This longitudinal quasi‐experimental study examined the general efficiency of part‐time special education for students at risk for reading difficulties in Estonian primary schools. Participants were selected from 464 students whose pre‐reading and reading skills were assessed for the study at the beginning of school. Eighty‐four of these children received part‐time special education support throughout the first grade (treatment group). Statistical matching was used to find a control group similar to the treatment group on pre‐reading skills and parental educational level but who did not receive extra help (control group; 84 children). Students' reading fluency and task persistence were assessed at the end of Grade 1 and Grade 2. Neither group differed in reading fluency nor task persistence at the end of either grade. Developmental trajectories of those treatment group children who received additional support only for reading and spelling difficulties did not differ from those who received this support for concurrent developmental disorders in addition to reading and spelling difficulties. Our findings indicate that a full‐year of special education support in the form of extra lessons without a prior diagnostic assessment, frequent progress monitoring, or focused interventions might not be an effective way to support children with reading difficulties.

This study investigated the relationships between verbal thinking and performance on visual figure discrimination tasks from a Vygotskian perspective in a large varied adult sample (N = 428). A test designed to assess the structure of word meanings (ie tendency to think in 'everyday' or 'scientific' concepts as distinguished by Vygotsky) together with two contour picture tasks was presented. Visual tasks were a modified version of Poppelreuter's overlapping figures and a picture depicting a meaningful scene. On both tasks concrete objects and abstract meaningless shapes had to be identified. In addition to relationships between visual task performance and word meaning structure, the effects of the meaningful scene and relations with gender were examined. The results confirmed the expected relation between word meaning structure and visual performance. Furthermore, they suggested a specific effect of the meaningful whole and a male advantage, especially for the first task in which women seemed to benefit less from advanced word meaning structure.

It is commonly assumed that behavior reflects the mental states of individuals. However, recent attempts to detect human states of mind via behavioral indicators have not always been successful; behavioral indicators may be unreliable and invalid. In this study we show that one of the common behavioral indicators, change in the overall amount of movement, correlated well with changes in the skin conductance level (SCL) at the group level, which reflects changes in arousal. At the individual level, however, changes in the SCL were related to movement patterns only in about half of the individuals. It is also noteworthy that the level of movement-SCL correlation was very highly predictable by certain social and cognitive characteristics of the individuals. Our results suggest that behavioral indicators may in many cases fail to predict mental states at the individual level.

Smedslund and Ross (2014) have offered us an interesting opinion article concerning the usefulness of empirical research for psychological practice. Appraisal of research is obviously contingent upon the way it is conceptualized and although the authors are involved with rather different kinds of practical problems they nevertheless conceptualize research in exactly the same way. This entails a possible mismatch between questions asked and methods used to answer them. I will try to add to the discussion by examining more closely how the authors conceptualize research and discuss the problems of mismatch between questions, methods, methodology, and epistemology. I claim that the authors' view of research misses some important aspects of scientific reasoning and follows an unjustified epistemological position. Part of the arising controversy is a rather natural consequence of this but could be overcome by reconsidering the aims of science and getting epistemology, methodology and questions in line. Although I focus on the specific article and the authors' positions, I hold that the issues discussed are common and general.

No abstract