15 Apr @ 1:52 PMNEW ARTICLE - An Abbreviated Impulsiveness Scale by Coutlee et al.
In their new Archives of Scientific Psychology article , Coutlee, Politzer, Hoyle, and Huettel present their abbreviated impulsiveness scale. From the authors: “Impulsiveness is a personality trait that reflects an urge to act spontaneously without thinking or planning ahead for the consequences of your actions. High impulsiveness is characteristic of various problematic behaviors including attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity, excessive gambling, risk-taking, drug use, and alcoholism. Researchers studying attention and self-control often assess impulsiveness using personality questionnaires, notably the common Barratt Impulsiveness Scale version 11 (BIS-11; last revised in 1995). Advances in techniques for producing personality questionnaires over the last 20 years prompted us to revise and improve the BIS-11. We sought to make the revised scale shorter and better matched to current behaviors. We analyzed responses from 1,549 adults who took the BIS-11 questionnaire. Using a statistical technique called factor analysis, we eliminated 17 questions that did a poor job of measuring the 3 major types of impulsiveness identified by the scale: inattention, spontaneous action, and lack of planning. We constructed our ABbreviated Impulsiveness Scale (ABIS) using the remaining 13 questions. We showed that the ABIS performed well when administered to additional groups of 657 and 285 adults. Finally, we showed expected relationships between the ABIS and other personality measurements related to impulsiveness, and we showed that the ABIS can help predict alcohol consumption. We present the ABIS as a useful and efficient tool for researchers interested in measuring impulsive personality.” Read on at http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/arc/2/1/1.html
07 Aug @ 3:34 AMJudgments of Learning Are Influenced by Multiple Cues in Addition to Memory for Past Test Accuracy
From the authors: "When people try to learn new information (e.g., in a school setting), they often have multiple opportunities to study the material. One of the most important things to know is whether people adjust their study behavior on the basis of past success so as to increase their overall level of learning (e.g., by emphasizing information they have not yet learned). Monitoring their learning is a key part of being able to make those kinds of adjustments. We used a recognition memory task to replicate prior research showing that memory for past test outcomes influences later monitoring, as measured by judgments of learning (JOLs; confidence that the material has been learned), but also to show that subjective confidence in whether the test answer and the amount of time taken to restudy the items also have independent effects on JOLs. We also show that there are individual differences in the effects of test accuracy and test confidence on JOLs, showing that some but not all people use past test experiences to guide monitoring of their new learning. Monitoring learning is therefore a complex process of considering multiple cues, and some people attend to those cues more effectively than others. Improving the quality of monitoring performance and learning could lead to better study behaviors and better learning". Read on at http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/arc/1/1/23.html
24 Jul @ 8:17 AMReporting Results from SEM Analyses
Psychological research typically involves the analysis of data (e.g., questionnaire responses, records of behavior) using statistical methods. The description of how those methods are used and the results they produce is a key component of scholarly publications. Despite their importance, these descriptions are not always complete and clear. To ensure the completeness and clarity of these descriptions, the Archives of Scientific Psychology requires that authors of manuscripts to be considered for publication adhere to a set of publication standards. Although the current standards cover most of the statistical methods commonly used in psychological research, they do not cover them all. In this article, we propose adjustments to the current standards and the addition of additional standards for a statistical method not adequately covered in the current standards---structural equation modeling (SEM). Adherence to the standards we propose would ensure that scholarly publications that report results of data analyzed using SEM are complete and clear.Read on at http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/arc/1/1/14.html.
25 Jun @ 8:28 AMFirst ARCHIVES Article! Metacognitive Knowledge as a Result of Framing
The first Archives of Scientific Psychology article is published online: Phrasing Questions in Terms of Current (Not Future) Knowledge Increases Preferences for Cue-Only Judgments of Learning by Ivo Todorov, Nate Kornell, Max Larsson Sundqvist, and Fredrik U. Jönsson. From the authors: “Effective learning demands knowledge about what learning strategies are most effective. Much research has addressed what students’ know about how to improve memory. However, to effectively study it is also important to accurately feel (i.e., monitor) how well or poorly you have learned; for example, a glossary list, because such monitoring is closely related to the decisions students make about what to restudy. Such monitoring, termed judgments of learning (JOLs), predict later recall of glossaries (i.e., word pairs) more accurately when they are made after a delay, while viewing the first word only (cue) compared with both words in a word pair (cue and target). We investigated whether people recognize the benefit of cue-only responses when making JOLs and whether their preferences depend on how JOL prompts are phrased. Forty participants studied glossaries and then made delayed cue-only and cue-target JOLs. When the JOL prompts were phrased as predictions of future memory performance, only 15% of the participants preferred the better cue-only strategy. When JOLs were instead phrased as assessments of the current state of learning, 55% preferred the cue-only strategy. To conclude, students do not seem to recognize the value of cue-only JOLs, but they picked the superior JOL strategy more often when the JOL phrasing focused their attention on their knowledge state at the time of the JOL, rather than on a future state. This indicates that study-advice to students should not only include information about how to improve memory, but also about how to improve monitoring.” Read on at http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/arc/1/1/7.html
11 Feb @ 9:28 AMA New Journal for a New Era
In their editorial, Harris Cooper and Gary R. VandenBos introduce Archives of Scientific Psychology as a response to recent changes in how social, behavioral, and cognitive scientists communicate with one another and with the public, as well as a response to changes in what people expect to learn when they read a scientific research report. The subject matter of this new open access journal will contain the entire discipline of psychology. Readers will find articles on subjects ranging from neuroscience to political psychology, and all points in between. The editors describe the unique features of the new journal, including its emphasis on open methods and open data. To read the editorial, see http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/arc/1/1/1.html
23 Jan @ 1:25 PMOpen Methods, Open Data, Open Access
Archives of Scientific Psychology, the American Psychological Association’s (APA) new journal, is now accepting new manuscripts. This journal’s open-methods, open-data, and open-access policies could change the face of psychological publishing, according to Co-editor Harris Cooper, PhD, chair of Duke University's psychology and neuroscience department. Although Archives is not the first open-access journal in the field of psychology, it is unique in requiring that authors contribute their full data set to a central, restricted-access data repository, says co-editor Gary VandenBos, PhD, executive director of APA's Office of Publications and Databases. Find out more about the journal in this feature of the recent APA Monitor on Psychology, and read more from the journal’s co-Editors here.