Deontic and epistemic reasoning in children

It is widely accepted that adults show an advantage for deontic over epistemic reasoning. Two published studies (Cummins, 1996b; Harris and Núñez, 1996, Experiment 4) found evidence of this “deontic advantage” in preschool-aged children and are frequently cited as evidence that preschoolers show the same deontic advantage as adults. However, neither study has been replicated, and it is not clear from either study that preschoolers were showing the deontic advantage under the same conditions as adults. The current research investigated these issues. Experiment 1 attempted to replicate both Cummins’s and Harris and Núñez’s studies with 3- and 4-year-olds (N = 56), replicating the former with 4-year-olds and the latter with both 3- and 4-year-olds. Experiment 2 modified Cummins’s task to remove the contextual differences between conditions, making it more similar to adult tasks, finding that 4-year-olds (n = 16) show no evidence of the deontic advantage when no authority figure is present in the deontic condition, whereas both 7-year-olds (n = 16) and adults (n = 28) do. Experiment 3 removed the authority figure from the deontic condition in Harris and Núñez’s task, again finding that 3- and 4-year-olds (N = 28) show no evidence of the deontic advantage under these conditions. These results suggest that for preschoolers, the deontic advantage is reliant on particular contextual cues such as the presence of an authority figure, in the deontic condition. By 7 years of age, however, children are reasoning like adults and show evidence of the advantage when no such contextual cues are present.     

THE SECOND SPHERE AND THE STORY OF NO STORY

The author discusses Roy Schafer's ideas of the second self and second reality, as well as his consistent theme of storyteller and story. The latter theme is also explored in the context of more recent psychoanalytic influences, such as Bionian thought, trauma theory, the French approach, and the interpersonal perspective. To illustrate the idea of the nonstory in today's clinical encounters, the author presents two clinical vignettes.     

Caffeine reinforces flavor preference and behavior in moderate users but not in low caffeine users

The study examined the role of caffeine consumption in caffeine reinforcement. Previous findings have shown that caffeine reinforced flavor preference in moderate caffeine consumers who are caffeine deprived. However, most of these studies have employed rating procedures only, and have not shown the effectiveness of caffeine to reinforce behaviors other than through subjective ratings. Twenty-five participants (15 low caffeine consumers, and 10 moderate caffeine consumers) were each given three exposures to a caffeinated drink, and three exposures to a non-caffeinated drink. Each drink was associated with a particular color. At each session, they were asked to rate the pleasantness of the drink, and choose from distinctively colored sweets. The results showed an increase in the rating of pleasantness for the caffeinated drink in moderate caffeine consumers, but a decrease in rated pleasantness for low caffeine consumers. The opposite effect was seen for the non-caffeinated drink. There was an increase in consumption of the number of sweets with the same color as that of the caffeine-paired drink in the moderate caffeine consumers. These findings suggest that caffeine may serve as a negative reinforcer, and that the alleviation of withdrawal symptoms may be associated with the flavor and appearance of the caffeinated drink.     

Counselor Competency in the Courtroom

This article outlines general courtroom procedures and offers systematic practical advice for the counselor testifying as an expert witness. Major topics include the counselor role in court, preparing for testimony, answering questions, and dealing with the cross-examination.     

The role of sincere amends and perceived partner responsiveness in forgiveness

In a sample of 188 people currently in a romantic relationship, the authors examined the extent to which perceiving a partner as responsive and sincere in making amends relates to participants' forgiveness of a partner after a real‐life hurtful event. Specifically, it was predicted that sincere amends would be associated with greater forgiveness because it conveys that one's partner has understood and validated one's experience of the hurtful event. Results supported this mediational model. Further, exploratory analyses suggested that this meditational model is moderated by event severity and relationship satisfaction. Discussion focuses on understanding how this work might help to inform the dynamic process of forgiveness in couples.     

Development of the deontic advantage in reasoning: Reply to Cummins

In response to Cummins’s report that comments on our article (Dack & Astington, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2011, Vol. 110, pp. 94–114), this article clarifies our perspective on what constitutes the deontic advantage, and notes similarities and differences between Cummins’s perspective and our own. Like Cummins, we believe that young children are capable of deontic reasoning and that methodological factors alone cannot explain this ability. However, we maintain that it is important to be precise about methodology in order to facilitate investigation of how the deontic advantage changes over developmental time, and this question is our main interest, although as yet incompletely answered. Contrary to Cummins, we do not think that existing data can speak to the issue of the potential innateness of deontic reasoning. We also disagree with Cummins’s perspective on norm versus normative proposition and with some of her comparisons between deontic and epistemic phenomena.