Rationality ideals and mentality

Mackenzie, this journal, this issue, convincingly shows that in certain dialogue games (commitment games) there are procedural restrictions similar to those that I impose on rationality idealizations. But, whereas my rationality analysis is set in the context of belief games, commitment games do not postulate beliefs. Is this significant? I suggest that mackenzie thinks that it is. There follow discussions of Psychologism and Behaviourism.     

祖辈协同教养与幼儿错误信念理解能力的关系:亲子依恋与祖辈同住的作用

为考察祖辈协同教养与幼儿错误信念理解之间的关系以及幼儿亲子依恋的中介作用,采用方便抽样的方法,调查了某城市三所幼儿园345名小班至大班的祖辈协同教养幼儿及其家庭教养人。对幼儿使用操作任务考察错误信念理解能力,对其家庭教养人利用自陈式问卷收集家庭教养方式和亲子依恋等数据。结果显示：(1)祖辈协同教养类型显著影响幼儿的错误信念理解水平和亲子依恋,“有祖辈同住”协同教养幼儿的错误信念理解水平以及依恋的安全性均显著低于“无祖辈同住”协同教养幼儿;(2)亲子依恋在祖辈协同教养的民主信任和教养冲突两个维度与幼儿错误信念理解能力之间分别存在显著的中介作用;(3)祖辈协同教养类型在教养冲突、亲子依恋、错误信念理解能力的中介模型中起调节作用,在“有祖辈同住”条件下,协同教养冲突显著负向预测幼儿的亲子依恋安全感。     

BELIEF VS. COMMITMENT, VALIDITY VS. VALUE: A RESPONSE TO WARD GOODENOUGH

Abstract. This paper is on Ward Goodenough's recent article (27: 3), suggesting that his points can be clarified by reiterating the distinction between the realms of meaning and relevance. Religion's "truth" is in the form of its ualue; the "proof" which it requires is uindication; and the resulting "faith" must be understood as commitment.     

Shrinkage estimation of linear combinations of true scores

This paper is concerned with combining observed scores from sections of tests. It is demonstrated that in the presence of population information a linear combination of true scores can be estimated more efficiently than by the same linear combination of the observed scores. Three criteria for optimality are discussed, but they yield the same solution which can be described and motivated as a multivariate shrinkage estimator.Input from Eric Bradlow, Charles Lewis, and Linda Zeger is acknowledged. Research for this paper was funded by the Program Research Council (ETS). Suggestions of the Editor and of anonymous referees were instrumental in several improvements of the paper.     

Jung in the academy: devotions and resistances

Jung's position in the contemporary mainstream English-speaking university is problematical indeed. For various historical and ideological reasons, Jung is generally not included in the courses in academic psychology, and in the humanities and social sciences his reception is lukewarm to say the least. He has only a marginal place in religious studies. This notorious academic resistance to Jung is compensated, some would say overcompensated, by student interest and enthusiasm, which sometimes seeks to make a religious dogma out of Jung's psychology. In a sense, cynical resistance to Jung and fanatical devotion to Jung can be seen to generate each other in a sort of binary opposition. This situation is unfortunate because neither extreme presents a fair or balanced view of Jung's thought or of his contribution to intellectual history. These and other problems associated with the teaching of Jung in a university setting are briefly outlined in this paper.     

Points of View

An adequate evaluation of argumentation requires identification of the object to which the argumentation pertains: the point of view. What are the distinguishing features of this object? In the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory, the object of argumentation is referred to by means of the notion ‘standpoint’. In other theories concerned with argumentation, reasoning, convincing or persuading, notions are used such as ‘thesis’, ‘conclusion’, ‘opinion’ and ‘attitude’. This paper is a survey of the characterisations of the object of argumentation given in the various theories. It discusses the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory, socio-psychological research on persuasion, cognitive research on reasoning, argumentative discourse analysis, two variants of informal logic, advocacy and debate, and the theory of communicative action. Next, it explores some relations between the notions used in these theories. Finally, it outlines some starting points for further research into the problems of identification.     

A stochastic model for test-retest correlations

A simple stochastic model is formulated in order to determine the optimal time between the first test and the second test when the test-retest method of assessing reliability is used. A forgetting process and a change in true score process are postulated. The optimal time between tests is derived by maximizing the probability that the respondent has not remembered the response on the first test and has not had a change in true score. The resulting test-retest correlation is then found to be a linear function of the true reliability of the test, where the slope of this function is the key probability of not remembering and having no change in true score. Some numerical examples and suggestions for using the results in empirical studies are given. Specific recommendations are presented for improved design and analysis of intentions data.This research was made possible by a grant from the Center for Food Policy Research, Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, New York, New York, 10027.     

东西方文化下的真实自我研究：一种关系的视角

真实自我反映了个体行为与其价值观、信仰、需求等内在状态的一致性程度, 分为特质真实与状态真实。在辨析了真实自我与自我认知、自我概念清晰性、自我一致性、正直、真诚等相关概念的异同, 并梳理该领域已有理论后, 提出真实自我表现或实现的文化差异, 即西方文化中的真实自我是自主动机驱动的, 而东方文化中的真实自我是关系要求驱动的。未来可以将“关系化”作为现象场, 以儒家传统思想为理智资源, 从理论建构、社会现象(新兴网络社交平台、社会变迁), 以及结合具体的研究方法(如跨文化比较、突显情境变化的方法)等方面开展研究。     

阴谋论信念的产生机制——社会认知视角的三种解释

社会心理学将阴谋论视作一种意识形态上的信念,并定义为人们将重大的政治或社会事件归因为有权力的群体或个人暗中预谋以达成其目的的解释倾向。社会认知视角为个体这种阴谋论信念的产生提供了三种解释。错觉模式感知导致人们认知上倾向于在不相关的事件之间建立联系;敏感性动因觉察影响人们过度感知并假定事件背后的动因、目的和意图等;投射是将自己愿意参与阴谋的意图归因于事件中的他人。