Does Cooperation in the Laboratory Reflect the Operation of a Broad Trait?

The Dictator Game, a face valid measure of altruism, and the Trust Game, a face valid measure of trust and trustworthiness, are among the most widely used behavioural measures in human cooperation research. Researchers have observed considerable covariation among these and other economic games, leading them to assert that there exists a general human propensity to cooperate that varies in strength across individuals and manifests itself across a variety of social settings. To formalize this hypothesis, we created an S‐1 bifactor model using 276 participants' Dictator Game and Trust Game decisions. The general factor had significant, moderate associations with self‐reported and peer‐reported altruism, trust, and trustworthiness. Thus, the positive covariation among economic games is not reducible to the games' shared situational features. Two hundred participants returned for a second session. The general factor based on Dictator Game and Trust Game decisions from this session did not significantly predict self‐reported and peer‐reported cooperation, suggesting that experience with economic games causes them to measure different traits from those that are reflected in self‐assessments and peer‐assessments of cooperativeness. © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Epistemic Contextualism: An Idle Hypothesis

Epistemic contextualism is one of the most hotly debated topics in contemporary epistemology. Contextualists claim that ‘know’ is a context-sensitive verb associated with different evidential standards in different contexts. Contextualists motivate their view based on a set of behavioural claims. In this paper, I show that several of these behavioural claims are false. I also show that contextualist test cases suffer from a critical confound, which derives from people's tendency to defer to speakers’ statements about their own mental states. My evidence consists in results from several behavioural experiments. I conclude that contextualism is an idle hypothesis and I propose some general methodological lessons.     

Empathic Skills and Cyberbullying: Relationship of Different Measures of Empathy to Cyberbullying in Comparison to Offline Bullying Among Young Adults

ABSTRACT

Empathy, as the ability to understand and feel the emotions of others, is related to less bullying behavior. However, the link of bullying behavior with self-reports of empathy seems to be stronger than with behavioral measures of empathy (e.g., empathic accuracy). Few studies have analyzed the relationship of affective and cognitive empathy to cyberbullying behavior, especially among young adults. In a quasiexperimental dyadic interaction paradigm with 72 young adults, empathic accuracy was operationalized as the match of other- and self-reported emotions for the target, and emotional congruence as the match of the target's and the perceiver's self-reported emotions. Affective and cognitive empathy, offline bullying behavior, and cyberbullying behavior were measured using self-reports. Empathic accuracy and cognitive empathy were found to be negatively linked. Emotional congruence, self-reported affective and cognitive empathy did not correlate with offline bullying behavior or cyberbullying behavior. Only empathic accuracy was significantly negatively linked to offline bullying behavior. In group tests, higher empathic accuracy (but not emotional congruence) was connected to less offline bullying behavior. In a multiple regression analysis only emotional congruence was a predictor of cyberbullying behavior. Thus, while empathic accuracy might diminish offline bullying behavior, emotional congruence might diminish cyberbullying behavior.     

Gender and appearance accuracy: Women’s advantage over men is restricted to dress items

Which aspects of people’s appearance do women remember better than men? Women were predicted to remember the dress-related items but not the physical characteristics of targets more accurately than men, given that the former might be a more female-relevant domain of interest among perceivers. Participants watched a videotaped target and then completed a surprise test of their memory for her/his appearance. Men were as accurate as women at remembering the target’s physical features but less accurate than woman at recalling what the target was wearing. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for eyewitness accuracy.     

Reciprocity and Discrimination: An Experiment of Hindu‐Muslim Cooperation in Indian Slums

This article shows that indirect positive reciprocity triggered by experiencing short and superficial cooperation with outgroups' individual members reduces discrimination of other members of the same group. The field research combined a lab‐in‐the‐field experiment and a survey conducted in the slums of Mumbai, an Indian city notorious for Hindu‐Muslim violence. After the treatment manipulated expectations of cooperative behavior, ethnically heterogeneous groups produced as much public goods in a public goods game as homogeneous groups. This positive experience radically reduced Hindu subjects' discriminatory attitudes towards the Muslim minority after the experiment. The effect was equally strong among voters of two extremist parties implicated in ethnic riots. The survey compared reciprocity with alternative explanations of why people discriminate against some, but not other ethnic groups. Indirect positive reciprocity and intergroup contact are associated with less, and relative size of the outgroup with more discriminatory attitudes.     

第二语言阅读“熔断”假说的认知心理证据:在线篇章处理的范式

本研究以认知心理学的结构建造理论为实验框架,模拟学习者母语及外语在线篇章处理的过程,从而获取第二语言阅读"熔断"假说以及"门槛"效应的认知心理证据。英语水平差别显著的高低两组共60名被试参加了英、汉语故事理解加工实验,考察他们如何对故事的人物角色进行持续跟踪,以厘清故事内的"因果链"。结果发现:(1)高水平组成功地把他们的母语故事理解加工能力迁移到第二语言的故事理解加工,而低水平组则迁移失败;(2)理解加工能力的迁移与被试心理表征建构能力以及抑制机制的效率紧密关联,高水平组被试能有效地利用抑制机制来管理他们第二语言的结构建造过程,从而建立对故事的连贯心理表征,而低水平组则不能。在分析上述结果的基础上,文章提出第二语言阅读"熔断"假说的认知心理证据就是第二语言心理表征建构与抑制机制的作用问题;要成功地进行第二语言篇章理解,读者必须要使其二语潜在的能力(如词汇效率等)发展到某个点上,使得与抑制(结构建造的关键)相关的许多无意识的决定过程能够高度自动化。     

Spatial But Not Oculomotor Information Biases Perceptual Memory: Evidence From Face Perception and Cognitive Modeling

Recent research put forward the hypothesis that eye movements are integrated in memory representations and are reactivated when later recalled. However, “looking back to nothing” during recall might be a consequence of spatial memory retrieval. Here, we aimed at distinguishing between the effect of spatial and oculomotor information on perceptual memory. Participants’ task was to judge whether a morph looked rather like the first or second previously presented face. Crucially, faces and morphs were presented in a way that the morph reactivated oculomotor and/or spatial information associated with one of the previously encoded faces. Perceptual face memory was largely influenced by these manipulations. We considered a simple computational model with an excellent match (4.3% error) that expresses these biases as a linear combination of recency, saccade, and location. Surprisingly, saccades did not play a role. The results suggest that spatial and temporal rather than oculomotor information biases perceptual face memory.     

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.