Validation of the French version of the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) among diabetes and HIV patients

IntroductionBecause changing personal beliefs about treatment could help improve adherence, having a validated tool for identifying these beliefs is important.ObjectiveThis study sought to validate the French version of the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-f^©).MethodData were gathered among 253 patients with type 2 diabetes and 123 HIV patients with the help of self-reported questionnaires, including the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire, a French adherence assessment, and some demographic variables.ResultsConfirmatory factor analyses show the French version of the BMQ has the same factorial structure as the English original in both diabetes and HIV samples. All items load on their expected factor namely specific-necessity, specific-concern, general-harm, and general-overuse. Moreover, each scale revealed good internal consistency and retained the psychometric qualities of the original version. These satisfactory properties were consolidated by predictive validity data that demonstrate the impact of treatment beliefs on adherence levels.ConclusionFindings are discussed in light of previous diabetes and HIV studies. The French BMQ proved to be a good way of quickly identifying inaccurate beliefs about treatment. It could be a useful tool in French clinical practice, such as in patient education.     

Conflict detection,dual processes,and logical intuitions: Some clarifications

Recent studies on conflict detection during thinking suggest that reasoners are sensitive to possible conflict between their heuristic judgement and elementary logical or probabilistic principles. I have argued that this conflict sensitivity calls for the postulation of logical intuitions and has implications for the way we conceive the interaction between System-1 and System-2 in dual process theories. In this paper I clarify potential misconceptions about this work, discuss the link with other approaches, and sketch directions for further research.     

ALL THE (MANY,MANY) THINGS WE KNOW: EXTENDED KNOWLEDGE*

In this paper we explore the potential bearing of the extended mind thesis—the thesis that the mind extends into the world—on epistemology. We do three things. First, we argue that the combination of the extended mind thesis and reliabilism about knowledge entails that ordinary subjects can easily come to enjoy various forms of restricted omniscience. Second, we discuss the conceptual foundations of the extended mind and knowledge debate. We suggest that the theses of extended mind and extended knowledge lead to a bifurcation with respect to the concepts of belief and knowledge. We suggest that this conceptual bifurcation supports a form of pluralism about these concepts. Third, we discuss whether something similar can be said at the metaphysical level.     

SLAP: Specification logic of actions with probability

A logic for specifying probabilistic transition systems is presented. Our perspective is that of agents performing actions. A procedure for deciding whether sentences in this logic are valid is provided. One of the main contributions of the paper is the formulation of the decision procedure: a tableau system which appeals to solving systems of linear equations. The tableau rules eliminate propositional connectives, then, for all open branches of the tableau tree, systems of linear equations are generated and checked for feasibility. Proofs of soundness, completeness and termination of the decision procedure are provided.     

Reasoning about evidence

Bayesians understand the notion of evidential support in terms of probability raising. Little is known about the logic of the evidential support relation, thus understood. We investigate a number of prima facie plausible candidate logical principles for the evidential support relation and show which of these principles the Bayesian evidential support relation does and which it does not obey. We also consider the question which of these principles hold for a stronger notion of evidential support.     

Highly reflective reasoners show no signs of belief inhibition

The processes underlying individual differences in reasoning performance are not entirely understood. What do people who do well on reasoning tasks where beliefs and logic conflict do differently from other people? Because abundant evidence shows that even poorer reasoners detect these conflicts, it has been suggested that individual differences in reasoning performance arise from inhibition failures later in the reasoning process. The present paper argues that a minority of highly skilled reasoners may deviate from this general reasoning process from an early stage. Two studies investigated signs of belief inhibition using a lexical access paradigm (Study 1) and a negative priming paradigm (Study 2). Study 1 showed that while other people exhibited signs of belief inhibition following a belief–logic conflict, people with the highest disposition for cognitive reflection did not. In Study 2, this finding was replicated and similar results were also obtained when comparing groups with higher and lower general cognitive ability. Two possible explanations are discussed.     

Bystanders’ responses to offline bullying and cyberbullying: The role of empathy and normative beliefs about aggression

Cyberbullying often takes place with the virtual presence or knowledge of bystanders. While we have some evidence about the determinants of bystanders’ responses to offline bullying, we lack empirical studies concerning the variables that influence bystanders’ responses to cyberbullying. The current study examines bystanders’ responses to offline bullying and cyberbullying incidents. Two types of responses were captured: support toward the victims and the reinforcement of bullies’ actions. Using data from 321 German adolescents (ages 12–18; M = 14.99; 44% girls), the association between bystanders’ responses and normative beliefs about verbal aggression and cyberaggression, and affective and cognitive empathy, were tested in a path model. Both types of normative beliefs positively predicted the reinforcement of bullies, and normative belief about verbal aggression also predicted support for the victims of offline bullying. Both types of empathy predicted support in offline bullying, but only affective empathy predicted support in cyberbullying. There was no link between affective or cognitive empathy to the reinforcement of bullies. Moreover, bystanders’ tendencies to respond supportively to the victim or to reinforce the bully were rather consistent in both cyber‐ and offline bullying, but there was no link between support and reinforcement. The findings are discussed with regard to implications for prevention and intervention efforts.     

The logical form of negative action sentences

It is typically assumed that actions are events, but there is a growing consensus that negative actions, like omissions and refrainments, are not events, but absences thereof. If so, then we must either deny the obvious, that we can exercise our agency by omitting and refrainment, or give up on event-based theories of agency. I trace the consensus to the assumption that negative action sentences are negative-existentials, and argue that this is false. The best analysis of negative action sentences treats them as quantifying over omissions and refrainments, conceived of as events.     

Men of Honor Don't Talk: The Relationship Between Masculine Honor and Social Activism Against Criminal Organizations in Italy

Criminal organizations have a strong influence on social, political, and economic life in Italy and other parts of the world. Nonetheless, local populations display collective passivity against organized crime, a phenomenon known as omertà. Omertà is linked to the concepts of honor and masculinity. That is, in order to fit ideological constructions of manliness, individuals should display indifference toward illegal activities and should not collaborate with legal institutions. In two studies, we investigated the link between endorsement of a masculine honor ideology and collective action intentions against criminal organizations (antimafia). Study 1 (N = 121) involved a Northern Italian sample, and Study 2 (N = 301) involved a Southern Italian sample. Across studies, results showed that endorsement of masculine honor ideology was associated with lower willingness to engage in social activism against criminal organizations. This relationship was mediated by attitudes toward criminal organizations (Study 1 and 2) and, in line with the notion of omertà, by lower levels of collective motive and more anxiety about interacting with police (Study 2). Directions for future research are discussed.