Single landmark learning in rats: Sex differences in a navigation task

In Experiments 1 and 2, rats were trained in a Morris pool to find a hidden platform located some distance away from a single landmark. Males learned to swim to the platform faster than females, but on test trials without the platform, males, unlike females, spent less time in the platform quadrant of the pool in the second half of each test trial than in the first. They also showed greater persistence in searching in the platform quadrant over a series of extinction trials. In Experiments 3a and 3b, the problem was made easier by locating the platform closer to the solitary landmark. Now males and females learned to swim to the platform equally rapidly, and both stopped searching in the platform quadrant in the second half of each test trial. Experiment 4 ruled out the possibility that males´ shorter latencies to find the platform in Experiment 2 were due to their swimming faster than females.     

论班图拉观察学习理论的特征及其历史地位

该文从以下三个方面分析了班图拉观察学习理论的特征：（１）强化与认知的结合,（２）行为主义的建构论,（３）交互决定论。作者认为,班图拉对心理学的杰出贡献是他发掘了观察学习这一前人所忽视的学习形式,给了观察学习以应有的地位。作者认为,班图拉在其观察学习的研究中,注重社会因素的影响。以认知的术语阐述观察学习的过程与作用,且注重以人为被试的实验,因而对学习心理学的发展产生重要影响。     

Responsible engineering: Gilbane Gold revisited

This paper addresses several concerns in teaching engineering ethics. First, there is the problem of finding space within already crowded engineering curricula for meaningful discussions of ethical dimensions in engineering. Some engineering programs may offer entire courses on engineering ethics; however, most do not at present and may not in the foreseeable future. A promising possibility is to weave ethics into already existing courses using case studies, but most current case studies are not well integrated with engineering technical analysis. There is a danger that case studies will be viewed by both instructors and students as departures from “business as usual”—interesting perhaps, but not essentially connected with “real” engineering. We offer a case study, inspired by the National Society of Professional Engineer’s popular video Gilbane Gold, that can be used to make the connection. It requires students to engage in technical analysis, but in a context that makes apparent the ethical responsibility of engineers. Further, the case we present marks a significant departure from more typical cases that primarily focus on wrongdoing and its prevention. We concentrate more positively on what responsible engineering requires. There is a need for more such cases, regardless of whether they are to be used in standard engineering courses or in separate courses in engineering ethics. This article is the product of the NSF/Bovay Endowment “Workshop to Develop Numerical Problems Associated With Ethics Cases for use in Required Undergraduate Engineering Courses” (NSF Grant DUE-9455141) held at Texas A&M University in August 1995. For further information about this project, contact Michael J. Rabins, Director of the Ethics and Professionalism Program in the Look College of Engineering at Texas A&M University. Additional case studies from this workshop are available on the Internet site http://ethics.tamu.edu. The writing of this article was supported in part by “Engineering Ethics: Good Works” (NSF/EVS Grant SBR-930257). Michael Pritchard teaches ethics and is co-author of Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases (1995) with C.E. Harris and Michael Rabins (Wadsworth, Belmont CA). Mark Holtzapple teaches chemical engineering and is author of Foundations of Engineering (McGraw-Hill) which includes an ethics chapter suitable for freshman engineering students.     

The relative error magnitude in three measures of change

Formulas for the standard error of measurement of three measures of change—simple difference scores, residualized difference scores, and the measure introduced by Tucker, Damarin, and Messick—are derived. Equating these formulas by pairs yields additional explicit formulas which provide a practical guide for determining the relative error of the three measures in any pretest-posttest design. The functional relationship between the standard error of measurement and the correlation between pretest and posttest observed scores remains essentially the same for each of the three measures despite variations in other test parameters (reliability coefficients, standard deviations), even when pretest and posttest errors of measurement are correlated.     

The effects of instructions and calculation procedures on observers' accuracy, agreement, and calculation correctness

Although the quality of observational data is generally evaluated by observer agreement, measures of both observer agreement and accuracy were available in the present study. Videotapes with a criterion protocol were coded by 16 observers. All observers calculated agreement scores both on their own and their partner's data and on a contrived data set misrepresented as data collected by other observers. Compared with agreement scores calculated by the experimenter, observers erroneously inflated their own agreement scores and deflated the agreement scores on the contrived data. Half of the observers (n = 8) had been given instructions emphasizing the importance of accuracy during observation while the other half had been given instructions emphasizing interobserver agreement. Accuracy exceeded agreement for the former group, whereas agreement exceeded accuracy for the latter group. The implications are that agreement should be calculated by the experimenter and that the accuracy-agreement relationship can be altered by differential observer instructions.     

Designer testing: using subjects'' personal vocabulary to produce individualised tests

The principle of designer tests is that of using a subject's own semantics rather than lists of words that may or may not be relevant or even understandable for the subject. The Personalised Emotional Index (PEI) is a prototype designer test, in this case a mood test, that uses words that the subject chooses from a list of suggestions within mood categories. Each person's test is custom made from familiar and understandable words from his/her own vocabulary. Such a test has much face validity, can be succinct and has comprehensibility for the subject. The results obtained when using this test at the same time as the Profile of Mood States Bipolar Version (POMS-BI) were very similar (e.g. in a regression analysis, the ‘elated-depressed' variable predicted present overall mood on both tests (POMS: t=5.25, p<0.000, PEI: t=5.84, p<0.000) with a high correlation for total scores (r=0.82, p<0.000). The PEI results were correlated within the two week interval (r's about −0.74; p<0.000) and reasonably but not highly correlated on retesting some months after the first testing (r's about −0.25; p<0.000). It was successfully used to differentiate mood variables from a group consisting of caregivers of people with schizophrenia (n=30, producing 399 days of data) and a group of unselected controls (n=62, producing 1080 days of data). The test appears to have validity, reliability, comparability, and utility.     

A review of the observational data-collection and reliability procedures reported in The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

The research published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (1968 to 1975) was surveyed for three basic elements: data-collection methods, reliability procedures, and reliability scores. Three-quarters of the studies reported observational data. Most of these studies' observational methods were variations of event recording, trial scoring, interval recording, or time-sample recording. Almost all studies reported assessment of observer reliability, usually total or point-by-point percentage agreement scores. About half the agreement scores were consistently above 90%. Less than one-quarter of the studies reported that reliability was assessed at least once per condition.     

Artifact, bias, and complexity of assessment: the ABCs of reliability

Interobserver agreement (also referred to here as "reliability") is influenced by diverse sources of artifact, bias, and complexity of the assessment procedures. The literature on reliability assessment frequently has focused on the different methods of computing reliability and the circumstances under which these methods are appropriate. Yet, the credence accorded estimates of interobserver agreement, computed by any method, presupposes eliminating sources of bias that can spuriously affect agreement. The present paper reviews evidence pertaining to various sources of artifact and bias, as well as characteristics of assessment that influence interpretation of interobserver agreement. These include reactivity of reliability assessment, observer drift, complexity of response codes and behavioral observations, observer expectancies and feedback, and others. Recommendations are provided for eliminating or minimizing the influence of these factors from interobserver agreement.     

Observer reliability as a function of circumstances of assessment

THREE FACTORS CHARACTERISTIC OF EXPERIMENTAL SETTINGS WERE HYPOTHESIZED TO INFLATE ARTIFACTUALLY THE RELIABILITY OF OBSERVATIONAL RECORDINGS: (a) knowledge by observers of when and by whom their reliability is being assessed, (b) the absence of the experimenter or a monitor to prevent cheating, and (c) computation of reliability within- (versus between-) observer group. Three groups of four observers used a standard nine-category observational code for disruptive behavior in recording from videotapes of a classroom for 22 days. Analyses revealed considerable increases in average occurrence reliability as a function of the main effects of each of the experimental factors. The specific increases in reliability associated with each of the 12 combinations of the experimental factors are presented for each category of behavior. The possible role of observer-training procedures and behavioral definitions as determiners of nonartifactual reliability is discussed.