Psychological Science in the Public Interest最新文献

{"title":"About the Authors.","authors":"Alberto Boschetti, L. Massaron","doi":"10.1177/1529100617706076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100617706076","url":null,"abstract":"Hamish Coates is a Tenured Professor at Tsinghua University Institute of Education, China, and Deputy Director of Tsinghua University Global Research Centre for the Assessment of College and Student Development. He was Professor of Higher Education at the University of Melbourne, Founding Director of Higher Education Research at the Australian Council for Educational Research, and Program Director at the LH Martin Institute for Tertiary Leadership and Management. He concentrates on improving the quality and productivity of higher education.","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2019-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100617706076","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65439659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"About the Authors","authors":"M. Bergman, Niels Brügger, A. Kantola, Kristin Skare, J. Straubhaar","doi":"10.1177/1529100619831747","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100619831747","url":null,"abstract":"Jonathan Corbet got his first look at the BSD Unix source back in 1981, when an instructor at the University of Colorado let him “fix” the paging algorithm. He has been digging around inside every system he could get his hands on ever since, working on drivers for VAX, Sun, Ardent, and x86 systems. He got his first Linux system in 1993 and has never looked back. Jonathan is currently the cofounder and executive editor of Linux Weekly News (http://www.LWN.net). He lives in Boulder, Colorado with his wife and two children.","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100619831747","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47264659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Dedication to Walter Mischel","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/1529100619828777","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100619828777","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100619828777","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42221066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"About the Authors","authors":"Reginald Wilson","doi":"10.1177/1529100618815879","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618815879","url":null,"abstract":"Art Graesser is a Professor in the Department of Psychology and the Institute of Intelligent Systems at the University of Memphis as well as an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Oxford. His primary research interests are in cognitive science, discourse processing, and the learning sciences. More specific interests include knowledge representation, question asking and answering, tutoring, text comprehension, conversation, emotions, artificial intelligence, and computational linguistics. He served as editor of the journals Discourse Processes (1996–2005) and Journal of Educational Psychology (2009–2014). His service in professional societies includes having been president of the Empirical Studies of Literature, Art, and Media (1989–1992), the Society for Text and Discourse (2007–2010), the International Society for Artificial Intelligence in Education (2007–2009), and the Federation of Associations in the Behavioral and Brain Sciences Foundation (2012–2013). He and his colleagues have developed and tested software in learning, language, and discourse technologies, including those that hold a conversation in natural language and interact with multimedia (such as AutoTutor) and those that analyze text on multiple levels of language and discourse (Coh-Metrix and QUAID). He has served on four Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) expert panels on problem solving, including acting as chair of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015 Collaborative Problem Solving.","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100618815879","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44343627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"About the Authors","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/1529100618777756","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618777756","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100618777756","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43557871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"About the Authors","authors":"S. Harrell","doi":"10.1177/1529100618766877","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618766877","url":null,"abstract":"In January 2014, NBR published a two-part interview with Daniel K. Gardner (Smith College) titled “China’s Off-the-Chart Air Pollution and Why It Matters (And Not Only to the Chinese).” The interview touched on a number of issues related not just to pollution and environmental quality in general but also to trade, technology, and quality of life in China, other parts of East Asia, and even the United States. For this roundtable, NBR asked several scholars who work on China and its environmental problems to comment further on the issues raised by Professor Gardner.","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100618766877","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48830520","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Do “Brain-Training” Programs Work?","authors":"D. Simons, W. Boot, N. Charness, S. Gathercole, C. Chabris, D. Hambrick, E. Stine-Morrow","doi":"10.1177/1529100616661983","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616661983","url":null,"abstract":"In 2014, two groups of scientists published open letters on the efficacy of brain-training interventions, or “brain games,” for improving cognition. The first letter, a consensus statement from an international group of more than 70 scientists, claimed that brain games do not provide a scientifically grounded way to improve cognitive functioning or to stave off cognitive decline. Several months later, an international group of 133 scientists and practitioners countered that the literature is replete with demonstrations of the benefits of brain training for a wide variety of cognitive and everyday activities. How could two teams of scientists examine the same literature and come to conflicting “consensus” views about the effectiveness of brain training? In part, the disagreement might result from different standards used when evaluating the evidence. To date, the field has lacked a comprehensive review of the brain-training literature, one that examines both the quantity and the quality of the evidence according to a well-defined set of best practices. This article provides such a review, focusing exclusively on the use of cognitive tasks or games as a means to enhance performance on other tasks. We specify and justify a set of best practices for such brain-training interventions and then use those standards to evaluate all of the published peer-reviewed intervention studies cited on the websites of leading brain-training companies listed on Cognitive Training Data (www.cognitivetrainingdata.org), the site hosting the open letter from brain-training proponents. These citations presumably represent the evidence that best supports the claims of effectiveness. Based on this examination, we find extensive evidence that brain-training interventions improve performance on the trained tasks, less evidence that such interventions improve performance on closely related tasks, and little evidence that training enhances performance on distantly related tasks or that training improves everyday cognitive performance. We also find that many of the published intervention studies had major shortcomings in design or analysis that preclude definitive conclusions about the efficacy of training, and that none of the cited studies conformed to all of the best practices we identify as essential to drawing clear conclusions about the benefits of brain training for everyday activities. We conclude with detailed recommendations for scientists, funding agencies, and policymakers that, if adopted, would lead to better evidence regarding the efficacy of brain-training interventions.","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100616661983","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65439575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"About the Authors","authors":"D. Simons","doi":"10.1177/1529100616670674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616670674","url":null,"abstract":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He received his Bachelor of Arts from Carleton College and his PhD in experimental psychology from Cornell University. His primary research explores the limits of awareness and memory, the reasons why we often are unaware of those limits, and the implications of such limits. He also maintains an active interest in research best practices and cognitive interventions. He is a Fellow and Charter Member of the Association for Psychological Science and an Alfred P. Sloan Fellow, and he received the American Psychological Association Distinguished Scientific Award for Early Career Contribution to Psychology (in the area of perception/motor performance). He and Christopher F. Chabris jointly received the 2004 Ig Nobel Prize in Psychology and coauthored the New York Times bestselling book The Invisible Gorilla, and Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us. He has authored more than 100 publications, and he currently serves as a Special Associate Editor for Registered Replication Reports at Perspectives on Psychological Science.","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100616670674","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65439643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"\"Sexual orientation, controversy, and science\": Corrigendum.","authors":"J. Bailey, Paul L. Vasey, L. Diamond, S. Breedlove, E. Vilain, M. Epprecht","doi":"10.1177/1529100616671516","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616671516","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100616671516","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65439653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Brain-Training Pessimism, but Applied-Memory Optimism","authors":"J. McCabe, Thomas S. Redick, R. Engle","doi":"10.1177/1529100616664716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616664716","url":null,"abstract":"As is convincingly demonstrated in the target article (Simons et al., 2016, this issue), despite the numerous forms of brain training that have been tested and touted in the past 15 years, there’s little to no evidence that currently existing programs produce lasting, meaningful change in the performance of cognitive tasks that differ from the trained tasks. As detailed by Simons et al., numerous methodological issues cloud the interpretation of many studies claiming successful far transfer. These limitations include small sample sizes, passive control groups, single tests of outcomes, unblinded informantand self-report measures of functioning, and hypothesisinconsistent significant effects. (However, note that, with older adults, a successful result of the intervention could be to prevent decline in the training group, such that they stay at their pretest level while the control group declines.) These issues are separate from problems related to publication bias, selective reporting of significant and nonsignificant outcomes, use of unjustified one-tailed t tests, and failure to explicitly note shared data across publications. So, considering that the literature contains such potential false-positive publications (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011), it may be surprising and disheartening to many that some descriptive reviews (Chacko et al., 2013; Salthouse, 2006; Simons et al., 2016) and meta-analyses (Melby-Lervåg, Redick, & Hulme, 2016; Rapport, Orban, Kofler, & Friedman, 2013) have concluded that existing cognitive-training methods are relatively ineffective, despite their popularity and increasing market share. For example, a recent working-memory-training metaanalysis (Melby-Lervåg et al., 2016) evaluated 87 studies examining transfer to working memory, intelligence, and various educationally relevant outcomes (e.g., reading comprehension, math, word decoding). The studies varied considerably in terms of the sample composition (age; typical vs. atypical functioning) and the nature of the working-memory training (verbal, nonverbal, or both verbal and nonverbal stimuli; n-back vs. span task methodology; few vs. many training sessions). Despite the diversity in the design and administration of the training, the results were quite clear. Following training, there were reliable improvements in performance on verbal and nonverbal working-memory tasks identical or similar to the trained tasks. However, in terms of far transfer, there was no convincing evidence of improvements, especially when working-memory training was compared to an active-control condition. The meta-analysis also demonstrated that, in the working-memory-training literature, the largest nonverbal-intelligence far-transfer effects are statistically more likely to come from studies with small sample sizes and passive control groups. This finding is not particularly surprising, given other work showing that most working-memory training studies are dramatically underpowered (Bogg &","PeriodicalId":20879,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science in the Public Interest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.4,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1529100616664716","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65439585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}