类别变量的中介效应分析

在心理学和其他社科研究领域,研究者能熟练地进行连续变量的中介效应分析,但面对自变量、中介变量或(和)因变量为类别变量的中介效应分析,研究者往往束手无策。在阐述类别自变量中介分析方法的基础上,我们建议使用整体和相对中介相结合的类别自变量中介分析方法,并给出了分析流程。以二分因变量为例,讨论了中介变量或(和)因变量为类别变量的中介分析方法的发展过程(即尺度统一的过程),建议通过检验Za×Zb的显著性来判断中介效应的显著性。用二个实际例子演示如何进行类别变量的中介效应分析。最后展望了类别变量的中介效应分析研究的拓展方向。     

Promoting Generalization of Reading: A Comparison of Two Fluency-Based Interventions for Improving General Education Student’s Oral Reading Rate

The generalization effects of empirically-supported fluency-based reading interventions have been largely ignored. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of two fluency-based reading interventions, Repeated Readings and Multiple Exemplars, on elementary-aged children’s immediate and generalized oral reading fluency rate. Using a within-subjects group design, a total of 42 second (n = 25) and fourth (n = 17) grade general education students were administered both interventions and their generalized responding to passages containing high word and medium word overlap was assessed. Results indicated that children’s oral fluency on intervention passages was significantly greater during the Repeated Readings intervention. However, children’s oral reading fluency on generalization passages containing medium word overlap was significantly greater following the Multiple Exemplars intervention. This difference was however possibly due to the Multiple Exemplar medium word overlap passage being easier for students to read. No significant differences between the two interventions were observed in children’s oral reading fluency on generalization passages containing high word overlap. Implications and limitations of the study are discussed in relation to improving students’ reading fluency on generalization passages.     

Comparing Performance Standards on the Retention of Words Read Correctly Per Minute

To measure retention of oral reading fluency, three students attending a learning support classroom used a repeating reading strategy with two passages. Each student read one passage to a high performance standard and the other passage to a lower performance standard. Results show it took the students more practice to reach the higher performance standard in regards to both calendar days and practice trials. The retention measures revealed all students had comparable decrements with words read correctly per minute for both the high and low performance standards even though practice varied. During the last retention interval 3½ months after obtaining the performance standard, all students demonstrated the highest terminal frequency of words read correctly per minute in the high performance standard condition.     

发散性思维的年龄差异及“位置法”记忆训练的作用

该研究的目的是探讨发散性思维的年龄差异以及“位置法”记忆训练对发散性思维的迁移作用。训练组为经过记忆训练的青年人24名,老年组20名,对照组为相匹配的青年人24名、老年人19名。结果表明:(1)在图形、符号、语义三方面的流畅性、变通性和独特性上,老年组均很显著地比青年组差。青年组的个别差异较大,老年组的更大,尤其是独特性。(2)青年训练组的图形流畅性、独特性及语义的独特性成绩显著优于其对照组,老年训练组图形的变通性有优于其对照组的趋势(P=.052),说明“位置法”记忆训练对发散性思维有一定的间接迁移作用,尤其是对青年人。(3)发散性思维与想象力、数字符号、训练前和训练后词的记忆以及图形的记忆成绩均有很显著正相关。而词汇成绩只与训练组两项发散性思维有显著相关。     

分类数据测量等价性检验方法及其比较：项目阈值(难度)参数的组间差异性检验

测量工具满足等价性是进行多组比较的前提, 测量等价性的检验方法主要有基于CFA的多组比较法和基于IRT的DIF检验两类方法。文章比较了单维测验情境下基于CCFA的DIFFTEST检验方法和基于IRT模型的IRT-LR检验方法, 以及多维测验情境下DIFFTEST和基于MIRT的卡方检验方法的差异。通过模拟研究的方法, 比较了几种方法的检验力和第一类错误, 并考虑了样本总量、样本量的组间均衡性、测验长度、阈值差异大小以及维度间相关程度的影响。研究结果表明：(1)在单维测验下, IRT-LR是比DIFFTEST更为严格的检验方法; 多维测验下, 在测验较长、测验维度之间相关较高时, MIRT-MG比DIFFTEST更容易检验出项目阈值的差异, 而在测验长度较短、维度之间相关较小时, DIFFTEST的检验力反而略高于MIRT-MG方法。(2)随着阈值差值增加, DIFFTEST、IRT-LR和MIRT-MG三种方法的检验力均在增加, 当阈值差异达到中等或较大时, 三种方法都可以有效检验出测验阈值的不等价性。(3)随着样本总量增加, DIFFTEST、IRT-LR和MIRT-MG方法的检验力均在增加; 在总样本量不变, 两组样本均衡情况下三种方法的检验力均高于不均衡的情况。(4)违背等价性题目个数不变时, 测验越长DIFFTEST的检验力会下降, 而IRT-LR和MIRT-MG检验力则上升。(5) DIFFTEST方法的一类错误率平均值接近名义值0.05; 而IRT-LR和MIRT-MG方法的一类错误率平均值远低于0.05。     

On an Intuitionistic Modal Logic

In this paper we consider an intuitionistic variant of the modal logic S4 (which we call IS4). The novelty of this paper is that we place particular importance on the natural deduction formulation of IS4— our formulation has several important metatheoretic properties. In addition, we study models of IS4— not in the framework of Kirpke semantics, but in the more general framework of category theory. This allows not only a more abstract definition of a whole class of models but also a means of modelling proofs as well as provability.     

Lecturer fluency can impact students' judgments of learning and actual learning performance

The way in which information is presented can influence students' judgments of learning (JOLs). Carpenter, Wilford, Kornell, and Mullaney (2013) found that students reported higher JOLs after viewing a fluent lecturer (good speaker) versus a disfluent lecturer, whereas actual learning performance was unaffected by lecturer fluency. The current research sought to replicate Carpenter et al. (2013) and examine whether students could improve calibration of their JOLs if provided a second opportunity to do so over a different video. In three experiments, participants watched a video of a fluent or disfluent lecturer, made a JOL, completed a free-recall test, and then repeated this procedure with a second video. The fluent lecturer generally produced higher JOLs than the disfluent lecturer (for both videos) across all three experiments. However, fluency also had a positive impact on actual learning performance. These diverging results further illuminate the impact lecturer fluency can have on student learning.     

加工流畅性对学习判断字体大小效应的影响

以自定步调学习时间和习得试验次数为加工流畅性指标,通过操纵不同字号的词对考察了加工流畅性对学习判断字体大小效应的影响。结果发现：（1）字体大小影响学习判断,但不影响回忆成绩;（2）不同字体大小的词对在加工流畅性（学习时间和学习次数）上存在差异,仅自定步调学习时间测量的加工流畅性对学习判断字体大小效应有贡献。这些结果说明学习判断的字体大小效应是一种元认知错觉现象,部分支持了加工流畅性假说。     

Retrieval effort or intention: Which is more important for participants’ classification of involuntary and voluntary memories?

Theories of autobiographical memory distinguish between involuntary and voluntary memories. While involuntary memories are retrieved with no conscious intention and are therefore unexpected, voluntary memories are both intended and expected. Recent research has shown that participants sometimes classify their memories as either involuntary or voluntary based on retrieval effort instead of intention. These findings question whether intention really is the defining difference between these two types of retrieval or whether retrieval effort is also an important determinant. In two experimental studies, we investigated the extent to which participants rely on retrieval effort while classifying their memories as involuntary or voluntary. We created experimental conditions that maximize the probability of one type of retrieval while minimizing the probability of another type. Participants reported autobiographical memories in each condition while the programme registered their retrieval time. They then classified their memories as either voluntary or involuntary and rated all memories on perceived retrieval effort. This gave us four categories of memories: experimentally defined voluntary and involuntary memories with an objective measure of effort (retrieval time) and subjectively classified involuntary and voluntary memories with a subjective measure of effort. This allowed us to investigate the relative contribution of intention and effort to involuntary and voluntary memories. We replicated and extended previous findings by showing that the majority of memories were classified as involuntary independently of whether they were retrieved in the experimentally defined voluntary or involuntary condition. This could indicate that subjective effort is more important than intention for the involuntary–voluntary distinction in contrast with existing theories. We discuss theoretical and methodological implications of this finding.