Latent trait models and dichotomization of graded responses

This paper discusses thecompatibility of the polychotomous Rasch model with dichotomization of the response continuum. It is argued that in the case of graded responses, the response categories presented to the subject are essentially an arbitrary polychotomization of the response continuum, ranging for example from total rejection or disagreement to total acceptance or agreement of an item or statement. Because of this arbitrariness, the measurement outcome should be independent of the specific polychotomization applied, for example, presenting a specific multicategory response format should not affect the measurement outcome. When such is the case, the original polychotomous model is called compatible with dichotomization.A distinction is made between polychotomization or dichotomization before the fact, that is, in constructing the response format, and polycho- or dichotomization after the fact, for example in dichotomizing existing graded response data.It is shown that, at least in case of dichotomization after-the-fact, the polychotomous Rasch model is not compatible with dichotomization, unless a rather special condition of the model parameters is met. Insofar as it may be argued that dichotomization before the fact is not essentially different from dichotomization after the fact, the value of the unidimensional polychotomous Rasch model is consequently questionable. The impact of our conclusion on related models is also discussed.     

A taxonomy of item response models

A number of models for categorical item response data have been proposed in recent years. The models appear to be quite different. However, they may usefully be organized as members of only three distinct classes, within which the models are distinguished only by assumptions and constraints on their parameters. “Difference models” are appropriate for ordered responses, “divide-by-total” models may be used for either ordered or nominal responses, and “left-side added” models are used for multiple-choice responses with guessing. The details of the taxonomy and the models are described in this paper. The present study was supported in part by two postdoctoral fellowships awarded to Lynne Steinberg: an Educational Testing Service Postdoctoral Fellowship at ETS, Princeton, NJ and an NIMH Individual National Research Service Award at Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Helpful comments by the editor and three anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged.     

A temporal limit on the effect of future food on current performance in an analogue of foraging and welfare

Rats obtained access to food twice each 24-hour period. The first session was a work session in which food was available on a progressive-ratio schedule. During the second session, which occurred between 1 and 23 hours after the work session, food was freely available up to a fixed total intake each 24 hours. The situation resembled elements of several real world circumstances, including the choice between continuing to forage in a rapidly depleting patch and waiting for a better patch, and between working now and receiving a guaranteed income later. The purpose of the experiment was to explore the time period over which future access to reward could affect current responding. Contrary to what might be expected from recent theorizing, anticipation of future food delayed by an hour or more after the start of the work session had no effect on current performance. Food intake was high and constant during work sessions except for a prefeeding effect that occurred when the free session closely preceded the next day's work session. Also, an increase in the difficulty of the work schedule increased the amount of work and the maximum price paid for food as if the work session were the only time food was available. The results indicate the importance of considering temporal limits in theories that require animals to integrate input over time to determine the allocation of resources among alternatives.     

James and Carnap on philosophical systems and the role of temperaments

The relationship between American pragmatism and logical empiricism is complicated at best. The received view is that by around the late 1930s or early 1940s pragmatism had been replaced, supplanted, or eclipsed by the younger and more logic-oriented form of empiricism developed in interwar Vienna. Recently, however, this picture has been challenged, and this paper offers further reasons for thinking that the received view is inadequate. Through a critical examination of William James's Pragmatism and “The Sentiment of Rationality” and Rudolf Carnap's “Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language” and other works, the paper builds a case for the existence of a rather striking correspondence between the work of one of pragmatism's most vaunted figures and the thought of logical empiricism's most famous advocate. Not only were both philosophers interested in what might be called metaphilosophy or the psychology of philosophy, both held very similar deflationary views.     

Exploring the Context-Sensitivity of Collective Action Motivations and the Mobilizing Role of Social Media: A Comparative Interview Study With Activists in Germany and Turkey

Western scholarship has underlined the relevance of social identity, perceived efficacy, emotions, and cost–benefit assessments as central catalysts of collective action. Little has been done to understand the context-sensitivity of these catalysts by means of cross-culturally comparative designs. The current study explores their context-sensitivity. It aims to find out whether existing opportunity structures in a democratic, nonrepressive country like Germany produce catalysts of collective action different from those produced in an autocratic, repressive country like Turkey. It also aims to understand the role of social media in mobilizing people in these two contexts. Semistandardized interviews with activists were carried out in both countries (n = 18 in Germany and n = 15 in Turkey) and analyzed by means of a cross-culturally comparative inductive coding procedure including initial and focused coding. Results show that collective action is related to different configurations of collective-action catalysts in the two countries. Solidarity concerns at the face of existential risks are more pronounced in Turkey, whereas political-change concerns are more important in Germany. The role of social media accordingly differs, adhering to the different activist goals. Theoretical implications for the role of context in studying collective action are discussed.     

“Put a Little Love in Your Heart”: Acceptance of Paternalistic and Ally Political Discourses Both Predict Pro-Roma Solidarity Intentions Through Moral Inclusion

The way politicians talk about minorities institutes the normative context of intergroup relations. We investigated how endorsement of different political discourses predicts donation and collective action intentions by majority members toward the Roma in five European countries. The survey was conducted online using samples demographically similar to the populations of Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, France, and Ireland (N = 5,054). First, results showed that accepting paternalistic discourse versus discourse promoting allyship were not distinguishable; both promoted higher moral inclusion which in turn predicted higher prosocial intentions. Second, donations (i.e., immediate relief) and collective action (i.e., social change action) were driven by identical factors. Third, acceptance of openly hostile political discourse neither predicted moral exclusion, nor lower prosocial intentions. In summary, our research provides important evidence that when it comes to Roma—non-Roma relations, the previously established distinction between solidarity intentions that aim to solidify status relations versus bring about social change is completely blurred, presumably because of the social context in which any positive message communicates moral inclusion challenging the hostile status quo.     

从疫情控制看中庸行动我的应急灵活性

本文撰写的目的是,藉助分析COVID-19疫情控制的应急心理机制,提出一个思考中国人“自我”的新架构,希望未来它能成为研究这一热门研究领域的新进路。沿用中国传统流传下来、但却一直被沿用至今的中庸思维,以及其内涵的“阴阳思维”及“全息思维”作为立论基础,提出“中庸行动我”的构念。它是指个体在选择及执行解决问题之具体行动方案时,依现实“情境需求”,灵活地“协调”出一个最恰当的“行动我”,以配合集体战疫的需要及功效。“中庸行动我”这一构念的提出,不仅只是为了解释战疫的成效,更重要的是它欲反映出中国人思维“灵活性”的根源,从而可以作为研究“中国人自我”的另类进路,不再只是以跨文化研究进路所关注的“本质自我”为主要立论基础,从而丰富了该领域现有的知识内涵。     

Critical action among Asian and Hispanic/Latinx youth: Identifying a multidimensional measure and exploring within-group differences

Critical action—behaviours aimed at dismantling systems of oppression—must be examined within youths' racialized experiences and should incorporate cultural and sociohistorical factors. We considered an expansive list of items capturing youth behaviours to create a novel four-factor (service, community change, expression, and care) measure of critical action for Asian and Hispanic/Latinx youth. Multiple distinct profiles of critical action were identified within both racial-ethnic groups, and associations between the profiles and sociodemographic and contextual support variables were explored. Gender differences in the type of critical action were found in both racial-ethnic groups, pointing to the potential influence of gender roles on critical action among these populations. Differences in critical action patterns were also found between those born in the U.S. versus those born outside the U.S.; access to critical action may differ within racial-ethnic groups depending on birthplace and associated nuances in familial and cultural contexts. This paper demonstrated a need for attending to variation between and within groups in the study of critical action in order to effectively support racialized youth's coping within and resistance against systems of oppression.     

Why do young people engage in some civic actions and not others? Exploring the roles of individual and collective civic efficacy

Civic actions are behaviours intended to improve conditions for others or help shape a community's future. Such actions vary widely from voting to voluntary helping, from canvassing to community organizing, and attempts have been made to categorize the array of civic actions. However, the question of why young adults engage in some types of civic actions versus others is not well understood. Using data from 598 White, cisgender, heterosexual young adults in the United States, we examined the relations between individual civic efficacy, collective civic efficacy, and seven actions: writing social media posts, voting, buycotting, volunteering, participating in an organization, supporting political candidates, and protesting. We hypothesized that individual efficacy would be positively related to all seven actions, but collective efficacy would be more strongly related to collective or political actions, compared to the individual or civil ones. Logistic regression analyses showed that individual efficacy positively predicted engagement in all seven civic actions. Individual and collective efficacy had a complex curvilinear relation with buycotting and supporting political candidates. Implications for future research and applications aimed at promoting civic engagement amongst young adults are discussed. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement .     

“You're overreacting!”: The ambiguity of Asian American microaggressions delegitimizes collective action

Asian Americans are lauded as the model minority who are intelligent and industrious. Simultaneously, they are deemed as perpetual foreigners. The current research examines how racial microaggressions expressed by a White American source toward an Asian American target affect perceptions of the perpetrator and target. White Americans and Asian Americans read about an interaction between two college students, where the racial microaggression made was either an ambiguous expression of the model minority myth (MMM; all studies), an ambiguous perpetual foreigner stereotype (all studies), an unambiguous MMM (all studies), or no racial bias (Studies 2 and 3). Findings indicate that both Whites and Asian Americans respond differently—when exposed to the aforementioned conditions—regarding perceived racism of the White perpetrator and appropriateness of response by the Asian American target; however, they respond similarly regarding perceived legitimacy of collective action by the target. Nevertheless, Whites and Asian Americans deemed the ambiguous microaggression against the target as a model minority not racist relative to unambiguous MMM. Our findings show that ambiguous forms of bias toward Asian Americans go “under the radar” of both Whites and Asian Americans as being racist and contribute to the maintenance of the racial status quo.