Significant subtest score differences on the WISC-R

Psychologists must often make decisions about the significance of scaled score differences between subtests on the WISC-R. Differences which statistically significant at the .05 and .01 level are presented. Generally, minimum differences of 3 to 5 points are necessary at the .05 level and 4 to 6 points at the .01 level. Cautions concerning the interpretation of statistically significant differences are discussed.     

2005 National Society of Genetic Counselors Presidential Address: Raising Our Voice

This Presidential Address was given at the annual education conference of the National Society of Genetic Counselors in Los Angeles, California, USA on November 14, 2005     

Self-esteem and beliefs about memory in environmentally stable and relocated students

This research examined beliefs about the utility of environmental, semantic, and phonological cues for remembering, as these beliefs are related to feelings of self-esteem, assertiveness, and locus of control. We proposed different types of relationships between self-esteem (and assertiveness) and metamemory for two group of college students, based on their differential experiences with distinctive memory failures. For students who were familiar with their current environment, self-esteem was positively related to confidence in having a good memory. It was only for newcomers—students who had recently moved to a new environment—that beliefs about the benefits of environmental cues were positively related to self-esteem and assertiveness. These results suggested that if newcomers were less aware of the utility of environmental cues, they were more likely to attribute their memory failures to their own inadequacies. We also obtained evidence that subjects with an internal locus of control were more knowledgeable regarding the utility of environmental cues than were externally oriented subjects.     

Ethnic group-by-generation interactions in WAIS scores in the Hawaii family study of cognition

This paper is a comparatively small-scale replication of a paper by DeFries, Corley, Johnson, Vandenberg, & Wilson (1982), using that subset of the DeFries subject group that was administered the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) and comparing parent vs. offspring performance of Americans of European and of Japanese Ancestry. Like DeFries et al., significant ethnic group-by-generation interactions were obtained in WAIS scores, suggesting the existence of substantial cultural influences on cognitive-test performance.     

Race differences and the Spearman hypothesis

Certain published data have been reviewed and new data presented relevant to the so-called Spearman hypothesis concerning the racial differences on cognitive tests of black and white Americans. In the published data, the correlation between the profiles of low socio-economic and high socio-economic status (SES) whites became ?.90 when sex, area of the country, and grade/age were controlled. This nearly mirror-image relationship suggests that the residual across-the-board difference between the two groups is primarily on the general factor in intelligence. In contrast, the same correlation between blacks and the low SES whites was only ?.19. This indicated not only independence of the profiles but the presence of multiple causes of differences in addition to a possible contribution of the general factor. These published interpretations have now been confirmed by obtaining correlations between general factor loadings and the group differences for most of the same tests. For the SES dochotomy in whites this correlation is .86. For blacks and the low SES whites it is .17. When the two distributions of differences are correlated, a value of .42 is obtained. The Spearman hypothesis appears to apply primarily to differences in socio-economic status rather than race. Furthermore, one cannot assume a large genetic component for each set of differences. Nor can one argue that the possibility of a large environmental component for each set indicates common environmental causes.     

Mirror reading in right and left handers: Are sinistrals really superior?

While left handers, where they do in fact appear to differ from right handers in cognitive function, have generally been found to be slightly inferior on verbal tasks, there are some reports of a sinistral superiority for nonverbal or spatial abilities. Tankle and Heilman (Brain and Language, 1982, 17, 124-132) report a sinistral superiority in (obligatory) reading of left-right mirror-reversed text. However, in an investigation which included various other forms of geometrical transformation of the written word, we find that strong familial sinistrals are either not different from or even slightly inferior to dextrals in reading most transformations, including left-right mirror reversals.     

Name and face matching in one or two visual fields: a test of models of hemispheric specialization

In two experiments a name and a face (each male or female) were simultaneously flashed to either the same or opposite visual fields (left or right), for matching congruent (same sex) or incongruent (opposite sex), to test the predictions of various models of hemispheric specialization. While overall best performance occurred with a face in the left visual field (LVF) and a name in the right visual field (RVF), and worst with the opposite configuration, the general pattern of results was incompatible with either a direct access model or an activational/attentional account. The results were, however, most compatible with the predictions of a semispecialized hemispheres account, whereby cerebral asymmetries are seen as relative rather than absolute, either hemisphere being capable of processing either kind of material (verbal or visuospatial), but to different levels of efficiency. However, despite the fact that the stimulus materials had previously been shown to produce stable and consistent lateral asymmetries in the predicted directions when presented in isolation, in the composite, integrative matching task the position of the name seemed to be the major determinant of the resultant asymmetries. It would seem therefore that when such stimuli are to be cross matched, either left hemisphere (language) processes somehow dominate right hemisphere (visuospatial) processing (though not in the way that would be predicted by a simple activational/attentional account) or the left hemisphere's greater capacity predominates.     

Book Reviews

In his famous lecture on Kant's essay 'An Answer to the Question What is Enlightenment' Foucault distinguished between two traditions in modern philosophy coming out of Kant's work: 'an analytic of truth' and 'an ontology of present reality [ actualité ]' or 'a genealogy of ourselves'. The paper presents this distinction as a fruitful displacement of the distinction between 'analytic' and 'continental' philosophy,which gives the latter precise cultural and philosophical meaning. The paper clarifies the distinction and argues that almost without exception, analytic philosophers are not interested -in their capacity as philosophers - in interpreting and understanding their historical present. Some possible reasons and some possible consequences of this lack of interest are examined briefly. Within the continental tradition itself, two major contemporary forms of 'an ontology of present reality' are distinguished, one exemplified by Habermas and the other by Foucault. The difference between these two forms of 'taking aim at the heart of the present' (to use Habermas' phrase) is explicated as a difference between distinct genres of critical discourse, or forms of critique. The difference is presented in respect to two major aspects: historical time and historicity, and critique's mode of engagement with 'an analytic of truth'. The last point, namely the presence of a crucial analytic moment in the philosophical interpretation of present reality, suggests a possible modification of the initial distinction between the two philosophical traditions.