Children’s scale errors are a natural consequence of learning to associate objects with actions: A computational model

Young children sometimes attempt an action on an object, which is inappropriate because of the object size—they make scale errors. Existing theories suggest that scale errors may result from immaturities in children's action planning system, which might be overpowered by increased complexity of object representations or developing teleofunctional bias. We used computational modelling to emulate children's learning to associate objects with actions and to select appropriate actions, given object shape and size. A computational Developmental Deep Model of Action and Naming (DDMAN) was built on the dual‐route theory of action selection, in which actions on objects are selected via a direct (nonsemantic or visual) route or an indirect (semantic) route. As in case of children, DDMAN produced scale errors: the number of errors was high at the beginning of training and decreased linearly but did not disappear completely. Inspection of emerging object–action associations revealed that these were coarsely organized by shape, hence leading DDMAN to initially select actions based on shape rather than size. With experience, DDMAN gradually learned to use size in addition to shape when selecting actions. Overall, our simulations demonstrate that children's scale errors are a natural consequence of learning to associate objects with actions.     

Validation française d’une version brève de l’Échelle de satisfaction maritale

IntroductionFew measuring instruments of couple satisfaction maximizing the individual perception of the relationship exists in French. Settings such as Liaison psychiatry of a general hospital could benefit from a questionnaire adapting to a variety of clinical profiles.ObjectiveThis article proposes a French revision and validation of the Marital Satisfaction Scale (MSS; Roach, Frazier, and Bowden, 1981), a 48-item self-reported questionnaire designed to evaluate personal satisfaction towards one's couple relationship.MethodA sample of 349 community-dwelling individuals aged 20–85 answered the MSS, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS; Spanier, 1976), and a series of inquiries related to sociodemographics. As an initial Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) did not validate the unidimensional structure postulated by the original authors, the item number was reduced to 14.ResultsThis brief version of the scale (MSS-14) was subsequently validated with an internal replication analysis, a strong criterion-related validity with the DAS (r_s = 0.73, P < 0.001), an excellent internal consistency (α = 0.961, IC à 95% [0.955, 0.967]), a strong test-retest reliability (r_s = 0.90, CI à 95% [0.85, 0.93], P < 0.001, Z = − 0.033, P = 0.973), and strong item-to-total correlations (> 0.69). The MSS-14 could differentiate individuals with and without marital distress (AUC = 0.97), while no sociodemographic variable seemed to have a significant influence on couple satisfaction.ConclusionThe MSS-14 appears to be a reliable instrument to assess the personal satisfaction towards a couple relationship in community-dwelling adults.     

State humility: Measurement,conceptual validation,and intrapersonal processes

Humility is a core psychological process theoretically marked by low self-focus, secure identity, and balanced awareness of strengths and weaknesses. We began with a consensual definition of humility before theoretically unpacking it. First, using 25 samples and 2622 adults, we developed the Brief State Humility Scale, which demonstrates strong construct validity and good reliability, is sensitive to experimental manipulation, and is uncorrelated with social desirability. Second, using this measure, we replicated previously reported relationships involving interpersonal processes; revealed links between state humility and intrapersonal processes (e.g. affect, creativity, and personality); and demonstrated key theoretical differences between state humility and modesty. This framework highlights new avenues for humility research and suggests how humility plays a critical role in emotional experience.     

Influence of Proactive Personality on Career Self‐Efficacy

This study examined the relationship between proactive personality and career decision‐making self‐efficacy. In Study 1, the authors validated the Proactive Personality Scale–Korean Short Form, using the Rasch model with 315 participants, and found that fit statistics, point‐measure correlations, and item difficulty estimates satisfy the construct validity criterion. In Study 2, the authors administered the Proactive Personality Scale, Career Decision‐Making Self‐Efficacy Scale, and Career Search Self‐Efficacy Scale to 296 freshman and sophomore college students. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that proactive personality scores explain additional variance in both career decision‐making self‐efficacy and career search self‐efficacy scores. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.     

No blank slates: Pre-existing schemas about pharmaceuticals predict memory for side effects

Objectives: Attribution of symptoms as medication side effects is informed by pre-existing beliefs about medicines and perceptions of personal sensitivity to their effects (pharmaceutical schemas). We tested whether (1) pharmaceutical schemas were associated with memory (recall/recognition) for side effect information (2) memory explained the attribution of a common unrelated symptom as a side effect.

Design: In this analogue study participants saw the patient leaflet of a fictitious asthma drug listing eight side effects.

Main outcome measures: We measured recall and recognition memory for side effects and used a vignette to test whether participants attributed an unlisted common symptom (headache) as a side effect.

Results: Participants who perceived pharmaceuticals as more harmful in general recalled fewer side effects correctly (r_{Correct Recall} = ?.273), were less able to differentiate between listed and unlisted side effects (r_{Recognition Sensitivity} = ?.256) and were more likely to attribute the unlisted headache symptom as a side effect (r_{side effect attribution} = .381, ps < .01). The effect of harm beliefs on side effect attribution was partially mediated by correct recall of side effects.

Conclusion: Pharmaceutical schemas are associated with memory for side effect information. Memory may explain part of the association between pharmaceutical schemas and the attribution of unrelated symptoms as side effects.     

Measuring adult indirect aggression: The development and psychometric assessment of the indirect aggression scales

This paper describes the development of a psychometric measure of indirect aggression for use in an adult population. Items were generated from a series of qualitative interviews. Two versions of the scale were developed; the Indirect Aggression Scale Aggressor version (IAS‐A) and Target version (IAS‐T). Both versions of the scale were administered to separate samples (n_A=294; n_T=294). Scales were analysed using item analysis of internal consistency, as well as exploratory factor analysis. Both versions were found to have the same consistent three sub‐scales: social exclusion, use of malicious humour, and guilt induction. Preliminary psychometric evaluation suggests that the scales are both sufficiently reliable (with Cronbach's alphas ranging from .81 to .89) and valid. There were no gender differences in either using or being the victim of indirect aggression, and the behaviour was significantly negatively correlated with age. Future validation and potential usage of the measures are discussed. Aggress. Behav. 31:1–14, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The Dimensionality of Right-Wing Authoritarianism: Lessons from the Dilemma between Theory and Measurement

The RWA Scale ( Altemeyer, 1981 , 1988 , 1996 ) is commonly regarded as the best measure of right-wing authoritarianism. The one-dimensional instrument assesses the covariation of three attitudinal clusters: authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression, and conventionalism. The incongruence between the implicit conceptual dimensionality on the one hand and methodological operationalization on the other makes room for discussion about whether it would be advantageous to measure the 3 facets of RWA separately. I rely on three arguments: (1) confirmatory factor analyses showing that three-dimensional scales fit the data better than the conventional one-dimensional practice; (2) the dimensions showing a considerable interdimension discrepancy in their capability to explain validation criteria; and (3) the dimensions showing an intradimensional discrepancy which is dependent upon the research question. The argumentation is illustrated by empirical evidence from several Web-based studies among German Internet users.