What Are We Doing When We Translate from Quantitative Models?

Although quantitative analysis (in which behavior principles are defined in terms of equations) has become common in basic behavior analysis, translational efforts often examine everyday events through the lens of narrative versions of laboratory-derived principles. This approach to translation, although useful, is incomplete because equations may convey concepts that are difficult to capture in words. To support this point, we provide a nontechnical introduction to selected aspects of quantitative analysis; consider some issues that translational investigators (and, potentially, practitioners) confront when attempting to translate from quantitative models; and discuss examples of relevant translational studies. We conclude that, where behavior-science translation is concerned, the quantitative features of quantitative models cannot be ignored without sacrificing conceptual precision, scientific and practical insights, and the capacity of the basic and applied wings of behavior analysis to communicate effectively.     

Distortion of probability and outcome information in risky decisions

Substantial evidence indicates that information is distorted during decision making, but very few studies have assessed the distortion of probability and outcome information in risky decisions. In two studies involving six binary decisions (e.g., banning blood donations from people who have visited England, because of “mad cow disease”), student and nonstudent participants distorted their evaluations of probability and outcome information in the direction of their preferred decision alternative and used these biased evaluations to update their preferences. Participants also evaluated the utilities of possible outcomes more positively when the outcomes could follow only from the preferred alternative and more negatively when they could follow only from the competing alternative. Such circular reasoning is antithetical to the normative consequentialist principles underlying decision analysis. Presenting numerical information as precise values or as ranges of values did not significantly affect information distortion, apparently because the manipulation did not affect perceived ambiguity as intended.     

The development of possibility judgment within and across domains

The ability to differentiate possible events from impossible ones is an invaluable skill when reasoning about claims that transcend the perceptual evidence at hand, yet preschool-aged children do not readily make this differentiation when reasoning about physically extraordinary events [Shtulman, A., &; Carey, S. (2007). Improbable or impossible? How children reason about the possibility of extraordinary claims. Child Development, 78, 1015–1032]. The present study sought to determine whether this failure stems from deficits in domain-specific knowledge or deficits in the domain-general procedure by which possibility judgments are made. Participants (48 children aged 4-9 years olds and 16 adults) were asked to judge the possibility of three types of extraordinary events – physical, psychological, and biological – and to justify their judgments of impossibility. Developmental changes in the ability to differentiate improbable events from impossible events were qualitatively similar across domains. Moreover, participants’ propensity to judge improbable events possible was significantly correlated with the quality of their justifications, both within and across domains. These findings suggest that modal development involves a domain-general change in how modal claims are evaluated.     

A meta‐analysis of psychopathy‐, antisocial PD‐ and FFM associations

This research meta‐analytically summarizes the relationships of the Five‐Factor Model (FFM) with psychopathy and Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD). Effect sizes of the associations between psychopathy, APD and the FFM were compiled from 26 independent samples (N = 6913) for psychopathy and 57 independent samples (N = 16 424) for APD. The results revealed predominantly points of similarity and some differences in the FFM associations of both disorders. Symptoms of psychopathy and APD were negatively associated with Conscientiousness and Agreeableness facets and positively with scores on Angry–Hostility (N2), Impulsiveness (N5), Excitement Seeking (E5) and negatively with Warmth (E1). Only psychopathy had a small negative association with Anxiety (N1) and was characterized by stronger negative associations with Agreeableness and Straightforwardness (A2), Compliance (A4) and Modesty (A5) compared to APD. The moderator analyses showed that sample type, use of the NEO‐PI‐R and APD instrument moderated the APD FFM associations, while psychopathy instrument and age group were moderators in the psychopathy MA. Implications of this research for the assessment of APD and psychopathy relying on dimensional models of personality pathology are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

我国产后抑郁研究现状分析

本文通过系统分析产后抑郁领域的国内研究现状,为研制针对性的干预策略奠定基础。研究遵循循证医学的理念,运用文献计量分析方法,对国内1998年～2007年间发表的111篇产后抑郁领域的研究文献进行分析。可见研究文献数量呈现逐年上升趋势,但研究范围主要局限于医学中心及区域范畴,研究内容主要涉及产后抑郁的评估与诊断、危险因素研究和预防干预方法的探索,但总体研究设计存在较大缺陷。可见亟需加强社区层面研究,提高研究设计的科学性,并将预防干预方法研究作为重点。     

Assessment of self-conscious emotions: a Swedish psychometric and structure evaluation of the Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA)

The Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA) is a well-established scenario-based questionnaire assessing self-conscious emotions, such as shame and guilt, which have been shown to be differentially associated with a variety of functional, motivational, behavioral and health outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties and internal structure of a Swedish version of TOSCA in a sample of 361 healthy adults. The psychometric properties and internal consistency of the Swedish version were at level with the original US TOSCA version for shame, guilt and detachment. The internal structure of the Swedish version was acceptable for shame, guilt and detachment but contained shortcomings in assessment of externalization.     

Self-perceived employability: Investigating the responses of post-graduate students

This paper reports the further testing of a research instrument to examine the expectations and self-perceptions of employability of business students at post-graduate level, building on previously reported research with undergraduates [Rothwell, A., Herbert, I., & Rothwell, F. (2008). Self perceived employability: Construction and initial validation of a scale for university students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(1), 1-12]. On this occasion the scale was again found to have a good internal reliability coefficient (α = .84), and discriminant validity from university commitment. Forcing a four-factor solution found components relating to the university’s reputation, individual self-confidence and proactivity, external labor market factors, and finally the individuals’ engagement with study and academic performance. For this multi-cultural post-graduate sample, perceptions of employability were good, but within that they placed significant emphasis on the brand and reputation of the university. Results indicate the potential for further studies with refined scales, particularly the combined scale of employability and ambition.     

Mixed effects modeling of Morris water maze data: Advantages and cautionary notes

Morris water maze data are most commonly analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance in which daily test sessions are analyzed as an unordered categorical variable. This approach, however, may lack power, relies heavily on post hoc tests of daily performance that can complicate interpretation, and does not target the nonlinear trends evidenced in learning data. The present project used Monte Carlo simulation to compare the relative strengths of the traditional approach with both linear and nonlinear mixed effects modeling that identifies the learning function for each animal and condition. Both trend-based mixed effects modeling approaches showed much greater sensitivity to identifying real effects, and the nonlinear approach provided uniformly better fits of learning trends. The common practice of removing a rat from the maze after 90 s, however, proved more problematic for the nonlinear approach and produced an underestimate of y-axis intercepts.     

Mysteries of morality

Evolutionary theories of morality, beginning with Darwin, have focused on explanations for altruism. More generally, these accounts have concentrated on conscience (self-regulatory mechanisms) to the neglect of condemnation (mechanisms for punishing others). As a result, few theoretical tools are available for understanding the rapidly accumulating data surrounding third-party judgment and punishment. Here we consider the strategic interactions among actors, victims, and third-parties to help illuminate condemnation. We argue that basic differences between the adaptive problems faced by actors and third-parties indicate that actor conscience and third-party condemnation are likely performed by different cognitive mechanisms. Further, we argue that current theories of conscience do not easily explain its experimentally demonstrated insensitivity to consequences. However, these results might be explicable if conscience functions, in part, as a defense system for avoiding third-party punishment. If conscience serves defensive functions, then its computational structure should be closely tailored to the details of condemnation mechanisms. This possibility underscores the need for a better understanding of condemnation, which is important not only in itself but also for explaining the nature of conscience. We outline three evolutionary mysteries of condemnation that require further attention: third-party judgment, moralistic punishment, and moral impartiality.     

How strong is the comparison‐to‐the‐strongest heuristic?: An empirical test of the comparison‐ to‐the‐strongest heuristic in probability judgment1,2

Abstract: Windschitl and Wells (1998 ) proposed that the pairwise comparison between the focal and strongest alternative outcomes plays an important role in probability judgment. However, their studies did not control the effects of alternative outcomes other than the strongest one. This article tested whether only the strongest alternative outcome would affect probability judgment, using a variable selection method in a multiple regression analysis. Study 1 reanalyzed the results of Windschitl and Young (2001 ) and showed that only the strongest alternative outcome affects probability judgment. In Study 2, a new experiment was conducted to modify the methodological problems in Study 1. The results of Study 2 were identical to those of Study 1. All these results consistently supported the comparison hypothesis.