阅读不同颜色中、英文时的眼动特征

采用眼动实验方法,对20名大学生阅读不同颜色中、英文材料时的眼动特征进行考察。结果发现：（1）颜色对中、英文阅读成绩影响趋势一致,红色成绩最好,黄色最差;（2）颜色对被试阅读眼动指标影响差异显著：注视次数上,红色和黑色最多;注视时间上,红色最短;眼跳距离上,黄色最长;注视频率上,黄色最低。     

Distinctions between hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: Results from a day reconstruction study among Norwegian jobholders

The study suggests that hedonic and eudaimonic well-being can be studied by theoretical and empirical analysis of subjective feelings. In this approach, pleasure is the hallmark of hedonism, and engagement serves as the core feeling of eudaimonia. The Day Reconstruction Method was used to investigate the assumption that overall life satisfaction predicts hedonic feelings but not eudaimonic feelings during a workday. Perceived job control was hypothesized to predict eudaimonic feelings but not hedonic feelings. Questionnaire data from 120 Norwegian jobholders were analyzed, providing support for the hypothesis. Moreover, pleasure was found to be relatively unrelated to engagement, and perceived control was basically unrelated to life satisfaction. The results are discussed against the background that hedonism and eudaimonia are two independent parts of a multidimensional concept of well-being.     

瑞文作业的年龄差异及其与“位置法”记忆训练的关系

该工作采用华东师大心理学系修订的瑞文测验联合型（ＣＲＴ—ＡＣ）,对经过“位置法”记忆训练的青年人、老年人及在年龄、性别、文化和智力水平等方面均相匹配的青年、老年对照进行测验,比较观察力和推理能力的年龄差异,探讨“位置法”记忆训练对这种能力的间接迁移作用。结果表明：１．青年组瑞文作业成绩明显高于老年组;２．当作业难度加大或限定时间时测验,更扩大了年龄差异;３．青年训练组瑞文作业成绩明显高于其对照组,而在老年训练组与其对照组之间则未见差异。     

罗夏墨迹技术的近期发展与争论

综合系统在罗夏墨迹技术（RIM）的标准化、客观化方面取得了很大的成功,但仍有一些批评者对它的信度、效度、常模与标准化等问题提出了质疑,作者们对这些争论的焦点问题进行了系统的回顾。总结有关的元分析和实验研究,发现RIM的多数核心变量都有较好的评分者信度和跨时间稳定性,只有心理状态变量的信度较低。以往的整体元分析和局部元分析都发现RIM不逊于其他测验。这些结果表明RIM在临床疾病诊断,外显行为预测方面都是有价值的。与其他 测验一样,RIM也有其优势与不足,在应用中应与其他测验互补     

经济法试题DIF的参数法检测研究

该研究基于项目反应理论的Samejima等级反应模型(GRM),在MULTILOG软件支持下,应用参数检测方法,对某年度全国性资格考试的某科目试卷中经济法部分的21个项目做了DIF检测分析。结果如下:存在性别DIF的项目一个,存在民族DIF的项目四个,存在工作性质DIF的项目一个。其中项目68在民族层面上表现为一致性DIF,项目64既存在民族DIF又存在工作性质DIF。通过对项目统计量、反应曲线的分析和专家的讨论,文章最后还分析了产生这些DIF的几个可能的原因。     

Evidence that stakes don’t matter for evidence

Some philosophers have recently defended anti-intellectualism with respect to knowledge and evidence. In this paper, I assess anti-intellectualism about evidence, which claims a relation between one's evidence and the practical benefits or costs of being right or wrong about the propositions supported by that evidence. Proponents of anti-intellectualism generally regard their view as not at all obvious, but nonetheless strongly supported by appeal to our intuitive judgments about whether particular epistemic properties are instantiated in hypothetical cases. Anti-Intellectualism is thus taken by its proponents to be a surprising truth. I show that, though peoples’ explicit judgments about the general issue of whether or not non-epistemic factors make an epistemic difference are often in line with anti-intellectualism, their judgments about whether particular epistemic properties are instantiated in hypothetical cases do not display a pattern that would clearly support anti-intellectualism about evidence. Thus, anti-intellectualism about evidence is not entirely surprising, and intuitive assessments of hypothetical cases do not clearly support its truth.     

Cybernetic Big Five Theory

Cybernetics, the study of goal-directed, adaptive systems, is the best framework for an integrative theory of personality. Cybernetic Big Five Theory attempts to provide a comprehensive, synthetic, and mechanistic explanatory model. Constructs that describe psychological individual differences are divided into personality traits, reflecting variation in the parameters of evolved cybernetic mechanisms, and characteristic adaptations, representing goals, interpretations, and strategies defined in relation to an individual’s particular life circumstances. The theory identifies mechanisms in which variation is responsible for traits in the top three levels of a hierarchical trait taxonomy based on the Big Five and describes the causal dynamics between traits and characteristic adaptations. Lastly, the theory links function and dysfunction in traits and characteristic adaptations to psychopathology and well-being.     

The General Factor of Personality: The “Big One,” a self-evaluative trait,or a methodological gnat that won’t go away?

Though recent research indicates that the Big Five can be subsumed under a “General Factor of Personality” (GFP), considerable dissention remains about whether the GFP is a substantive trait (either a “mega”-trait or simply, positive self-evaluation), or a response artifact. To disentangle these potential explanations, we estimated GFP saturation based on scales within a single inventory (which may share response artifacts) versus between different inventories (wherein the GFP would be more substantive). Drawing on meta-analytic findings across 370 independent samples of 155,781 individuals, GFP saturation was reduced substantially when based on between inventory data (26%) compared to within inventory data (50%). These results indicate that the GFP functions as a response artifact that may be reduced by administering scales from different inventories. However, some GFP variance also appears to represent stable tendencies that span across inventories. Overall, the GFP appears to be partly a stable, self-evaluative trait and partly a set of response tendencies specific to a particular personality inventory. We discuss the implications of these results for academic and applied personality measurement.     

A Jensen effect on dysgenic fertility: An analysis involving the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth

In this study we attempt to determine whether dysgenic fertility is associated with the Jensen effect. This is investigated with respect to a US population representative sample of 8110 individuals from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth for whom there exists complete data on IQ and fertility. In addition to the general sample, the sample was also broken out by race and sex so as to examine whether or not the Jensen effect manifested amongst different sub-populations. The method of correlated vectors revealed significant Jensen effects in five of the seven samples, and in all cases the effect was in a direction indicating that subtests with higher g-loadings were associated with larger dysgenic fertility gradients. The magnitude of the difference between Spearman’s ρ and Pearson’s r was non-significant in all cases, suggesting that biasing factors were minimally influencing the result. This finding suggests that dysgenesis occurs on the ‘genetic g’ at the heart of the Jensen effect nexus, unlike the Flynn effect, which is ‘hollow’ with respect to g. Finally, the finding is discussed in the context of two converging lines of evidence indicating that genotypic IQ or ‘genetic g’ really has been declining over the last century.     

Is the Flynn effect on g?: A meta-analysis

Black/White differences in mean IQ have been clearly shown to strongly correlate with g loadings, so large group differences on subtests of high cognitive complexity and small group differences on subtests of low cognitive complexity. IQ scores have been increasing over the last half century, a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. Flynn effect gains are predominantly driven by environmental factors. Might these factors also be responsible for group differences in intelligence? The empirical studies on whether the pattern of Flynn effect gains is the same as the pattern of group differences yield conflicting findings. A psychometric meta-analysis on all studies with seven or more subtests reporting correlations between g loadings and standardized score gains was carried out, based on 5 papers, yielding 11 data points (total N = 16,663). It yielded a true correlation of − .38, and none of the variance between the studies could be attributed to moderators. It appears that the Flynn effect and group differences have different causes. Suggestions for future research are discussed.