Response error and processing biases in confidence judgment

Previous studies showed that random error can explain overconfidence effects typically observed in the literature. One of these studies concluded that, after accounting for random error effects in the data, there is little support for cognitive‐processing biases in confidence elicitation. In this paper, we investigate more closely the random error explanation for overconfidence. We generated data from four models of confidence and then estimated the magnitude of random error in the data. Our results show that, in addition to the true magnitude of random error specified in the simulations, the error estimates are influenced by important cognitive‐processing biases in the confidence elicitation process. We found that random error in the response process can account for the degree of overconfidence found in calibration studies, even when that overconfidence is actually caused by other factors. Thus, the error models say little about whether cognitive biases are present in the confidence elicitation process. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Christ-Centred Solidarity in a Time of Pandemic

The article proposes a reading of Colossians 1:15-20 for the time of COVID-19, arguing that the assertion that all things “hold together” in the incarnate Christ should lead Christians not only to practise solidarity with those most at risk, but also to evaluate societal and systemic responses to COVID-19 in the light of their effects on the most vulnerable members of society. The article considers the use and misuse of the rhetoric of self-sacrificial love or loving self-sacrifice, and the use and misuse of the image of warfare – arguing that in both of these areas, Christian communities offer urgent challenges and correctives on the basis of their traditions of Christ-centred solidarity.     

Social influence, marriage, and the heart: cardiovascular consequences of interpersonal control in husbands and wives.

Human and experimental animal research suggests that social stress in general--and chronic, effortful attempts to exert social control in particular--may contribute to cardiovascular disease. We examined the effects of exerting social influence or control on cardiovascular responses in married couples. Compared to husbands discussing a problem with their wives, husbands attempting to influence or persuade their wives displayed larger increases in systolic blood pressure (SBP) before and during the discussion. Furthermore, these physiological effects were accompanied by increases in anger and a more hostile and coldly assertive interpersonal style. Although wives who engaged in social influence attempts displayed generally similar behavior, they did not show the elevated SBP response or anger. We discuss the results in terms of the social context of cardiovascular reactivity and potential marital factors in cardiovascular health.     

Cognitive slowing in decision tasks in early and advanced Parkinson's disease.

Ten untreated patients with recently diagnosed Parkinson's disease (PD), 9 treated patients with more advanced pathology, and 17 matched normal controls were investigated with three reaction tasks with increasing cognitive load but identical motor requirements: simple reaction, choice reaction with indicative stimuli, and choice reaction with ambiguous stimuli. Times required until a home key was released (= reaction time) and from then until a response key was pressed (= movement time) were recorded. Estimates of pure decision time (overall response time minus movement time in a simple reaction time task) revealed a difference between advanced and early PD patients. Advanced PD patients showed an overall slowing of decision time in the reaction time tasks, but the effect of the cognitive load of the tasks on the decision time was comparable to a control group. The untreated early PD patients performed quite normally in the more simple decision tasks but showed a disproportionate slowing of decision time in tasks with higher cognitive load.