The child verbal competence effect in court: a comparative study of field investigative interviews of children in child sexual abuse cases

The purpose of this study is to compare field investigative interviews of children (FIIC) with three different legal outcomes in child sexual abuse cases: (i) insufficient evidence to proceed (IEP); (ii) convictions; or (iii) acquittals by the court. One hundred FIIC were divided into one of the three outcome possibilities. Amongst the female interviewees older than 10 years, there were no cases of acquittals and the convicted cases were over-represented. The children's response to open questions was found to be the main difference between the three FIIC outcomes. The responses to these open questions were 1.9 and 2.3 times longer in the convicted cases compared to acquittals and IEP. Possible explanations for the result are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The rhetorical foundation of philosophical argumentation

The rejection of rhetoric has been a constant theme in Western thought since Plato. The presupposition of such a debasement lies at the foundation of a certain view of Reason that I have called propositionalism, and which is analyzed in this article. The basic tenets of propositionalism are that truth is exclusive, i.e. it does not allow for any alternative, and that there is always only one proposition which must be true, the opposite one being false. Necessity and uniqueness are the ideals of propositionalism. But the question of the necessity of such a necessity is bound to arise. Foundationalism and propositionalism are intrinsically related. Since necessity excludes alternatives, rhetoric, which is based on the possibility of opposite standpoints, is unavoidably devalued as the crippled child of Reason, identical to sophistry or eristic. But propositionalism cannot justify itself and provide a justification for its own foundation without circle or contraditction. Since it responds to the problem of eradicating problems and alternatives through propositional entities, propositionalism is ultimately based on questioning to which it replies in the mode of denial. The unavowed foundation of Reason is therefore the question of questioning, even though this very question is suppressed as propositionalism. The trace of such a question is not only historical, but can also be seen, for instance, in the role played by the principle of contradiction in the constitution of propositional Reason (Artitotle): opposite propositions are not the expression of a problematic situation, they are either possible or successively unique propositions.We want to replace propositionalism by problematology which allows for the conceptualization of alternatives, thereby rendering a true rhetoric possible. Argumentation cannot then be equated with eristic any more, as propositionalism maintained.Rationality must be seen as having questioning as its true starting-point. Reason must be rhetorical if it is to survive the death of propositionalism which took place after the radical criticisms of Marx, Nietzsche and Freud. Even if it is still hard ffor philosophers and rhetoricians to think within another framework and even though they prefer endlessly to deconstauct the old one instead of changing it, problematology is bound to impose itself as the new voice for rationality, because Reason has always endeavored to solve problems. Propositionalism has been only one way of conceiving problems, based on the view that solutions could be but the suppression of questioning.     

Commentary on “Can a good philosophical contribution be made just by asking a question?”

This paper explains some of the reasoning behind “Can a Good Philosophical Contribution Be Made Just by Asking a Question?,” a paper which consists solely in its title and which is published in the same issue of the journal as the present paper. The method for explaining that reasoning consists in making available a lightly edited version of a letter the authors sent to the editors when submitting the title-only paper. The editors permitted publication of that paper on the condition that the authors also separately publish a version of that letter; the present paper aims to fulfil that condition.     

On the longevity of behavioral interventions for challenging behavior

The capacity for a treatment to maintain its effects over time may be the most critical component of behavioral interventions for challenging behavior as treatments that fail to persist are likely to be of little value to society. We reviewed the quality and quantity of different types of post-intervention data for the treatment of challenging behavior in studies published over the last 7 years. We found that for the majority of participants at least one measure of maintenance, fading, or follow-up was reported but with limited information regarding the quality of those measures. Reports of secondary variables related to post-intervention data (e.g., latency to measurement) were also uncommon. We discuss possible explanations for the paucity of post-intervention data, barriers to obtaining post-intervention data, strategies for obtaining these data, and implications for the external validity of behavioral interventions for challenging behavior. We provide recommendations for increasing the probability that post-intervention data are included in applied research on challenging behavior.     

Three years follow-up of panic disorder patients: A naturalistic study

Forty Danish panic disorder patients participating in a placebo controlled study of alprazolam and imipramine (The Cross National Collaborative Panic Study, Phase II) were followed up by a telephone interview three years later, with essentially the same battery of evaluation procedures applied at baseline, end of study, and follow-up. The main finding was that panic disorder is a chronic disorder, but fluctuating in form and severity in the course of time. Twenty-five percent of the patients no longer fulfilled the DSM-III criteria for panic disorder, but had substantial disability due to a variety of symptoms, including panic attacks at infrequent rate, generalized anxiety symptoms, affective symptoms, and phobic avoidance behavior. Nearly three fourths of the patients were under treatment at follow-up. Benzodiazepines were the drugs most often prescribed, usually in combination with supportive psychotherapy. It was concluded that the different types of treatment offered were insufficient. Variables predicting panic disorder or substantial disability at 3-years follow-up were few.     

Significance of Childhood Conduct Problems to Later Development of Conduct Disorder Among Children With ADHD: A Prospective Follow-Up Study

This study investigates whether low to moderate levels of childhood oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) and conduct disorder (CD) behaviors contribute to the development of clinically diagnosed CD in adolescence, in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Participants were 207 White boys (ages 6-12) with ADHD free of conduct disorder diagnoses. Parent and teacher ratings were obtained. Participants were assessed at mean age 18 by clinicians blind to childhood status. A non-ADHD group (recruited in adolescence) was also studied. ODD behavior ratings did not predict CD in adolescence, whereas CD behavior ratings did. No single ODD or CD behavior predicted adolescent outcome. ADHD probands with very low ratings (Not at all, Just a little) by parents and teachers on all CD behaviors were still at significantly increased risk for CD in adolescence, compared to non-ADHD controls. The same relationships were found between childhood ODD and CD behaviors, and antisocial personality disorder in adulthood (mean age, 25). We conclude that childhood ADHD is a developmental precursor of later antisocial disorder, even in the absence of comorbid ODD or CD in childhood. However, low levels of CD-type problems are not innocuous, because they predict later CD among children with ADHD without comorbid CD.     

Comorbidity in schizophrenia: A prognostic study of personality disorders in recovered and non-recovered schizophrenia patients

Symptoms and outcome in schizophrenia are heterogeneous. Part of the variation in outcome might be due to the coexistence of other forms of psychopathology. In the present study the prevalence of personality disorders in a group of recovered and non-recovered schizophrenia patients was focused to examine the prognostic implications of comorbidity for the outcome of the disorder. The results showed no significant differences in prevalence of personality disorders in the two groups at first admission to the hospital, but the difference at the time of interview was close to significance. Emotional and conduct difficulties in adolescence were significantly more prevalent in the non-recovered group. Schizoid features and emotional and conduct disorders in childhood were also more often reported among the non-recovered subjects. The results confirm that comorbidity contributes to the variation in outcome for schizophrenia patients, but does not confirm its prognostic significance.     

Logical Pluralism from a Pragmatic Perspective

This paper presents a new view of logical pluralism. This pluralism takes into account how the logical connectives shift, depending on the context in which they occur. Using the Question-Under-Discussion Framework as formulated by Craige Roberts, I identify the contextual factor that is responsible for this shift. I then provide an account of the meanings of the logical connectives which can accommodate this factor. Finally, I suggest that this new pluralism has a certain Carnapian flavour. Questions about the meanings of the connectives or the best logic outside of a specified context are not legitimate questions.     

“Oh Events” for the Professor: Studies and Stories of Religious Studies Abroad

This response explains three ways in which the preceding essays are a significant contribution to the study of study abroad, explores three additional issues, and makes three suggestions for future work on religious studies and study abroad. This response is published alongside of six other essays, comprising a special section of the journal (see Teaching Theology and Religion 18:1, January 2015).