汉语双字词的心理词典存储—来自发展性阅读障碍个案的证据

研究探讨了发展性阅读障碍个案S汉字命名过程选择性错误的产生机制。汉字命名、词汇判断和组词实验有三个主要发现,个案S在汉字命名过程中产生大量的选择性错误,选择性错误在复合词中发生的前后位置没有显著差异;S在词汇判断过程中,混淆词汇中两个词素的先后顺序;S对产生选择性错误的汉字组词的数量显著少于控制组,且其产生选择性错误的复合词的频率显著高于他组出的其他词汇频率。研究以Zhou&Marslen-Wilson(2000)的复合词的多水平平行结构心理词典模型为基础讨论了这些发现的理论意义,并着重分析了汉字命名过程中词素频率和词汇意义结构之间的交互作用。     

Using automation to combat the replication crisis: A case study from controlled-rearing studies of newborn chicks

The accuracy of science depends on the precision of its methods. When fields produce precise measurements, the scientific method can generate remarkable gains in knowledge. When fields produce noisy measurements, however, the scientific method is not guaranteed to work – in fact, noisy measurements are now regarded as a leading cause of the replication crisis in psychology. Scientists should therefore strive to improve the precision of their methods, especially in fields with noisy measurements. Here, we show that automation can reduce measurement error by ∼60% in one domain of developmental psychology: controlled-rearing studies of newborn chicks. Automated studies produce measurements that are 3–4 times more precise than non-automated studies and produce effect sizes that are 3–4 times larger than non-automated studies. Automation also eliminates experimenter bias and allows replications to be performed quickly and easily. We suggest that automation can be a powerful tool for improving measurement precision, producing high powered experiments, and combating the replication crisis.     

On Being Happy and Mistaken on a Good Day: Revisiting Forgas’s (1998) Mood-Bias Result

Forgas (1998) reported “on being happy and mistaken,” finding that a happy mood increased the fundamental attribution error (FAE) compared to a sad mood. However, the standard attitude-attribution paradigm used by Forgas might contain demand characteristics, to which happy people might be especially susceptible. In addition, Goldenberg and Forgas (2012) showed that a happy mood decreased a form of the FAE. Using the questioner-contestant paradigm, we replicated Forgas’s result, but only when participants were already having a “good day.”     

Development of a Cyber/Information Technology Knowledge Test for Military Enlisted Technical Training Qualification

An Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) Review Panel, with expertise in personnel selection, job classification, psychometrics, and cognitive psychology developed recommendations for changes to the military enlistment test battery. One recommendation was to develop and evaluate a test of cyber/information and communications technology literacy to supplement current ASVAB content. This article summarizes a multiphased Cyber Test development process: (a) a review of information/computer technology literacy definitions and measures, (b) development and pilot testing of a cyber knowledge measure, (c) validation of test scores against final school grades (FSGs) for selected technical training courses, (d) development of an operational reporting metric and subgroup norms, and (e) examination of construct validity. Results indicate the Cyber Test has predictive validity versus technical training school grades and incremental validity comparable to the ASVAB technical knowledge tests when used with the ASVAB Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) verbal/math composite as a baseline.     

The relationship between cognitive errors,coping strategies,and clients' experiences in session: An exploratory study

Aim: Cognitive errors (CE) and coping strategies (CS) can bear weight on how individuals relate to others and perceive interpersonal relationships. However, there is little research into how clients' erroneous beliefs and maladaptive coping strategies can interfere with the therapeutic process. This study utilised a sample of healthy clients to explore the relationship between their CEs and CSs and their evaluation of therapy. Method: Therapy sessions of undergraduate student clients (N =26) were rated using the Cognitive Error Rating Scale (CERS – 3rd edition), the Coping Patterns Rating Scale (CPRS;), the Session Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ) and the Session Impact Scale (SIS). Results: Clients who engaged in dichotomous thinking endorsed problem solving less and were more likely to feel unsupported and misunderstood by the therapist. Clients who discounted the positive tended to feel more pressured and judged by therapists. Conversely, those who engaged in problem solving were more likely to find sessions deeper and more valuable as compared to those who reacted to stressful events by submission, escape, or opposition. Implications: Better understanding how and when a client's cognitive errors and coping mechanisms are at play during therapy can help clinicians to address them and intervene appropriately.     

新手考官的工作记忆和人格对其评分有效性的影响——以无领导小组讨论为例

相对于其它评价中心技术而言,在无领导小组讨论中考官因素对评分结果的影响尤为重要.本研究主要探讨无领导小组讨论中新手考官的工作记忆与人格对其评分有效性的影响.结果发现,首先,新手考官的评分者一致性较低,评分准确度较差.其次,工作记忆和人格的部分因素分别从不同方面影响新手考官的评分有效性,具体表现在：（1）利他性越强,新手考官评分总均值的准确性越高,且评分结果越宽松;（2）新手考官的决断性越强,对所有应聘者做出有效区分的准确性越高;（3）新手考官的沉稳性越高,对各维度的区分越有效;（4）注意转换和抑制能力对新手考官的晕轮效应及其在各个维度上进行区分的准确度有抑制作用.     

Prediction of true test scores from observed item scores and ancillary data

In many educational tests which involve constructed responses, a traditional test score is obtained by adding together item scores obtained through holistic scoring by trained human raters. For example, this practice was used until 2008 in the case of GRE^®General Analytical Writing and until 2009 in the case of TOEFL^® iBT Writing. With use of natural language processing, it is possible to obtain additional information concerning item responses from computer programs such as e‐rater^®. In addition, available information relevant to examinee performance may include scores on related tests. We suggest application of standard results from classical test theory to the available data to obtain best linear predictors of true traditional test scores. In performing such analysis, we require estimation of variances and covariances of measurement errors, a task which can be quite difficult in the case of tests with limited numbers of items and with multiple measurements per item. As a consequence, a new estimation method is suggested based on samples of examinees who have taken an assessment more than once. Such samples are typically not random samples of the general population of examinees, so that we apply statistical adjustment methods to obtain the needed estimated variances and covariances of measurement errors. To examine practical implications of the suggested methods of analysis, applications are made to GRE General Analytical Writing and TOEFL iBT Writing. Results obtained indicate that substantial improvements are possible both in terms of reliability of scoring and in terms of assessment reliability.     

Calibrated Bayes Factors Should Not Be Used: A Reply to Hoijtink,van Kooten,and Hulsker

Hoijtink, Kooten, and Hulsker (2016 Hoijtink, H., van Kooten, P., &; Hulsker, K. (2016). Why Bayesian psychologists should change the way they use the Bayes factor. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51, 1--9. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2014.969364.[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) present a method for choosing the prior distribution for an analysis with Bayes factor that is based on controlling error rates, which they advocate as an alternative to our more subjective methods (Morey &; Rouder, 2014 Morey, R.D., &; Rouder, J.N. (2014). Bayesfactor: Computation of Bayes factors for common designs. R package version 0.9.9. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=BayesFactor [Google Scholar]; Rouder, Speckman, Sun, Morey, &; Iverson, 2009 Rouder, J.N., Speckman, P.L., Sun, D., Morey, R.D., &; Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t-tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 225–237. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.2.225[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Wagenmakers, Wetzels, Borsboom, &; van der Maas, 2011 Wagenmakers, E.-J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., &; van der Maas, H. (2011). Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: The case of psi. A comment on Bem (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 426–432. doi: 10.1037/a0022790[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). We show that the method they advocate amounts to a simple significance test, and that the resulting Bayes factors are not interpretable. Additionally, their method fails in common circumstances, and has the potential to yield arbitrarily high Type II error rates. After critiquing their method, we outline the position on subjectivity that underlies our advocacy of Bayes factors.