Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.)

From Efficient Markets Theory to Behavioral Finance

The 'five rights' of clinical reasoning: an educational model to enhance nursing students' ability to identify and manage clinically 'at risk' patients.

High Idiosyncratic Volatility and Low Returns: International and Further U.S. Evidence

The emergence of electronic computers in the last thirty years has given rise to many interesting questions. Many of these questions are technical, relating to a machine’s ability to perform complex operations in a variety of circumstances. While some of these questions are not without philosophical interest, the one question which above all others has stimulated philosophical interest is explicitly non-technical and it can be expressed crudely as follows: Can a machine be said to think and, if so, in what sense? The issue has received much attention in the scholarly journals with articles and arguments appearing in great profusion, some resolutely answering this question in the affirmative, some, equally resolutely, answering this question in the negative, and others manifesting modified rapture. While the ramifications of the question are enormous I believe that the issue at the heart of the matter has gradually emerged from the forest of complications. It is easy to answer the question “Can machines/computers think?” Easy, that is, once we know with some degree of precision what thinking is, what machine/computers are, and, last but not least, how to understand the word “can.” The possibility of answering the question, “Can a computer think?” is rendered either question-beggingly trivial or mind-bogglingly impossible unless one is able to give some independent signification to its key terms. To define a computer as a sort of machine, and then to define machine in such a narrow way that it becomes meaningless to ask if it thinks viciously begs the question unless the definitions can be given independent justification. Of course, a similar consideration applies to arguments in favour of artificial intelligence. I assume that the majority of those who would put this question intend by “think” something like

https://researchrepository.ucd.ie/bitstream/10197/5469/1/Minds_and_Machines.pdf

Minds and machines

Surprise is often defined in terms of disconfirmed expectations, whereby the surprisingness of an event is thought to be dependent on the degree to which it contrasts with a more likely, or expected, outcome. The authors investigated the alternative hypothesis that surprise is more accurately modeled as a manifestation of an ongoing sense-making process. In a series of experiments, participants were given a number of scenarios and rated surprise and probability for various hypothetical outcomes that either confirmed or disconfirmed an expectation. Experiment 1 demonstrated that representational specificity influences the relationship that holds between surprise and probability ratings. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the inclusion of an enabling event lowers surprise ratings for disconfirming outcomes. Experiment 3 explored the reason for this effect, revealing that enabling events lower surprise by reducing uncertainty, thus enhancing ease of integration. Experiment 4 evaluated the contrast hypothesis directly, showing that differences in contrast are not correlated with differences in surprise. These results provide converging support for the view that the level of surprise experienced for an event is related to the difficulty of integrating that event with an existing representation.

/pdf/making-sense-of-surprise-an-investigation-of-the-factors-1xe8s0lzei.pdf

Making sense of surprise: an investigation of the factors influencing surprise judgments.

Developing creativity in higher education for 21st century learners: A protocol for a scoping review

Student engagement is a key predictor of academic performance, persistence and retention in higher education. While many studies have identified how aspects of the college environment influence engagement, fewer have specifically focused on emotional intelligence (EI). In this study, we sought to explore whether EI could predict cognitive and/or affective engagement in a sample of undergraduate psychology students in Ireland. Ninety-one students completed two forms of the student engagement instrument, rating current engagement and retrospective secondary school engagement, along with the trait EI (TEI) questionnaire. After controlling for academic ability, gender and school engagement, multiple regression analyses found TEI to be a positive predictor of both cognitive and affective engagement. Previous academic performance acted as an additional predictor of cognitive engagement, while retrospective affective school engagement predicted current affective engagement. These results suggest that interventions aimed at increasing EI may have positive implications for many aspects of student engagement, and hence performance at third level.

/pdf/engaging-students-emotionally-the-role-of-emotional-41f6s013fs.pdf

Engaging Students Emotionally: The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Predicting Cognitive and Affective Engagement in Higher Education.

This study investigated how both caregiver and patient factors predict different aspects of burden in colorectal cancer caregivers. One hundred and fifty-three caregiver–survivor dyads separately provided information on patient disease and treatment-related factors, and perceived global health status (EORTC QLQ30), along with caregiver socio-demographic factors, health and care-related activities. Four multiple regression analyses were conducted to assess the influence of caregiver characteristics, patient characteristics and care-related activities on four dimensions of burden from the Caregiver Reaction Assessment scale. Caregiver characteristics significantly predicted health and financial burden (11%–13% of explained variance) with comorbidity and younger age increasing this risk. Patient health, in particular global health status and the presence of a stoma, predicted all burden scores, explaining 14%–22% of variance. Care-related activities was also a significant predictor of all burden scores, explaining an additional 5%–11% of variance, with time involved in caring the most consistent predictor. Results highlight that a combination of factors influence caregiver burden. These results may be used to identify those most at risk, allowing practitioners to deliver tailored effective support. In particular, efforts to alleviate the burden of caring on caregiver schedule may be merited, given that this was the domain in which the burden was greatest.

/pdf/understanding-burden-in-caregivers-of-colorectal-cancer-3nspmy6556.pdf

Understanding burden in caregivers of colorectal cancer survivors: what role do patient and caregiver factors play?

In spite of recent advances in treatment, many people with multiple sclerosis (MS) require ongoing care and support. Informal caregivers can experience burden as a result of their role, with possible implications for quality of life (QOL). We review recent research examining MS caregiver experience to (1) understand current risk factors for caregiver burden and (2) identify possible strategies for increasing carer well-being. MS caregiver experience is highly variable and can be predicted by a variety of care recipient, caregiver and contextual factors. Burden is not the only characteristic associated with care, with positive consequences also reported. Emerging research suggests a number of ways in which carers can be better supported. Identifying and meeting the needs of MS caregivers offers the best way of delivering tailored support. Future research should focus on the development of psychosocial supports, while acknowledging the needs of those caring for different MS patient populations.

/pdf/caregiver-burden-in-multiple-sclerosis-recent-trends-and-esnm7srde9.pdf

Rebecca Maguire

Papers

Making sense of surprise: an investigation of the factors influencing surprise judgments.

Developing creativity in higher education for 21st century learners: A protocol for a scoping review

Engaging Students Emotionally: The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Predicting Cognitive and Affective Engagement in Higher Education.

Understanding burden in caregivers of colorectal cancer survivors: what role do patient and caregiver factors play?

Caregiver Burden in Multiple Sclerosis: Recent Trends and Future Directions.