A bitter pill for closure

Synthese - The primary objective of this paper is to introduce a new epistemic paradox that puts pressure on the claim that justification is closed under multi premise deduction. The first part of...     

Approach-avoidance goals and relationship problems,communication of stress,and dyadic coping in couples

Partners in romantic relationships differ in the extent to which they are oriented towards positive outcomes (e.g., intimacy) or away from negative outcomes (e.g., conflict). The present study examines these approach-avoidance relationship goals in relation to self-reported relationship problems, stress communication, and dyadic coping. Hypotheses were tested on a dyadic level (Actor-Partner Interdependence Model) using data from 368 couples. As expected, people endorsing approach goals reported fewer relationship problems, more effective stress communication, and better dyadic coping. People endorsing avoidance goals reported more relationship problems and poorer dyadic coping. Further, approach-oriented people tended to perceive their partner as being more communicative and more supportive, whereas avoidance-oriented people tended to perceive their partner as more communicative but less supportive. Reports by partners agreed with the self-reports of approach- and avoidance-oriented spouses concerning stress communication and dyadic coping. These findings highlight motivational factors in general, and orientation towards approach-avoidance goals in particular, as key features in understanding relationship maintenance.     

Epistemology and the law: why there is no epistemic mileage in legal cases

Philosophical Studies - The primary aim of this paper is to defend the Lockean View—the view that a belief is epistemically justified iff it is highly probable—against a new family of...     

Influence of Motor Cortex Stimulation During Motor Training on Neuroplasticity as a Potential Therapeutic Intervention

Rehabilitation options to promote neuroplasticity may be enhanced when patients are engaged in motor practice during repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Twelve participants completed 3 separate sessions: motor practice, motor practice with rTMS, and rTMS only: motor practice consisted of 30 isometric contractions and subthreshold rTMS was 30, 3-s trains at 10 Hz. Assessments included the Box and Block Test (BBT), force steadiness (10% of the maximum voluntary contraction), and TMS (cortical excitability, intracortical inhibition, and intracortical facilitation). Participants significantly increased BBT scores following the combined condition. Force steadiness improved after all 3 conditions (p < .05). TMS outcomes depended on intervention condition with significant increases in facilitation following the motor practice plus rTMS condition. All interventions influenced motor control, yet are likely modulated differently when combining motor practice plus rTMS. These results help guide the clinical utility of rTMS as an intervention to influence motor control.