Enhancing Older Adult Eyewitness Memory with the Cognitive Interview

Thirty older (m age=71.73 years) and 20 young adults (m age=21.60 years) viewed a videotape of a simulated crime and were then interviewed with either a Cognitive Interview (CI) or a standard police interview (SI). The older participants were interviewed with either an SI, CI, or CI that was modified for older people (CI–M). No differences were found between the CI and CI–M. The CI elicited more information than the SI, without a reduction in accuracy rate. Moreover, the advantage of the CI over the SI was greater for the older than for the young participants. There were no overall age-related differences. Results are discussed in terms of performance of older witnesses and implications for understanding how the CI functions.     

A Critique of Six Measures for Assessing Creativity

Tests and measures of creativity are critical instruments guiding educators in identifying highly productive individuals capable of contributing insightful and far reaching solutionsto ourproblem ridden civilization. This paperanalyzesand critiques six popularlyused measures ofcreativity: 1) The Torrance Test of Creative Thinking by E. Paul Torrance (1966); 2) The Creativity Assessment Packet by frank Williams (1980); three subtests of divergent production of the 3) Structure ofthe Intellect Learning Abilities Test by Mary Meeker; 4) Thinking Creatively With Sounds and Words by E. Paul Torrance, Joe Khatena and Bert F. Cunnington (1973); 5) Thinking Creatively In Action and Movement by E. Paul Torrance (1981); 6) Khatena-Torrance Creative Perception Inventory by Joe Khatena & E. Paul Torrance (1976). Reviewed through personal observation and published literature, these tests reveal a capacity as partial measures of divergent and productive thinking. Findings indicate that updating and upgrading of several tests with thought toward key constituent factors of the creative process would be qualitatively beneficial to test design. Harnessing creative potential is a main concern of educators hoping to prepare America's youth for a fast paced and rapidly changing existence. The questions at the heart of this concern: what creativity is, what constitutes creative thinking, and what the creative individual is like, have given birth to many tests and biographical checklists. Understanding the dimensions ofcreativity is difficult at best, and assessing it through tests or biographical checklists is even more problematic. Through direct examination and a review ofthe literature, this paper critiques six such measures for validity, reliability and utility. Those measures included: the Creativity Assessment Packet (CAP), the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TICT), Thinking Creatively in Action and Movement, Thinking Creatively with Sound and Words, Khatena-Torrance Creative Perception Inventory, and three divergent thinking subtests ofthe Structure of Intellect Learning Abilities Test (SOl-LA).     

Learning from Aesthetic Disagreement and Flawed Artworks

Disagreements about art are considered here for their potential to pose questions about reality beyond the artwork. The project of assessing artistic value is useful for bringing complex questions to light. The ambitiousness of the cognitive stock, in Richard Wollheim's term, that can be relevant to understanding an artwork may mean that confident evaluation will elude us. Thinking about artistic value judgment in this way shifts its centrality as the point of artistic interpretation and evaluation; the goal of judging a work's meaning and value is a useful tool for prompting us to understand a work. But if we fail to reach that goal, that does not mean we have failed to engage with the work appropriately. The artistic value judgment, and achieving consensus on that value, can be secondary in importance to grasping the problems a work poses that are not immediately resolvable. Examples drawn from literary and philosophical imagining, in the work of Grace Paley and Mary Mothersill, and from Toni Morrison's literary criticism are used to illustrate and support the fruitfulness of this approach.     

Sampling the Reluctant Participant: A Random‐Sample Response‐Rate Study of Men and Sexual Coercion1

Past research has documented the difficulty associated with mail surveys in general, and with the rates of male participation, especially if the topic involves sensitive materials. Our study varied incentive value and whether participants received a letter of introduction. We adopted most of the stringent survey‐design characteristics recommended by Dillman (1991). The results suggest that a letter of introduction significantly increased the response rate. Additionally, a smaller monetary incentive did as well as did a larger one. Despite a maximum participation rate of only 22%, the sample was successful in representing men across the age span. Some important differences from men in the general population were found on demographic and attitudinal variables, however, the generalizability was still improved well beyond the college male.