An analysis of the word-superiority effect

It is easier to decide which of two letters was presented tachistoscopically if the critical letter was in a word rather than in a scrambled word. We showed that this word-superiority effect holds just as strongly for pronounceable nonwords as for words, even when the critical letters are constant over all trials. This finding rules out word meaning and familiarity as variables accounting for the effect. In addition, it was found that the superiority of pronounceable stimuli holds for two-letter stimuli as well as four, and it is therefore concluded that the effect is not due to a memory limitation. An explanation of the effect in terms of the use of additional acoustic information is ruled out by showing that the effect was not diminished when the two possible words sounded exactly alike. An experiment using correctly and incorrectly spelled chemical formulas suggested that spelling regularities, regardless of pronounceability per se, account for the superiority effect. Finally, when decisions about two critical letters must be made on each trial, the correlation between being correct on one and on the other is higher for pronounceable stimuli under some conditions.     

Classroom behavior inventory: Factor verification

Sixty-nine second grade suburban children were rated by three teachers using a classroom behavior inventory. Factor analysis was performed to test the a priori structure of the instrument. The 18-item inventory was analyzed on three factors: Task-Oriented vs Distractibility, Extroversion vs Introversion, and Considerateness vs Hostility. The three factors loaded perfectly according to the a priori design. The need for further investigations concerning the reliability and a comparison of the rating scale with objective observations is indicated.     

Informational cues and attributions based on role behavior

A recent experiment by Messick and Reeder (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1972, 18, 482–491) attempted to extend Jones, Davis, and Gergen's (Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 63, 302–310) classic finding that out-of-role behavior.is more informative for person perception than in-role behavior. It is argued, however, that this study confounded two variables, role performance and occupation. Evidence is presented that the occupation variable alone could have produced Messick and Reeder's results. Both variables seem to affect attributions. The importance of these findings for relating attribution theory and role theory is discussed.     

Regularity as a Form of Constraint

Regularity theories of causation are guided by the idea that causes are collectively sufficient for their effects. Following Mackie [1974], that idea is typically refined to distinguish collections that include redundant members from those that do not. Causes must be collectively sufficient for their effects without redundancy. While Mackie was surely right that the regularity theory must distinguish collections that are in some sense minimally sufficient for an effect from those that include unnecessary hangers-on, I believe that redundancy is the wrong mark of that distinction. I propose a way to develop the regularity theory without it. Instead of distinguishing minimal from mere sufficiency in terms of redundancy, we should look to the influence that events have in the world. Causes, so construed, must have just enough collective influence to ensure that an effect occurs. I argue that such an account provides a uniform solution to the problem of epiphenomena and to a pair of related problems that arise for prior iterations of the regularity theory.     

J. Wentzel van Huyssteen: Refiguring Rationality in the Postmodern Age

In his three books J. Wentzel van Huyssteen develops a complex and helpful notion of rationality, avoiding the extremes of foundationalism and postmodern relativism and deconstruction. Drawing from several postmodern philosophers of science and evolutionary epistemologists who seek to devise a usable notion of rationality, he weaves together a view that allows for a genuine duet betweenscience and theology. In the process he challenges much contemporary nonfoundationalist theology as well as the philosophical naïveté of some cosmologists and sociobiologists.     

Sex differences in instigative aggression

The instigative aggression paradigm, in which male and female subjects instructed a female confederate which shock to set for an opponent in a competitive reaction time task, was employed. It was observed that males instigated more aggression than females and that both passive and assertive noncooperation effectively reduced instigative aggression, the assertive form of noncooperation being only slightly less effective. Questionnaire data suggested that females found the passive noncooperator most desirable while males found her least so. Results were discussed in terms of violation of task role and sex role expectations.     

I. Validity of WISC-R factor scores in predicting achievement and attention for four sociocultural groups

The predictive validity of WISC-R factor scores was examined with samples from the four sociocultural groups of Anglo, Black, Chicano, and native American Papago. The Full Scale IQ and Verbal Comprehension (VC) factor scores were significantly better predictors of achievement as measured by teacher ratings and the Metropolitan Achievement Test. The Perceptual Organization and Freedom from Distractibility (FD) factor scores were also significantly related to achievement, but at a lower level than Full Scale and VC. The correlations of the WISC-R and achievement measures were nearly the same for three of the four groups (exception was native American Papago). The relationship of the FD factor score to ratings of attention was statistically significant, but relatively low. Cautions in interpreting FD as a measure of attention were recommended due to overlap of distributions and low proportion of variance in attention accounted for by FD.     

THE PROBLEM OF “GOD” IN PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGION: LONERGAN'S “COMMON SENSE” (RELIGION) VERSUS “THEORY” (THEOLOGY)

The emphasis on God in American psychology of religion generates the problem of explaining divine‐versus‐natural causality in “spiritual experiences.” Especially “theistic psychology” champions divine involvement. However, its argument exposes a methodological error: to pit popular religious opinions against technical scientific conclusions. Countering such homogenizing “postmodern agnosticism,” Bernard Lonergan explained these two as different modes of thinking: “common sense” and “theory”—which resolves the problem: When theoretical science is matched with theoretical theology, “the God‐hypothesis” explains the existence of things whereas science explains their natures; and, barring miracles, God is irrelevant to natural science. A review of the field shows that the problem is pervasive; attention to “miracles”—popularly so‐named versus technically—focuses the claims of divine‐versus‐natural causality; and specifications of the meaning of spiritual, spirituality, science, worldview, and meaning itself (suffering that same ambiguity: personal import versus cognitive content) offer further clarity. The problem is not naturalism versus theism, but commonsensical versus theoretical thinking. This solution demands “hard” social science.     

An intelligent fault detection system for a heat pump installation based on a geothermal heat exchanger

The heat pump with geothermal exchanger is one of the best methods to heat up a building. The heat exchanger is an element with high probability of failure due to the fact that it is an outside construction and also due to its size. In the present study, a novel intelligent system was designed to detect faults on this type of heating equipment. The novel approach has been successfully empirically tested under a real dataset obtained during measurements of one year. It was based on classification techniques with the aim of detecting failures in real time. Then, the model was validated and verified over the building; it obtained good results in all the operating conditions ranges.     

“THINGS COUNTER,ORIGINAL, SPARE,STRANGE”: DEVELOPING A POSTFOUNDATIONAL TRANSVERSAL MODEL FOR SCIENCE/RELIGION DIALOGUE

This second of three articles outlining the development and practice of a different approach to neurotheology discusses the construction of a suitable methodology for the project based on the work of J. Wentzel van Huyssteen. It explores the origin and contours of his concept of postfoundational rationality, its potential as a locus for epistemological parity between science and religion and the distinctive and unique transversal space model for interdisciplinary dialogue which he builds on these. It then proposes a further development of the model which has the potential to produce a very different type of additional and original dialogical outcome. While such “transversal” outputs may initially seem counter and strange they not only flow naturally from the models’ own inherent dynamics but also open up the possibility of a distinctively different form of neurotheology.