Time-series analysis in operant research

A time-series method is presented, nontechnically, for analysis of data generated in individual-subject operant studies, and is recommended as a supplement to visual analysis of behavior change in reversal or multiple-baseline experiments. The method can be used to identify three kinds of statistically significant behavior change: (a) changes in score levels from one experimental phase to another, (b) reliable upward or downward trends in scores, and (c) changes in trends between phases. The detection of, and reliance on, serial dependency (autocorrelation among temporally adjacent scores) in individual-subject behavioral scores is emphasized. Examples of published data from the operant literature are used to illustrate the time-series method.     

Field articulation and linguistic structures.

The relation of field articulation to sensitivity to linguistic structures was explored. Subjects (23 males and 23 females) were given the rod-and-frame test and then made true-false judgments of sentences varying in grammatical and semantic complexity. While increased complexity did increase the difficulty of true-false judgments of sentences, the latencies of these judgments were unrelated to the scores on the rod-and-frame test. These results were discussed in terms of the generality of previous studies reporting a relationship between field articulation and linguistic abilities.     

Effects of serial dependency on the agreement between visual and statistical inference

Comparisons between visual and time-series inferences from behavioral data show that serial dependency in scores is likely to disrupt agreement between the two methods of analysis. If researchers follow an earlier recommendation that time-series analysis be used to supplement or confirm visual analysis, this study's findings suggest that the two methods will disagree most often when the data contain high levels of autocorrelation and when reliable behavorial changes are indicated by time-series analysis.     

A Moral Framework for Multicultural Education in Healthcare

The goal of this paper is two-fold. First, I begin by reviewing several of themajor points of emphasis among health educatorsas they begin to incorporate multiculturalissues into healthcare education. I thenconsider the role of moral relativism, which iscurrently being endorsed by some healtheducators, as the foundation for resolvingcross-cultural conflicts in healthcare. Iargue that moral relativism is ultimatelyinconsistent with the stated goals inmulticultural curricular proposals and fails toprovide an effective framework for consideringmoral conflicts in cross-cultural settings. Instead, I propose that those methods seekingto establish a common morality, built uponmutually shared values, offer the mostpromising means of resolving cross-culturalconflicts. This leads to my second goal, tocompare recent work in moral pragmatism withwhat is now widely known in bioethics as moral``principlism.' I argue that while proponentsof principlism and pragmatism each seek toestablish a common foundation for moraldeliberation, they fail to appreciatesignificant similarities between theirrespective approaches. Instead of offeringtwo completely unique and independent methodsof moral deliberation, I suggest thatprinciplism and pragmatism embrace commonthemes that point us in a positive direction,providing an effective framework useful forconsidering cross-cultural conflicts inhealthcare.