Squeezing, striking, and vocalizing: Is number representation fundamentally spatial?

Numbers are fundamental entities in mathematics, but their cognitive bases are unclear. Abundant research points to linear space as a natural grounding for number representation. But, is number representation fundamentally spatial? We disentangle number representation from standard number-to-line reporting methods, and compare numerical estimations in educated participants using line-reporting with three nonspatial reporting conditions (squeezing, bell-striking, and vocalizing). All three cases of nonspatial-reporting consistently reproduced well-established results obtained with number-line methods. Furthermore, unlike line-reporting—and congruent with the psychophysical Weber–Fechner law—nonspatial reporting systematically produced logarithmic mappings for all nonsymbolic stimuli. Strikingly, linear mappings were obtained exclusively in conditions with culturally mediated elements (e.g., words). These results suggest that number representation is not fundamentally spatial, but builds on a deeper magnitude sense that manifests spatially and nonspatially mediated by magnitude, stimulus modality, and reporting condition. Number-to-space mappings—although ubiquitous in the modern world—do not seem to be rooted directly in brain evolution but have been culturally privileged and enhanced.     

Data Collection in a Flat World: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Mechanical Turk Samples

Mechanical Turk (MTurk), an online labor system run by Amazon.com, provides quick, easy, and inexpensive access to online research participants. As use of MTurk has grown, so have questions from behavioral researchers about its participants, reliability, and low compensation. In this article, we review recent research about MTurk and compare MTurk participants with community and student samples on a set of personality dimensions and classic decision‐making biases. Across two studies, we find many similarities between MTurk participants and traditional samples, but we also find important differences. For instance, MTurk participants are less likely to pay attention to experimental materials, reducing statistical power. They are more likely to use the Internet to find answers, even with no incentive for correct responses. MTurk participants have attitudes about money that are different from a community sample's attitudes but similar to students' attitudes. Finally, MTurk participants are less extraverted and have lower self‐esteem than other participants, presenting challenges for some research domains. Despite these differences, MTurk participants produce reliable results consistent with standard decision‐making biases: they are present biased, risk‐averse for gains, risk‐seeking for losses, show delay/expedite asymmetries, and show the certainty effect—with almost no significant differences in effect sizes from other samples. We conclude that MTurk offers a highly valuable opportunity for data collection and recommend that researchers using MTurk (1) include screening questions that gauge attention and language comprehension; (2) avoid questions with factual answers; and (3) consider how individual differences in financial and social domains may influence results. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Administering Quantitative Instruments With Qualitative Interviews: A Mixed Research Approach

The authors demonstrate how collecting quantitative data via psychometrically sound quantitative instruments during the qualitative interview process enhances interpretations by helping researchers better contextualize qualitative findings, specifically through qualitative dominant crossover mixed analyses. They provide an example of this strategy, whereby a baseline was established using a quantitative scale and normative data to help interpret qualitative interviews, resulting in what they call a mixed methods interview. Philosophical and practical implications are discussed.     

Trait anxiety and trait anger measured by ecological momentary assessment and their correspondence with traditional trait questionnaires

Ecological momentary assessments (EMA) of anxiety and anger/hostility were obtained every 25–30 min over two 24-h periods, separated by a median of 6 months, from 165 employees at a university in the Northeast. We used a multilevel trait-state-error structural equation model to estimate: (1) the proportion of variance in EMA anxiety and anger/hostility attributable to stable trait-like individual differences; (2) the correspondence between these trait-like components of EMA anxiety and anger/hostility and traditional questionnaire measures of each construct; and (3) the test–retest correlation between two 24-h averages obtained several months apart. After adjustment for measurement error, more than half the total variance in EMA reports of anxiety and anger/hostility is attributable to stable trait-like individual differences; however, the trait-like component of each construct is only modestly correlated with questionnaire measures of that construct. The 6-month “test–retest” correlations of latent variables representing the true 24-h EMA average anxiety and average anger are quite high (r ? 0.83). This study represents the longest follow-up period over which EMA-based estimates of traits have been examined. The results suggest that although the trait component (individual differences) of EMA momentary ratings of anxiety and anger is larger than the state component, traditional self-report questionnaires of trait anxiety and anger correspond only weakly with EMA-defined traits.     

Qualitative research in psychology: Attitudes of psychology students and academic staff

Qualitative research is experiencing a resurgence within the field of psychology. This study aimed to explore the range of attitudes towards qualitative research in psychology held by students and academics, using the model of attitudes by Eagly and Chaiken as a framework. Twenty‐one psychology students and academics were interviewed about their attitudes towards qualitative research. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. While qualitative research was described as inherent to the psychology profession and useful for generating rich data, some participants felt that this approach was not well respected or considered as legitimate as quantitative methods. Reflecting common misperceptions about qualitative research, participants also expressed concerns that qualitative research was too subjective and had limited generalisability. Furthermore, some participants felt that they lacked the skills and confidence necessary to conduct qualitative research. Large investments in time and resources were identified as barriers to undertaking qualitative research. Identifying attitudes towards qualitative research provides a basis for future work in dispelling myths, promoting attitudinal change and increasing both the use and teaching of qualitative approaches in psychology.     

Quantitative Standards for Absolute Linguistic Universals

Absolute linguistic universals are often justified by cross‐linguistic analysis: If all observed languages exhibit a property, the property is taken to be a likely universal, perhaps specified in the cognitive or linguistic systems of language learners and users. In many cases, these patterns are then taken to motivate linguistic theory. Here, we show that cross‐linguistic analysis will very rarely be able to statistically justify absolute, inviolable patterns in language. We formalize two statistical methods—frequentist and Bayesian—and show that in both it is possible to find strict linguistic universals, but that the numbers of independent languages necessary to do so is generally unachievable. This suggests that methods other than typological statistics are necessary to establish absolute properties of human language, and thus that many of the purported universals in linguistics have not received sufficient empirical justification.     

计划缺失设计——通过有意缺失让研究更高效

缺失值是社会科学研究中非常普遍的现象。全息极大似然估计和多重插补是目前处理缺失值最有效的方法。计划缺失设计利用特殊的实验设计有意产生缺失值, 再用现代的缺失值处理方法来完成统计分析, 获得无偏的统计结果。计划缺失设计可用于横断面调查减少(或增加)问卷长度和纵向调查减少测量次数, 也可用于提高测量有效性。常用的计划缺失设计有三式设计和两种方法测量。     

犯罪行为决策的理论与研究方法

犯罪行为是犯罪人决策的结果。犯罪行为决策研究旨在通过运用认知心理学的有关原理,说明犯罪行为实施之前的行为决策过程及影响因素,其成果能为国家制定刑事政策与犯罪预防政策等提供理论依据。犯罪行为决策的理论模型主要可分为犯罪理性模型、犯罪期望效用模型和犯罪前景理论模型。犯罪行为决策的研究方法主要采用心理物理法、过程追踪法、访谈法、投射测验法和犯罪统计法等。展望未来,应进一步探讨犯罪行为决策的理性与非理性问题,并加强对犯罪行为决策的验证性研究。     

主管承诺理论研究述评

主管承诺（supervisory commitment or commitment to supervisor）是20世纪80年代以来在组织承诺（organizational commitment or commitment to organization）基础上发展起来的员工承诺理论的一个分支。对它的测量,学者们主要是借鉴Allen和Meyer与O’Reilly和Chatman对组织承诺的测量方法,目前属香港学者陈振雄的测量最为细致和全面。对影响主管承诺的前因,学者们目前探索到文化、感受主管支持（PSS）和领导—成员交换（LMX）三个因素。对主管承诺的结果,学者们普遍认为,主管承诺比组织承诺更能影响员工的工作绩效和组织公民行为（OCB）,但在对工作满意感和跳槽意图的影响上还存在不同的意见。另外,在目前大多数学者的研究中,主管承诺与组织承诺是并列关系,但Hunt和Morgan更主张二者是因果关系,而且是主管承诺带来组织承诺。在全面述评的基础上,作者对未来的研究提出了四点展望。     

CD-MST初始阶段模块组建方法比较

具有认知诊断功能的计算机化多阶段测验(CD-MST)是CDA和MST相结合的一种测验方式。由于CD-MST自适应频次较少,初始阶段模块组建会影响整个测验的判准率。借鉴CD-CAT初始项目选取方法,根据CDA和MST自身特点,提出了7种CD-MST初始阶段模块组建方法,分别是随机法、选题策略法、R*矩阵法、CTTID法、CDI法、CTTIDR*法和CDIR*法。采用模拟研究对不同项目质量下7种方法的判准率进行了比较。研究结果表明,当初始阶段结束时,包含R*矩阵的方法判准率显著高于其他方法,尤其是CTTIDR*法;整个测验结束时,CTTIDR*法较其他方法仍然有优势,CDIR*法和R*矩阵法结果较为接近。选题策略法在初始阶段结束时判准率较低,甚至低于随机法,整个测验结束时,判准率同CDIR*法和R*矩阵法持平。4种项目质量对判准率影响较大,HD-HV题库下判准率最高,HD-LV次之,LD-HV较差,LD-LV最差。