Consciousness and inference to the best explanation: Compiling empirical evidence supporting the access-phenomenal distinction and the overflow hypothesis

A tacit assumption in the field of consciousness studies is that the more empirical evidence a theory can explain, the better it fares when weighed against competitors. If one wants to take seriously the potential for empirical evidence to move forward debates in consciousness studies, there is a need to gather, organize, validate, and compare evidence. We present an inference to the best explanation (IBE) process on the basis of empirical support that is applicable in debates between competing theories of consciousness. Our proposed IBE process consists in four steps: Assimilate, Compile, Validate, and Compare. Until now, the vast majority of the work in the field has consisted in gathering empirical evidence for theories i.e., the assimilation step. To illustrate the feasibility of our proposed IBE process, and what it may look like when applied in practice, we deliver a complete collection (the compilation step) of empirical support for the distinction between A-Consciousness and P-Consciousness and the overflow hypothesis. Finally, we offer an example of the validation step, by scrutinizing the interpretation of aphantasics’ performance on retro-cue paradigms offered in the literature in support of the overflow hypothesis. The compilation we deliver here is the first effort in the IBE process, the end result of which — hopefully — will be the ability of the research community to carry out side-by-side comparisons of theories and the empirical phenomena they claim to explain, i.e., the comparison step.     

证据顺序和证词自信度对学前末期儿童因果推理的影响

开展两个实验探究证据顺序和证词自信水平对5岁儿童因果推理的影响机制。132名和127名5岁儿童分别参与实验1和实验2。实验1发现证据顺序对儿童因果推理的影响表现为近因效应,但证词的自信水平差异不影响儿童的因果推理;实验2发现如果儿童注意到证词的自信水平信息,他们更倾向于在自信证词条件依据证词推断因果关系,证据顺序的影响力被削弱。研究结果说明证据顺序变化导致易受影响的近因效应。     

Repression and splitting: towards a method of conceptual comparison

An attempt is made to compare two psychoanalytic concepts which by ‘belonging’ to different psychoanalytic groups have come to be defined and used differently. The paper is also an inquiry into the possibility of a comparative psychoanalytic method. The two concepts are ‘repression’ and ‘splitting of the ego’ and an examination is made of the semantic similarities and differences. Some clinical material is offered that adds indicative clinical evidence to test the semantic comparison. The aim is to answer the question: Are the terms simply alternative ones for similar clinical phenomena? The paper offers one method which could provide an answer. It represents a general method for clarifying and maybe reconciling the differing points of view of competing psychoanalytic schools.     

Resisting Explanation

Although explanation is widely regarded as an important concept in the study of rational inquiry, it remains largely unexplored outside the philosophy of science. This, I believe, is not due to oversight as much as to institutional resistance. In analytic philosophy it is basic that epistemic rationality is a function of justification and that justification is a function of argument. Explanation, however, is not argument nor is belief justification its function. I argue here that the task of incorporating explanation into the theory of rational inquiry poses a serious challenge to our basic concept of epistemic rationality as well as the a priori method of inquiry that still lies at the heart of analytic philosophy. Specifically, it pushes us toward a much stronger form of naturalism than is generally thought necessary, one in which argument and explanation are recognized as distinct and equally fundamental cognitive processes whose dynamic relationship is one of the central issues in the theory of rationality.     

肿瘤与肿瘤标志物研究中证据的思考

随着对肿瘤研究的深入,人类发现的肿瘤标志物越来越多。目前有一定临床价值的肿瘤标志物已达100多种,但经过10多年的临床实践发现,肿瘤与其标志物之间的关系错综复杂。现有的许多研究中实验设计以及对结果的分析都存在着一些问题,得出的结论缺乏直接或确凿的证据,甚至出现偏差的结论,以致于影响到临床的准确应用。所以,有必要对此进行总结和探讨,以期有效发挥肿瘤标志物的临床应用价值。     

Why do doctored images distort memory?

Doctored images can cause people to believe in and remember experiences that never occurred, yet the underlying mechanism(s) responsible are not well understood. How does compelling false evidence distort autobiographical memory? Subjects were filmed observing and copying a Research Assistant performing simple actions, then they returned 2 days later for a memory test. Before taking the test, subjects viewed video-clips of simple actions, including actions that they neither observed nor performed earlier. We varied the format of the video-clips between-subjects to tap into the source-monitoring mechanisms responsible for the ‘doctored-evidence effect.’ The distribution of belief and memory distortions across conditions suggests that at least two mechanisms are involved: doctored images create an illusion of familiarity, and also enhance the perceived credibility of false suggestions. These findings offer insight into how external evidence influences source-monitoring.     

When should evidence be disclosed in an interview with a suspect? An experiment with mock-suspects

The question of whether to disclose evidence to a suspect early on, or later, in an interview is often of critical importance for police officers' interviewing strategies. To shed light on this issue, an experiment was conducted in which 95 participants each committed a mock-theft as a hidden ‘witness’ observed them. A statement from the witness was presented to them during a subsequent interview in which they were ‘suspects’. The time at which this evidence was disclosed to participants, and the evidence strength, was manipulated. Each participant was randomly assigned to one of four conditions; Early Weak, Early Strong, Late Weak, or Late Strong. Both late evidence disclosure, and strong evidence, produced higher confession rates than did early disclosure or weak evidence, and late disclosure of weak evidence resulted in the withdrawal of most of the confessions which had previously been made. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

心理治疗的循证实践与循效施治

循证实践与循效施治是当前国外心理治疗的两种相互补充的模式,二者在理论假设、获取证据的来源、操作流程等方面存在着明显不同。从影响来看,循证实践的影响力超过了循效施治,它被美国提升推广为一种心理学运动,它的倡导昭示着目前临床心理治疗的一个关键性改革。然而,在心理治疗中要真正实施循证实践存在着很多困难和挑战,循效施治是解决这些困难和问题的方法之一。我国心理治疗的专业化水平不高,藉美国心理治疗循证实践提供的理念和方法去思考中国心理治疗的问题,我们亦可获得有益于中国心理治疗发展的思路。     

Thomas: The Apostle of Scientists

Richard Dawkins suggests that the way “doubting Thomas” demanded evidence for Jesus’ resurrection should endear him to scientists. A close reading of Chapter 20 of John’s Gospel suggests that Thomas’ confession of Jesus’ divinity does indeed resonate with how scientists make progress, but not because he demanded evidence. Rather, the similarity lies in the way he went beyond the immediate evidence to reach a bold conclusion, the implications of which took a lifetime to work out. A comparison with the way J. J. Thomson discovered the first sub-atomic particle, the electron, shows that this is also how breakthroughs in science happen.