Search

According to an influential physicalist view, the intuition of distinctness is a cognitive illusion in the sense that it results from fallacious reasoning: we erroneously infer that the referents of phenomenal and physical concepts are different, from the fact that there is a certain difference between our uses of those concepts. (Kammerer, Review of Philosophy and Psychology 10:649–667, 2019) has recently argued, however, that it is psychologically implausible that the intuition of distinctness results from a fallacy: the reasoning process leading to this intuition is, in several psychological respects, similar to valid reasoning and dissimilar to typical fallacies, which gives us a reason to think that this process is a case of valid reasoning. I argue that there are no psychological reasons to think that the process underlying the intuition of distinctness (or at least the crucial part of this process) is a case of valid reasoning. There is, in fact, only one crucial psychological respect in which this process resembles valid reasoning, and although the two processes are similar in one crucial respect, this does not rule out that the intuition of distinctness results from a fallacy, namely, the sort of fallacious reasoning that physicalists have in mind. Furthermore, since the process underlying the intuition of distinctness resembles typical fallacies in one crucial respect, there is a reason to think that the intuition of distinctness does result from a fallacy.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved two drugs for ‘hypoactive sexual desire disorder’ in women, flibanserin (Addyi) in 2015 and bremelanotide (Vyleesi) in 2019. In this paper we examine the outcome measures and clinical trial data upon which regulatory approval was based. In clinical trials, flibanserin led to an average of only one additional enjoyable sexual experience every two months, bremelanotide to none. Trials for both drugs feature shifts in primary outcomes and a contested indication. A politicised industry-sponsored advocacy campaign and conflicted patient and expert testimony likely influenced flibanserin’s approval at its third attempt. Bremelanotide, with even weaker efficacy, capitalised on the regulatory precedent set by the approval of flibanserin. Reconsideration of regulatory decisions to approve these drugs is in order, as well as a broader examination of how future regulatory decisions can better address conflicts of interest and clinically meaningful benefit.

Maturity models are perceived as aiding organizations to perform better. This is also true of DevOps maturity models. The question is whether DevOps maturity models also improve organizational performance. This article contributes to the current debate on the value of DevOps maturity models and provides alternative insights.

Gratitude to others is typically understood as a response to good things people give to us or do for us. Occasionally, though, we thank people for things other than gifts or actions. We sometimes thank people for being there for us, for instance, or for loving us, or for being good parents or teachers, or for believing in us. In this article, I develop a set of considerations to help determine whether gratitude to others for being, loving, or believing can be fitting in any of these cases. I begin by arguing that when it is appropriate for a beneficiary thank a benefactor for ϕ-ing, the beneficiary’s gratitude to the benefactor for ϕ-ing is fitting only insofar as the benefactor ϕ-ed out of benevolence, care or concern for the beneficiary. I then show that thanking can express attitudes other than gratitude, thereby highlighting the thanks-gratitude fallacy: the mistake of inferring the fittingness of one person’s gratitude to another from the fact that it would be reasonable for the former to thank the latter. These considerations imply that gratitude for being there for us, gratitude for believing in us, and gratitude for being a good professional can sometimes be fitting, while gratitude for loving us and gratitude for being a good intimate (e.g., a good parent or spouse) generally are not.

The decision to purchase a product is inseparable from the buyer's trust in a product. Testimonials are a tool for marketers to eliminate consumer barriers about the product to be purchased. Testimonials on home shopping television products tend to be controllable. The selection of sources, the use of scripts, and the editing process can be a form of media control over the information received by the public. This study focus on analyzing testimonials from the logical side of the testimony content. The method used to analyze this logical fallacy is qualitative content analysis. The text is separated using Toulmin's model into three parts, namely claim, ground, and warrant. This research uses a logical fallacy as a tool to evaluate the logic of the testimony in terms of content. The results of this study found that there was a logical fallacy in the testimony content. The fallacies include generalization fallacy, fallacy fallacies, fallacy of composition, appeal to wealth fallacy, appeal to pity, dan appeal to force.

Are we living in an age of unreason? And what to do about it? Can we combat unreason? We discuss situations in which one may presume to be confronted with unreasonable behavior by an interlocutor: fallacies, changing rules of the game, shifting to some other type of dialogue, and abandonment of reasonable dialogue. We recommend ways that could be helpful to obtain a return to reason. These possibilities lead us to a moderately optimistic conclusion.

It is widely believed that “emotion leads to action while reason leads to conclusions”, emotionalists can, then, consume others and be consumed by others to take action and reach specific conclusions (even if they were unsound). Pathos – for example - as a communication technique is used for persuading the public to have belief in a certain idea or take a specific action by appealing to their prejudices and by repeating and intensifying the words and phrases that can trigger their emotions towards that idea or that action. Such a technique may lead to get the public confused between what is and what should be. This is what is termed the fallacy of shoulds which targets influencing the public, positively or negatively, regardless appealing to logic or looking for the truth. Managing emotions is considered a big challenge particularly because fallacies, are intentionally committed in daily public discourse whoever its parties are, departing from emotions are powerful forces for influencing others. This is why the author believes that “emotional fallacies” is an issue that needs to be thoroughly and deeply explored. Therefore, this current paper tackles five main domains: public discourse, a quick view on logical fallacies, emotional fallacies overview, reasons behind emotional fallacies, and a proposed perspective for analyzing emotional fallacies.

The present work aims to analyze the effectiveness of the pedagogical character of the socio-educational measures applied in Law n. 8.069/1990, known as the Child and Adolescent Statute (ECA), to the detriment of the age of criminal responsibility. The methodology based on the hypothetical-deductive method and on the legislative and doctrinal bibliographic review is applied. The objective is to investigate the historical framework, using the old Code of Minors to the current ECA and, together with the biopsychosocial conditions, affirm that the reduction of the age of criminal responsibility is a fallacy without any effectiveness. Afterwards, considerations are made about the guiding principles, especially the peculiar state of the person in development. The biopsychosocial development of children and adolescents implies the use of socio-educational measures to educate young people who commit acts analogous to criminal offenses, the so-called infractions, which have a pedagogical and sanctioning character. The peculiar characteristics of children and adolescents reject the possibility of reducing the age of criminal responsibility, since there is not the necessary training to understand the act and it’s factual and legal consequences by the young offender, in addition to meeting the stone clause provided for in the Federal Constitution 1988. The situation of social vulnerability and the environmental context of the youth are determining factors for their choices, among them the practice of an infraction and, due to their peculiar condition in development and their own dignity, their actions and omissions must be judged. based on his mental capacity, which is constantly changing, without scientific change in the age system of criminal non-accountability.

This paper examines games with non-neutral option labels (such as “A”, “B”, “A”, “A”) and finds surprisingly invariant behaviour across games. The behaviour closely resembles the choices people make when they have to bet on one of the options in individual lotteries. An option’s ‘representativeness’ (lack of distinguishing features) and ‘reachability’ (physical centrality, salience, and valence) determine choice behaviour in both the lotteries and the highly strategic games. There is no evidence of people best-responding to others’ betting(-like) behaviour. This is in line with the idea that once people decide that strategic reasoning would not take them any further, they pick an alternative as if they were betting on one of their ‘current best-responses’. The findings explain the well-documented seeker advantage in hide-and-seek games, as well as why participants often display behaviour that could be exploited by others. On top, they help understand why in national lotteries, people also tend to bet on identical subsets of the available numbers.

The purpose of this research is to examine the challenges faced by the learner and the activities they undertake concerning informal digital learning of English (IDLE) implementation in the English as foreign language (EFL) context. The impact of the COVID-19 on the education sector feels very challenging. Especially in EFL learning at the high/secondary school level, it is crucial since the skills are needed to support such level students' more complex need. It leads many experts to find the formal model's best alternative: playing digital games as IDLE. However, the current indications showed various challenges in the efforts of implementing IDLE within an academic context. As part of a more extensive sequential qualitative mixed-method study, seven high school students from various Indonesia parts were interviewed. From the findings, it is discovered that there were still some challenges regarding the implementation of IDLE in an academic context: physical and behavioural assumptions, dealing with the growth of physical and behavioural effect misconception and logical fallacy within the community; communal judgment, the a priori assumption of 'gaming stereotype' which massively wide-spread; and, technical challenges, regarding the implemental availability of the contemporary learning model. It is also recommended that finding solutions to these challenges requires many parties' involvement. It is due to some of the challenges were fundamentals. It is expected that many parties' involvement will make the resulting efforts to be a holistic solution.

In this article, we argue that the relationship between 'subject' and 'object' is poorly understood in health research regulation (HRR), and that it is a fallacy to suppose that they can operate in separate, fixed silos. By seeking to perpetuate this fallacy HRR risks, among other things, objectifying persons by paying insufficient attention to human subjectivity, and the experiences and interests related to being involved in research. We deploy the anthropological concept of liminality – concerned with processes of transformation and change over time – in order to emphasise the enduring connectedness between subject and object in these contexts. By these means, we posit that regulatory frameworks based on processual regulation can better recognise and encompass the fluidity and significance of these relationships, and so ground more securely the moral legitimacy and social licence for human health research.

El objetivo es analizar cómo los sesgos cognitivos influyen en la percepción e interpretación de falacias en textos argumentativos para elucidar una metodología que permita subsanar estas situaciones en la interpretación. Así, para explorar la pregunta ¿de qué forma los sesgos inciden en la identificación e interpretación de falacias en estudiantes? se discuten los resultados de una prueba inserta en un proyecto académico que, a lo largo de cuatro semestres, ha permitido confrontar resultados entre grupos de estudiantes de las distintas licenciaturas de la Escuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores, unidad Morelia, de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Adicionalmente, los resultados se comparan con una aplicación de la misma prueba a un grupo de juristas activos en su ámbito profesional, con la intención de reconocer rasgos compartidos con una población que no está asociada cotidianamente al contexto académico universitario. Los resultados muestran que evidenciar los sesgos es necesario para que el interlocutor de un texto argumentativo sea capaz de detectar las falacias que, de otra manera, pasan desapercibidas. Es pertinente el desarrollo de investigaciones adicionales en distintos niveles educativos y ambientes profesionales que permitieran obtener resultados que contribuyan a la interpretación de los textos argumentativos desde los distintos elementos que inciden en ellos: sesgos, heurísticas, estrategias argumentativas y falacias. This article aims to highlight how cognitive biases influence the perception and interpretation of fallacies in argumentative processes on the assumption that, if biases can be detected and there is conscious training, it is feasible to correct these situations in the interpretation. This article intends to answer the question: How do biases affect the interpretation of fallacies in students? The results from a test inserted in an academic project during four semesters are discussed and compared among group of students enrolled in different degrees at Escuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores, Unidad Morelia, from the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Additionally, these results are compared with the results obtained for the same test by a group of lawyers, all active in their professional field, with the intention of recognizing shared traits with a population that is not associated on a daily basis with the university academic context. The results show that for the interlocutor to detect fallacies in argumentative writing, it is necessary to make biases visible, otherwise, fallacies would be left unnoticed. Additional research seems to be necessary at different levels to further contribute to the interpretation of argumentative texts from its constituting elements such as biases, heuristics, argumentative strategies and fallacies. L’objectif est de rendre compte comment les biais cognitifs influencent la perception et l’interprétation des erreurs placées intentionnellement dans des processus argumentatifs, puisque si des biais peuvent être détectés et il y a un entraînement conscient et il serait possible de pallier ces situations dans le cadre de l’interprétation. Ainsi, à la question de savoir comment les biais affectent l’identification et l’interprétation des erreurs chez les étudiants, nous pouvons y répondre à travers une expérience réalisée lors d’un projet universitaire qui, au cours de quatre semestres, a permis de confronter les résultats entre des groupes d’étudiants de différentes licences de l’École Nationale d’Études Supérieures, unité Morélia, et de l’Université Nationale Autonome de México. De plus, les résultats sont comparés avec une application du même test à un groupe de professionnels du droit, tous actifs dans leur domaine professionnel, avec l’intention de reconnaître des caractéristiques communes avec une population qui n’est pas quotidiennement associée au contexte académique universitaire. Les résultats montrent que mettre en évidence les biais cognitifs est nécessaire pour que l’interlocuteur d’un texte argumentatif soit capable de détecter des erreurs qui, autrement, passent inaperçues. Il serait pertinent d’approfondir les recherches dans différents niveaux éducatifs et milieux professionnels, ce qui permettrait d’obtenir des résultats qui contribuent à l’interprétation des textes argumentatifs depuis les différents éléments qui les affectent: biais cognitifs, heuristiques, stratégies argumentatives et erreurs.

Much of our ordinary thought and talk about responsibility exhibits what I call the ‘pie fallacy’—the fallacy of thinking that there is a fixed amount of responsibility for every outcome, to be distributed among all those, if any, who are responsible for it. The pie fallacy is a fallacy, I argue, because how responsible an agent is for some outcome is fully grounded in facts about the agent, the outcome and the relationships between them; it does not depend, in particular, on how responsible anyone else is for that same outcome. In this paper, I explore how the pie fallacy can arise by considering several different kinds of case in which two or more agents are responsible for the same outcome. I’ll end with some brief remarks on the potential consequences of my arguments for how to think about responsibility in war.

Rationality biases, such as the gambling fallacy (e.g., predicting future coin-tosses based on previous tosses) and the famous “Linda” conjunction fallacy (estimating the conjunction that “Linda” is both teller and feminist based on her description) have not been examined in people suffering from acute stress disorder (ASD). We analyze potential outcomes and align them with different theories. To discern the precise pattern of rationality biases in persons with ASD, we examined performance on these 2 tasks within a month of the Hayian Super-Typhoon (August 27th, 2013). Out of a sample of 1001 persons, 82 had clinical ASD and their performance was compared to the remaining 919 participants. A specific link between ASD and rationality biases revealed that although conjunction task performance was not associated with ASD diagnosis, coin-task performance was. Namely, responding “Heads” to a 6th coin-toss after 5 successive “Heads” (reverse gambling fallacy) was robustly linked with ASD diagnosis. The results align with the bridging of trauma theories claiming that trauma symptoms are generated by disequilibrium following trauma exposure, with prospect theory’s notion of chance, which is conceived as belief in equilibrium restoration. Such disequilibrium following trauma exposure is thus linked with the belief underlying reverse gambling fallacy biases, namely “what-was-will-be”. Implications regarding themes important to address in therapy are mentioned.

The Covid-19 pandemic presents argumentation theorists with an opportunity to reflect on the ways in which people, agencies and governments respond to the emergence of a new virus. Reponses have revealed a range of judgements and decisions, not all of which are rationally warranted. This article will examine errors in reasoning, several of which have reduced the public’s compliance with important health measures. This article will also analyse rationally warranted reasoning about Covid-19 employed by public health agencies. In examining instances of good and bad reasoning during the Covid-19 pandemic, we can begin to construct a taxonomy of arguments that facilitated and hindered individual and collective responses during this public health emergency., La pandémie de COVID-19 offre aux théoriciens de l'argumentation l'occasion de réfléchir sur la manière dont les gens, les agences et les gouvernements réagissent à l'émergence d'un nouveau virus. Les réponses ont révélé une gamme de jugements et de décisions qui ne sont pas tous rationnellement justifiés. Cet article examinera les erreurs de raisonnement, dont plusieurs ont réduit la conformité du public à des mesures sanitaires importantes. Cet article analysera également le raisonnement rationnellement justifié au sujet du COVID-19 employé par les agences de santé publique. En examinant les exemples de bons et de mauvais raisonnements pendant la pandémie de COVID-19, nous pouvons commencer à construire une taxonomie d'arguments qui ont facilité et entravé les réponses individuelles et collectives lors de cette urgence de santé publique.

Based on a large dataset of Russian material, the paper presents these general features of the home: a place to spend leisure time containing a long-established group of different ages and sexes free to move about in their environment These factors lead to tension between communicants and a diversity of topics of conversation. Inadequate recipient design is an overarching trigger for misunderstanding caused by the speaker. It derives from poor concentration on interaction and the common ground fallacy, and leads to the frequent use of indirect and elliptical expressions. Inadequate concentration causes the recipient to non-listen and overguess. Finally, misunderstandings occur because of mishearings, misinterpretations and misreferences. Misinterpretation may concern the content, intention or mode of the message.

All creative people, whose names we remember, are united by such a character trait as passion. And the field of creativity is not so important here — both in art, and in technical sciences, and in medicine, to achieve a result, complete immersion in research, some kind of obsession is necessary. Robert Koch (1843-1910) — a great researcher, a German physician, microbiologist and hygienist, proved by his own example that a clear goal, fortitude and efficiency overcome all unfavorable circumstances. This work examined the life and work of Robert Koch over a significant period of time — from graduation to the discovery of tuberculin, its announcement as a treatment for tuberculosis and the recognition of the fallacy of this statement. From the point of view of the authors of the work, this period of time is of great interest. We see Robert Koch — a scientist with extraordinary abilities and a unique combination of character traits. Diligence and the highest ability to work, exactingness towards himself, a clear organization of work, the ability not to stop in the face of difficulties — predetermined the success of his research.

Narrative fallacy is a problematic heuristic that leads us to make inaccurate cause-effect relationships. They are a particular issue in case reports because of the limited scope of these papers, the perpetuated biases they proffer and the misperception of 'black swan' events. This article highlights the negative effects of these fallacies in dermatological practice through three case studies: the use of epinephrine with lignocaine at distal sites, the difference between once-daily and twice-daily application of topical steroids, and the effect of sterile gloves for skin surgery on infection rates. Awareness of the biases in case reports and the employment of metacognition may help us to avoid falling victim to narrative fallacies. Given the potential problems with this heuristic, Clinical and Experimental Dermatology (CED) utilizes case reports to further medical education and offer different clinical perspectives, rather than as a driver of medical knowledge.

In this article, we describe a hitherto undocumented fallacy—in the sense of a mistake in reasoning—constituted by a negativity bias in the way that people attribute motives to others. We call this the “worst-motive fallacy,” and we conducted two experiments to investigate it. In Experiment 1 ( N = 323), participants expected protagonists in a variety of fictional vignettes to pursue courses of action that satisfy the protagonists’ worst motive, and furthermore, participants significantly expected the protagonist to pursue a worse course of action than they would prefer themselves. Experiment 2 ( N = 967) was a preregistered attempted replication of Experiment 1, including a bigger range of vignettes; the first effect was not replicated for the new vignettes tested but was for the original set. Also, we once again found that participants expected protagonists to be more likely than they were themselves to pursue courses of action that they considered morally bad. We discuss the worst-motive fallacy’s relation to other well-known biases as well as its possible evolutionary origins and its ethical (and meta-ethical) consequences.

PurposeThe adaptation hypothesis suggests that gambling participation would gradually decline after an initial exposure to this activity. While this hypothesis was tested in pathological gambling among residents in Western countries, the present inquiry explores the hypothesis in a tourism context.Design/methodology/approachThis research is focused on the Mainland Chinese gamblers. Convenience sampling was used. Data were collected outside participating casinos and at major attractions. A total of 498 valid responses were collected.FindingsBy assessing changes of the Mainland Chinese gambling perceptions (e.g. excitement and fallacy) and behaviors, results point to visitor gamblers' decrease in gambling excitement and fallacy as well as budget to income ratio.Originality/valueBy assessing changes of the Mainland Chinese gambling perceptions and behaviors, this research aims to contribute to the literature by demonstrating whether the Chinese gamblers have adapted and hence, are more rational about this recreational activity.

Conventional wisdom holds that verbs are more difficult to borrow than nouns. Recent studies have supported this claim, inferring it from the fact that synchronically almost every language studied contains a larger proportion of identifiable borrowings among nouns than among verbs. In this paper, I demonstrate that, while true, there is a logical fallacy in this inference. Using a large diachronic corpus of Russian texts, I show that verbs have lower turnover rates and, consequently, longer life expectancies than nouns, i.e., they are generally more difficult to replace. I argue that this fact alone could theoretically result in the synchronically observed disparities. The hypothesis of cross-linguistically lower verbal turnover rates, which I propose based on these findings, is difficult to verify directly on a large sample of languages. However, it makes a non-trivial prediction, which can be tested more easily. It predicts that if a contact situation lasted for a while, but ceased to exist several centuries ago, the proportion of verbs borrowed during that period and surviving to the present day may equal or exceed the proportion of such borrowings among nouns. The data found in the World Loanword Database (Haspelmath & Tadmor 2009) are consistent with this prediction, thus providing evidence in favor of the hypothesis.

One of the challenges that language professionals face in our increasingly diverse communities is establishing a balance between diversity and language standards. While Standard Japanese can be considered a common language to interact with the majority of Japanese speakers who may not be accustomed to nonnative speech (ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines, 2012), the strict requirement to follow the monolingual standard may disregard the legitimacy of multilingual speakers, including nonstandard dialect speakers. This article discusses pros and cons of setting standards in language programs and relevant findings concerning the native speaker fallacy (Author, 2019). Then the author will share his shifting perspectives on errors, interlanguage, dialectal differences, and certain “nonstandard” practices (e.g. translanguaging) in his experience of training, hiring, and supervising teaching assistants at Brigham Young University.

Informed by concepts of native speakers, racial nativism, and language socialization theory, this study documented the existence of the native speaker fallacy (Phillipson, 1992, Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press) in a university‐level Japanese and Chinese program in the United States. Specifically, the researcher collected survey responses from language teachers and students, conducted interviews, and observed the teacher training process, one‐on‐one teaching sessions, and classroom teaching over the course of 2 academic years. A regression analysis showed how the perception of native and non‐native speakers was significantly influenced by students’ language level, native language, and race, and by the language program itself. The cases of a dialectal speaker and biracial Japanese teachers illustrated the effects of the bifurcated categorizations on teachers who do not fit in the dichotomy. Implications derived from this study call for critical analysis of the valorization of standard dialect and investigation into ways that will make more room for diversity in the language classroom. This study also underscores the importance of debriefing meetings that allow language professionals and students to reflect their teaching and learning experiences in relation to their identities and to examine unquestioned assumptions about language and racial identities and language standardization in increasingly globalized and diverse communities.

In this paper, I elaborate on the cognitive pragmatic approaches of commitment attribution. I argue that non-propositional meanings (Sperber and Wilson 2015) play a role in the reconstruction of arguments (see Oswald 2016) and I underline that this constitutes a further argument in favor of a cognitive approach to the study of commitment attribution. I focus on an authentic example of a straw man fallacy consisting in (a) an implicit misattribution of commitments to the speaker with the form “Excuse me for having done p” and (b) a refutation of the attributed position by means of non-propositional effects (in this case, the refutation is implicitly conveyed through an ironical utterance). I conclude that non-propositional effects can serve as a criterion to distinguish a mere false attribution of commitments from a full-fledged straw man fallacy.

Despite scientific agreement about the anthropogenic cause of climate change, the general public holds different beliefs regarding the causes of climate change. Some believe climate change to be ca...

This article will argue that, rather than being objective and universal treatment appro-aches, counseling and psychotherapy are indigenous/traditional (i.e., cultural) healing methods of the Euro-American West. Therefore, the World Health Organization's Mental Health Gap Action Programme (MHGAP), designed to provide increased access to reportedly highly effective Western mental health treatment services in many low- and middle-income countries, is likely to falter. It can be argued that culturally adapted counseling and psychotherapy will be most effective for individuals in non-Western countries who endorse or are somewhat acculturated to Western understandings and ways of living. Therefore, Western psychological interventions should not be at the forefront of the MHGAP in non-Western countries. Supportive evidence for this perspective is summarized and alternative approaches to promoting global mental health that draw on non-Western indigenous healing practices are presented.

Few advances in schizophrenia research have been translated into clinical practice, despite 60 years of serum biomarkers studies and 50 years of genetic studies. During the last 30 years, neuroimaging studies on schizophrenia have gradually increased, partly due to the beautiful prospect that the pathophysiology of schizophrenia could be explained entirely by the Human Connectome Project (HCP). However, the fallacy of reverse inference has been a critical problem of the HCP. For this reason, there is a dire need for new strategies or research “bridges” to further schizophrenia at the biological level. To understand the importance of research “bridges,” it is vital to examine the strengths and weaknesses of the recent literature. Hence, in this review, our team has summarized the recent literature (1995–2018) about magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of schizophrenia in terms of regional and global structural and functional alterations. We have also provided a new proposal that may supplement the HCP for studying schizophrenia. As postulated, despite the vast number of MRI studies in schizophrenia, the lack of homogeneity between the studies, along with the relatedness of schizophrenia with other neurological disorders, has hindered the study of schizophrenia. In addition, the reverse inference cannot be used to diagnose schizophrenia, further limiting the clinical impact of findings from medical imaging studies. We believe that multidisciplinary technologies may be used to develop research “bridges” to further investigate schizophrenia at the single neuron or neuron cluster levels. We have postulated about future strategies for overcoming the current limitations and establishing the research “bridges,” with an emphasis on multimodality imaging, molecular imaging, neuron cluster signals, single transmitter biomarkers, and nanotechnology. These research “bridges” may help solve the reverse inference fallacy and improve our understanding of schizophrenia for future studies.

We identify the need for a new wave of research on adolescent secrecy in their relationship with parents that relinquishes the focus on the nomothetic objective of finding general principles. This third wave builds on novel insights on three fallacies committed in previous waves of research: (1) between-person effects do not necessarily provide insights into within-family processes (the ecological fallacy), (2) within-family processes are not necessarily homogeneous across adolescents and families (the one size fits all fallacy), and (3) longer-term effects are not necessarily identical to short-term processes (the galloping horse fallacy). This approach promises to provide us with a more person-specific understanding of adolescent secrecy from parents, which enables more tailored insights as to when and for whom secrecy is bad versus good.

Vernacular lexemes appear self-evident, so we unwittingly reify them. But the words and phrases of natural languages comprise a treacherous basis for identifying valid psychological constructs, as I illustrate in emotion research. Like other vernacular lexemes, the emotion labels in natural languages do not have definite, stable, mutually transparent meanings, and any one vernacular word may be used to denote multiple scientifically distinct entities. In addition, the consequential choice of one lexeme to name a scientific construct rather than any of its partial synonyms is often arbitrary. Furthermore, a given vernacular lexeme from any one of the world's 7000 languages rarely maps one-to-one into an exactly corresponding vernacular lexeme in other languages. Words related to anger in different languages illustrate this. Since each language constitutes a distinct taxonomy of things in the world, most or all languages must fail to cut nature at its joints. In short, it is pernicious to use one language's dictionary as the source of psychological constructs. So scientists need to coin new technical names for scientifically derived constructs-names precisely defined in terms of the constellation of features or components that characterize the constructs they denote. The development of the kama muta construct illustrates one way to go about this. Kama muta is the emotion evoked by sudden intensification of communal sharing-universally experienced but not isomorphic with any vernacular lexeme such as heart warming, moving, touching, collective pride, tender, nostalgic, sentimental, Awww-so cute!. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Experiments in psychology often target hypothetical constructs to test some causal hypothesis or theory. In light of this goal, it is pertinent to use a manipulation that actually changes the focal hypothetical construct, and only that construct. In assessing whether such manipulation “success” can be assumed, researchers often include manipulation validity checks in their designs—a measure of the focal construct which should be responsive to the manipulation. One interpretation of a positive manipulation check is that it lends credence to a particular causal interpretation of a phenomenon. Scrutinizing the results of such manipulation checks supposedly enables a more stringent test of a causal hypothesis. This paper submits that manipulation checks do not improve our inferences to causal explanations, but may in practice result in weaker hypothesis tests. Rather than being useful, manipulation checks are at best uninformative, but more likely compromise the appraisal of a causal hypothesis. The second half of this paper advocates four methodological heuristics, offered as alternatives to manipulation validity checks, to more severely test causal hypotheses. The heuristics call for a burgeoning focus on (a) assessing the specificity of manipulations, (b) evaluating theoretical risk, (c) attempts to cast doubt on alternatives, and (d) appraising the relative merits of explanations. I conclude that rather than relying on manipulation checks as a ‘Band-Aid’ method to alleviate validity concerns, inferential rigor can be improved by virtue of these heuristics.

To provide clients with the best possible treatment, social workers require fallacy recognition skills. Ideally, these skills are already acquired during university education. We conducted an exper...

A jangle fallacy is the assumption that measures are different by having different names, although they assess the same underlying construct (Gonzalez et al., in press). This is the case of opennes...

Like all humans, M/EEG researchers commit certain fallacies or mistakes in reasoning. This article surveys seven well-known but still common fallacies, including reverse inference, hasty generalization, hasty exclusion, inferring from group to individual, inferring from correlation to causation, affirming a disjunct, and false dichotomy. These fallacies are illustrated with classic EEG research by Libet and collaborators, but many researchers (not just Libet) continue to commit them in all areas of research (not just M/EEG). This article gives practical suggestions about how to spot and avoid each fallacy.

The fact that world-over people seem inexplicably motivated to allocate time and effort to apparently useless cultural practices, like the arts, has led several evolutionary scholars to suggest that these might be costly Zahavian signals correlated with genetic fitness, such as the infamous peacock’s tail. In this paper, I review the fundamental arguments of the hypothesis that art evolved and serves as a costly Zahavian signal. First, I look into the hypothesis that humans exert mate choice for indirect benefits and argue that the data supports mate choice for direct benefits instead. Second, I argue that art practice may well be a costly signal, however not necessarily related to good genes. Third, I suggest that Thorstein Veblen’s original concept of conspicuous signals as social tools to obtain and convey prestige provides a better account than the Zahavian model for the evolution and function of art in society. As a Veblenian signal, art could still have many of the effects suggested for visual art as a Zahavian signal, except not for the indirect benefits of optimal offspring, but for the direct benefits of acquiring and conveying social status. publishedVersion

Resilience is a topic of growing interest in the literature focused on organizations. There is an extensive research on resilience but it is embedded in a variety of disconnected literatures that have developed in different research fields, involving varying levels of analysis and different subconstructs. This has resulted in a general confusion surrounding the concept of resilience and its relationship to similar constructs. In this paper, we synthesize this fragmented literature to better understand organization-related resilience and set the stage for future work in this area. First, based on a bibliographic coupling analysis of 1,667 articles, we identify 10 historical clusters that have shaped this domain and highlight how these clusters have developed over time. Second, drawing on recommendations for how research can develop high-quality concept definitions, we analyze subconstructs, conceptual definitions, and measures applied in this domain. Third, we distinguish resilience from related constructs. Overall, our synthesis revealed that resilience is an important and distinct concept in organization-related research. In spite of this, the field has suffered from the presence of a jingle-jangle fallacy, which means that existing conceptualizations of resilience assign different meanings to this label, while at the same time various subconstructs exist. Thus, fourth, we develop a framework integrating the broad literature of organization-related resilience into three distinct themes of research that offer different insights into how entities across levels deal with adversity. In an attempt to provide guidance for research that builds upon this review, we conclude with an agenda for future investigations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

In 1972, R.C. Lewontin concluded that it follows from the fact that the large majority of human genetic variation (≈ 85%) is among individuals within local populations that racial taxonomy is unjustified. Three decades later, Edwards demonstrated that while the accuracy with which individuals may be assigned to groups is poor for a single locus, consideration of multi-locus data allows for highly accurate assignments. Edwards concluded that Lewontin's dismissal of racial taxonomy was unwarranted. Edwards misidentified the aim of Lewontin's critique, which was directed at the utility of racial classification and not at assigning individuals to groups using genetic data. Moreover, Edwards conflated distinct kinds of correlation when sketching out his argument. If we follow Edwards' argument to its natural terminus, it becomes clear that it is consideration of all of the correlation structure among local groups in human genetic data that renders racial taxonomy scientifically useless. Lewontin considers the correlation structure relevant to his analysis of racial taxonomy and does not make his eponymous misstep. Rather, critics of Lewontin who use racial taxonomies in their work are the primary offenders when it comes to committing Lewontin's fallacy.

In this paper we argue that Bley-Vroman’s Comparative Fallacy, which warns against comparisons between native speakers and learners in second-language acquisition (SLA) research, is not justified on either theoretical or methodological grounds and should be abandoned as it contravenes the explanatory nature of SLA research. We argue that for SLA to be able to provide meaningful explanations, grammatical comparisons with a baseline (usually of native speakers although not always the case) are not only justified but necessary, a position which we call the ‘Comparative Logic’. The methodological choices assumed by this position ensure that interlanguage grammars are analysed in their own right and respecting their own principles. Related issues, such as why we focus on the native speaker and why investigating deficits in linguistic-cognitive SLA is essential in our field are discussed as well.

In this brief communication, we discuss the confusion of mortality with fatality in the interpretation of evidence in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and how this confusion affects the translation of science into policy and practice. We discuss how this confusion has influenced COVID-19 policy in France, Sweden, and the United Kingdom and discuss the implications for decision-making about COVID-19 vaccine distribution. We also discuss how this confusion is an example of a more general statistical fallacy we term the “Missing Link Fallacy.”

There are three feelings that prompt a person to take their life: hopelessness, helplessness and worthlessness. Studies have found that the risk of suicide increases with decreasing happiness. In the recent past, people have been left clueless when celebrities and successful people ended their lives despite appearing overtly happy. What prompted them to do so? Modern society today highlights the importance of success over failure. Although we are motivated to be successful in life, it should not become our main gauge of happiness. In the same way we should not let success be our main goal in life and get discouraged by failure. Happiness has been viewed in two ways: as concerning the well-being of a person, and as the opposite of depression. Each one of us has different ways of measuring happiness. The quality of one’s happiness depends on one’s priorities in life. Happiness is not merely something that can be quantified with how much success and failure one has because such metric is very much subjective. How do we prevent a young life from extinguishing? How do we identify suicidal behavior among successful people and help those around? The present chapter covers the possible reasons why successful people commit suicide. Role of media in preventing suicide and measures for preventing suicide by successful people has been discussed.

While the role of discourse connectives has long been acknowledged in argumentative frameworks, these approaches often take a coarse-grained approach to connectives, treating them as a unified group having similar effects on argumentation. Based on an empirical study of the straw man fallacy, we argue that a more fine-grained approach is needed to explain the role of each connective and illustrate their specificities. We first present an original corpus study detailing the main features of four causal connectives in French that speakers routinely use to attribute meaning to another speaker (puisque, étant donné que, vu que and comme), which is a key element of straw man fallacies. We then assess the influence of each of these connectives in a series of controlled experiments. Our results indicate each connective has different effects for the persuasiveness of straw man fallacies, and that these effects can be explained by differences in their semantic profile, as evidenced in our corpus study. Taken together, our results demonstrate that connectives are important for argumentation but should be analyzed individually, and that the study of fallacies should include a fine-grained analysis of the linguistic elements typically used in their formulation.