No abstract

We investigated how people interpret conditionals and how stable their interpretation is over a long series of trials. Participants were shown the colored patterns on each side of a 6-sided die and were asked how sure they were that a conditional holds of the side landing upward when the die is randomly thrown. Participants were presented with 71 trials consisting of all combinations of binary dimensions of shape (e.g., circles and squares) and color (e.g., blue and red) painted onto the sides of each die. In 2 experiments (N₁ = 66, N₂ = 65), the conditional event was the dominant interpretation, followed by conjunction, and material conditional responses were negligible. In both experiments, the percentage of participants giving a conditional event response increased from around 40% at the beginning of the task to nearly 80% at the end, with most participants shifting from a conjunction interpretation. The shift was moderated by the order of shape and color in each conditional's antecedent and consequent: Participants were more likely to shift if the antecedent referred to a color. In Experiment 2 we collected response times: Conditional event interpretations took longer to process than conjunction interpretations (mean difference = 500 ms). We discuss implications of our results for mental models theory and probabilistic theories of reasoning.

These results suggest that routine outcome monitoring is feasible, and suggest the possibility of using jointly agreed idiographic measures alongside particular perspectives on outcome as part of a PROMs approach.

This brief commentary article considers the implications of intensive outcome monitoring which is central to children and young people's Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (CYP IAPT) in England and Wales. Services are being provided with a range of free software solutions to enable data collection, and guidance on interpretation of the measures, but there will still be some burden of data entry and collation for already overstretched services. It may be that the utility of the feedback will go some way to offset the sense of burden but this remains to be seen. Whether commissioners and others will rise to the challenge of supporting this aspect may prove crucial to the success or otherwise of such intensive ROM use. Many aspects of the CYP IAPT approach are new and whilst drawing on experience from earlier pilots of session by session monitoring in CAMHS both in the UK and abroad, and from Adult IAPT, there is likely to be much for us to learn. Time will tell whether the approach helps to improve the care children and young people receive but we are cautiously optimistic.

Perceptual studies suggest that processing facial identity emphasizes upper-face information, whereas processing expressions of anger or happiness emphasizes the lower-face. The two goals of the present study were to determine (a) if the distributions of eye fixations reflect these upper/lower-face biases, and (b) whether this bias is task- or stimulus-driven. We presented a target face followed by a probe pair of morphed faces, neither of which was identical to the target. Subjects judged which of the pair was more similar to the target face while eye movements were recorded. In Experiment 1 the probe pair always differed from each other in both identity and expression on each trial. In one block subjects judged which probe face was more similar to the target face in identity, and in a second block subjects judged which probe face was more similar to the target face in expression. In Experiment 2 the two probe faces differed in either expression or identity, but not both. Subjects were not informed which dimension differed, but simply asked to judge which probe face was more similar to the target face. We found that subjects scanned the upper-face more than the lower-face during the identity task but the lower-face more than the upper-face during the expression task in Experiment 1 (task-driven effects), with significantly less variation in bias in Experiment 2 (stimulus-driven effects). We conclude that fixations correlate with regional variations of diagnostic information in different processing tasks, but that these reflect top-down task-driven guidance of information acquisition more than stimulus-driven effects.