No abstract

The FaceBase Consortium was established by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research in 2009 as a ‘big data’ resource for the craniofacial research community. Over the past decade, researchers have deposited hundreds of annotated and curated datasets on both normal and disordered craniofacial development in FaceBase, all freely available to the research community on the FaceBase Hub website. The Hub has developed numerous visualization and analysis tools designed to promote integration of multidisciplinary data while remaining dedicated to the FAIR principles of data management (findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability) and providing a faceted search infrastructure for locating desired data efficiently. Summaries of the datasets generated by the FaceBase projects from 2014 to 2019 are provided here. FaceBase 3 now welcomes contributions of data on craniofacial and dental development in humans, model organisms and cell lines. Collectively, the FaceBase Consortium, along with other NIH-supported data resources, provide a continuously growing, dynamic and current resource for the scientific community while improving data reproducibility and fulfilling data sharing requirements.

In 3 experiments, the authors tested the conditions under which 3rd variables are controlled for in making causal judgments. The authors hypothesized that 3rd variables are controlled for when the 3rd variables are themselves perceived as causal. In Experiment 1, the participants predicted test performance after seeing information about wearing a lucky garment, taking a test-preparation course, and staying up late. The course (perceived as more causally relevant) was controlled for more than was the garment (perceived as less causally relevant) in assessing the effectiveness of staying up late. In Experiments 2 and 3, to obviate the many alternative accounts that arise from the realistic cover story of Experiment 1, participants predicted flowers' blooming after the presentation or nonpresentation of liquids. When one liquid was trained as causal, it was controlled for more in judging another liquid than when it was trained as neutral. Overall, stimuli perceived as causal were controlled for more when judging other stimuli. The authors concluded that the effect of perceived causal relevance on causal conditionalizing is real and normatively reasonable.

Stanovich & West continue a history of norm-setting that began with deference to reasonable people's opinions, followed by adherence to probability theorems. They return to deference to reasonable people, with aptitude test performance substituting for reasonableness. This allows them to select independently among competing theories, but defines reasoning circularly in terms of aptitude, while aptitude is measured using reasoning.