全文获取类型
收费全文 | 59篇 |
免费 | 2篇 |
出版年
2023年 | 1篇 |
2022年 | 2篇 |
2021年 | 1篇 |
2020年 | 1篇 |
2019年 | 3篇 |
2018年 | 3篇 |
2017年 | 1篇 |
2016年 | 7篇 |
2015年 | 1篇 |
2014年 | 1篇 |
2013年 | 6篇 |
2012年 | 4篇 |
2011年 | 3篇 |
2010年 | 1篇 |
2009年 | 1篇 |
2008年 | 2篇 |
2007年 | 1篇 |
2006年 | 1篇 |
2005年 | 1篇 |
2004年 | 2篇 |
2000年 | 1篇 |
1999年 | 2篇 |
1985年 | 1篇 |
1981年 | 1篇 |
1980年 | 2篇 |
1977年 | 1篇 |
1974年 | 2篇 |
1973年 | 1篇 |
1971年 | 1篇 |
1969年 | 1篇 |
1968年 | 3篇 |
1964年 | 1篇 |
1961年 | 1篇 |
排序方式: 共有61条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
2.
Meghan Hegarty-Craver Kristin H. Gilchrist Cathi B. Propper Gregory F. Lewis Samuel J. DeFilipp Jennifer L. Coffman Michael T. Willoughby 《Behavior research methods》2018,50(5):1816-1823
Respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) is a quantitative metric that reflects autonomic nervous system regulation and provides a physiological marker of attentional engagement that supports cognitive and affective regulatory processes. RSA can be added to executive function (EF) assessments with minimal participant burden because of the commercial availability of lightweight, wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) sensors. However, the inclusion of RSA data in large data collection efforts has been hindered by the time-intensive processing of RSA. In this study we evaluated the performance of an automated RSA-scoring method in the context of an EF study in preschool-aged children. The absolute differences in RSA across both scoring methods were small (mean RSA differences = –0.02–0.10), with little to no evidence of bias for the automated relative to the hand-scoring approach. Moreover, the relative rank-ordering of RSA across both scoring methods was strong (rs = .96–.99). Reliable changes in RSA from baseline to the EF task were highly similar across both scoring methods (96%–100% absolute agreement; Kappa = .83–1.0). On the basis of these findings, the automated RSA algorithm appears to be a suitable substitute for hand-scoring in the context of EF assessment. 相似文献
3.
Rachel Tillman 《希帕蒂亚:女权主义哲学杂志》2013,28(1):18-31
This paper addresses Peter Singer's claim that cognitive ability can function as a universal criterion for measuring moral worth. I argue that Singer fails to adequately represent cognitive capacity as the object of moral knowledge at stake in his theory. He thus fails to put forth credible knowledge claims, which undermines both the trustworthiness of his moral theories and the morality of the actions called for by these theories. I situate Singer's methods within feminist critiques of moral reasoning and moral epistemology, and argue that Singer's methods are problematic for moral reasoning because they abstract from their object valuable contextual features. I further develop this claim by showing the importance of embodiment for the construal of objects of moral knowledge. Finally, I develop the moral and scholarly implications of this critique. By showing that the abstract, universal methods of reasoning Singer employs cannot credibly construe the objects of ethical inquiry, I call into question the validity of these methods as a means to moral knowledge in general. Furthermore, since moral reasoning takes place within an embodied moral landscape, it is itself a moral enterprise. Singer's moral reasoning, and ours, must be held accountable for its knowledge claims as well as its concrete effects in the world. 相似文献
4.
5.
Murray H. Tillman 《Journal of School Psychology》1973,11(1):80-87
The verbal section of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) has become a frequently used assessment device and research tool with blind children. This article reviews and critiques studies involving the WISC with samples of blind subjects. Discussion focuses on reliability, validity, and research strategy. Recommendations and suggestions for further research place emphasis upon experimental analysis of behavior. 相似文献
6.
7.
8.
9.
Micah D. Tillman 《Metaphilosophy》2016,47(2):304-322
This article argues that philosophers tend to employ a particular method in constructing their theories and critiquing their opponents. To substantiate this claim, the article examines the work of Nietzsche and Locke, the Empiricists and Rationalists, Heidegger, Levinas, and Derrida, and Russell and Wittgenstein, showing how each relies on a method the article labels “revolution‐through‐return.” The method consists in identifying the authority behind your opponent's theory, then appealing to something “prior to” that authority, from which you then proceed to derive your own theory. The article distinguishes between several senses of priority (temporal, ontological, axiological, and so on), argues that modern philosophers tend to rely on temporal priority, and discusses the questions in priority theory that need to be addressed in order evaluate and construct revolution‐through‐return arguments. 相似文献
10.
Lynch Sarah F. Bedford Rachael Propper Cathi Wagner Nicholas J. 《Journal of abnormal child psychology》2022,50(4):489-503
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology - Although research suggests that callous-unemotional (CU) traits are underpinned by deficits in social affiliation and reduced sensitivity to... 相似文献