"The referents of trait inferences: The impact of trait concepts versus actor-trait links on subsequent judgments": Retraction of Stapel, Koomen, and van der Pligt (1996)

Reports the retraction of "The referents of trait inferences: The impact of trait concepts versus actor-trait links on subsequent judgments" by Diederik A. Stapel, Willem Koomen and Joop van der Pligt (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996[Mar], Vol 70[3], 437-450). This retraction follows the results of an investigation into the work of Diederik A. Stapel (further information on the investigation can be found here: https://www.commissielevelt.nl/). The Drenth Committee has found evidence of fraud, leading to the conclusion that fraud is most likely in the data supplied by Diederik A. Stapel. His co-authors were unaware of his actions and were not involved in the collection of the likely fraudulent data. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1996-03014-002.) The authors investigated the hypothesis that when trait inferences refer to abstract behavior labels they act as a general interpretation frame and lead to assimilation in subsequent judgments of an ambiguous target, whereas when they refer to a specific actor-trait link they will be used as a scale anchor and lead to contrast. Similar to G. B. Moskowitz and R. J. Roman's (see record 1992-31124-001) study, participants who were instructed to memorize trait-implying sentences showed assimilation, and participants who were instructed to form an impression of the actors in these sentences showed contrast. However, exposure to trait-implying sentences that described actors with real names and were accompanied with photos of the actors resulted in contrast under both memorization and impression instructions (Experiment 1). Furthermore, contrast ensued when trait-implying sentences were accompanied with information that suggested a person attribution, whereas assimilation ensued when that information suggested a situation attribution, independent of processing goals (Experiment 2). These findings are interpreted as support for referent-based explanations of the consequences of trait inferences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Speed-Accuracy Response Models: Scoring Rules based on Response Time and Accuracy

Starting from an explicit scoring rule for time limit tasks incorporating both response time and accuracy, and a definite trade-off between speed and accuracy, a response model is derived. Since the scoring rule is interpreted as a sufficient statistic, the model belongs to the exponential family. The various marginal and conditional distributions for response accuracy and response time are derived, and it is shown how the model parameters can be estimated. The model for response accuracy is found to be the two-parameter logistic model. It is found that the time limit determines the item discrimination, and this effect is illustrated with the Amsterdam Chess Test II.     

Sahlqvist Correspondence for Modal mu-calculus

We define analogues of modal Sahlqvist formulas for the modal mu-calculus, and prove a correspondence theorem for them.     

Cumulative Effects of Mothers’ Risk and Promotive Factors on Daughters’ Disruptive Behavior

Little is known about the ways in which the accumulation of maternal factors increases or reduces risk for girls' disruptive behavior during preadolescence. In the current study, maternal risk and promotive factors and the severity of girls' disruptive behavior were assessed annually among girls' ages 7-12 in an urban community sample (N?=?2043). Maternal risk and promotive factors were operative at different time points in girls' development. Maternal warmth explained variance in girls' disruptive behavior, even after controlling for maternal risk factors and relevant child and neighborhood factors. In addition, findings supported the cumulative hypothesis that the number of risk factors increased the chance on girls' disruptive behavior disorder (DBD), while the number of promotive factors decreased this probability. Daughters of mothers with a history of Conduct Disorder (CD) were exposed to more risk factors and fewer promotive factors compared to daughters of mothers without prior CD. The identification of malleable maternal factors that can serve as targets for intervention has important implications for intergenerational intervention. Cumulative effects show that the focus of prevention efforts should not be on single factors, but on multiple factors associated with girls' disruptive behavior.     

The social costs of punishment

Lab experiments on punishment are of limited relevance for understanding cooperative behavior in the real world. In real interactions, punishment is not cheap, but the costs of punishment are of a different nature than in experiments. They do not correspond to direct payments or payoff deductions, but they arise from the repercussions punishment has on social networks and future interactions.     

Blaming for a better future: future orientation and associated intolerance of personal uncertainty lead to harsher reactions toward innocent victims

People are often encouraged to focus on the future and strive for long-term goals. This noted, the authors argue that this future orientation is associated with intolerance of personal uncertainty, as people usually cannot be certain that their efforts will pay off. To be able to tolerate personal uncertainty, people adhere strongly to the belief in a just world, paradoxically resulting in harsher reactions toward innocent victims. In three experiments, the authors show that a future orientation indeed leads to more negative evaluations of an innocent victim (Study 1), enhances intolerance of personal uncertainty (Study 2), and that experiencing personal uncertainty leads to more negative evaluations of a victim (Study 3). So, while a future orientation enables people to strive for long-term goals, it also leads them to be harsher toward innocent victims. One underlying mechanism causing these reactions is intolerance of personal uncertainty, associated with a future orientation.     

Testosterone, cortisol, and serotonin as key regulators of social aggression: A review and theoretical perspective

In human and non-human animals the steroid hormones cortisol and testosterone are involved in social aggression and recent studies suggest that these steroids might jointly regulate this behavior. It has been hypothesized that the imbalance between cortisol and testosterone levels is predictive for aggressive psychopathology, with high testosterone to cortisol ratio predisposing to a socially aggressive behavioral style. In this review, we focus on the effects of cortisol and testosterone on human social aggression, as well as on how they might modulate the aggression circuitry of the human brain. Recently, serotonin is hypothesized to differentiate between impulsive and instrumental aggression, and we will briefly review evidence on this hypothesis. The aim of this article is to provide a theoretical framework for the role of steroids and serotonin in impulsive social aggression in humans.     

Development of regulation disorders into specific psychopathology

Underlying deficits in self‐regulation and sensory processing are seen in children with regulation disorders (RD) and might lead to emotional and behavioral problems as the child develops. However, little is known about the specific developmental course of RD. This follow‐up study was conducted to investigate the development of a clinical sample of RD children, diagnosed by means of the Diagnostic Classification of Mental Health and Developmental Disorders of Infancy and Early Childhood, Revised (DC:0–3R; ZERO TO THREE, 1994), toward specific psychopathology 4 to 10 years later based on parent‐ and teacher‐reports on the Child Behavior Checklist (T.M. Achenbach & L.A. Rescorla, 2007). Parental reports showed that 39 to 69% of children with RD had internalizing, externalizing, and total problems above borderline cutoffs, as compared to norm group data (16%). In addition, higher rates of affective, anxiety, attention deficit/hyperactivity, oppositional defiant, and conduct problems were reported. Analyses between RD subtypes showed significant differences on future attention problems and rule‐breaking behavior, wherein less favorable results were found for the Hypersensitive subtype Type A (fearful/cautious) in comparison to the sensory stimulation‐seeking/impulsive subtype. The current results indicate persistence of emotional and behavioral problems into middle childhood and adolescence in children with preschool RD diagnoses. More attention should be paid to differentiation of psychopathology in these children since developmental outcomes may differ between RD subtypes.