that neither of the two leading views – which I call reasons internalism and reasons externalism – makes room for habitual actions to count as actions for reasons; by the reasons theory, they cannot be rational either. I suggest one way of effecting the reconciliation which, whilst it allows us to keep the reasons theory, requires us to conceive of reasons as even more radically external than current externalists believe them to be.     

Interpopulation variation in the risk-related decisions of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Portia labiata</Emphasis>, an araneophagic jumping spider (Araneae,Salticidae), during predatory sequences with spitting spiders

The extent to which decision-making processes are constrained in animals with small brains is poorly understood. Arthropods have brains much smaller and simpler than those of birds and mammals. This raises questions concerning limitations on how intricate the decision-making processes might be in arthropods. At Los Ba?os in the Philippines, Scytodes pallidus is a spitting spider that specialises in preying on jumping spiders, and Portia labiata is a jumping spider that preys on S. pallidus. Scytodid spit comes from the mouth, and egg-carrying females are less dangerous than eggless scytodids because the female uses her chelicerae to hold her eggs. Held eggs block her mouth, and she has to release them before she can spit. The Los Ba?os P. labiata sometimes adjusts its tactics depending on whether the scytodid encountered is carrying eggs or not. When pursuing eggless scytodids, the Los Ba?os P. labiata usually takes detour routes that enable it to close in from behind (away from the scytodid's line of fire). However, when pursuing egg-carrying scytodids, the Los Ba?os P. labiata sometimes takes faster direct routes to reach these safer prey. The Los Ba?os P. labiata apparently makes risk-related adjustments specific to whether scytodids are carrying eggs, but P. labiata from Sagada in the Philippines (allopatric to Scytodes) fails to make comparable risk-related adjustments.     

Naturalizing the space of reasons

Given the Sellarsian distinction between the space of causes and the space of reasons, the naturalist seeks to articulate how these two spaces are unproblematically related. In Mind and World () John McDowell suggests that such a naturalism can be achieved by pointing out that we work our way into the space of reasons by the process of upbringing he calls Bildung. ‘The resulting habits of thought and action’, writes McDowell, ‘are second nature’ (p. 84). In this paper I expose one implication of this remark, namely, that Bildung naturalism requires a conception of a type of action which is at once rational and habitual. Current orthodoxies in the philosophy of action prevent these two features from easily co‐existing. Whilst various reconciliations are possible, I argue that only one keeps Bildung naturalism intact. This, however, commits the naturalist to a conception of reasons more radically external than any to be found in current literature, according to which the agent need have no conception of what her reasons are at the time of acting. This is what I call acting in the dark of reasons. One upshot for McDowell is that this conception of reasons may be in tension with some of his other claims.     

A COMPARISON OF WHITE AND HISPANIC WOMEN'S STORIES OF ADJUSTMENT TO THE BIRTH OF A CHILD

As part of a larger project designed to inform prevention and treatment of postpartum depression and promote positive mother–child relationships in diverse families, this study describes personal stories of postnatal adjustment from 14 White and 9 Hispanic women recruited from prenatal care clinics. Qualitative interviews conducted in the mothers’ primary language (English or Spanish) were analyzed using a modified grounded theory content‐analysis approach. The coding scheme developed to capture the women's discourse about their experiences included child temperament and health; intergenerational patterns; work demands and job loss; schedule changes; increased responsibilities; difficulties with parenting tasks; emotional distress; social stressors and resources; coping strategies; and changes in work, personal, social, and marital domains. More White mothers than Hispanic mothers reported changes in time structure, work stressors, use of psychotropic medication, informational support, and social support from other mothers and professionals; however, within‐group differences were more evident than were cross‐group ethnic differences. Analyses of qualitative interviews led to the integration of Belsky's Determinants of Parenting Model (1984) and the Double ABCX Model of Family Adjustment and Adaptation (McCubbin & Patterson, 1983) into a hybrid third theoretical framework.