Individual differences in language development: Implications for development and language.

Reviews literature on differences in characteristics of language development. Some children have been found to emphasize single words, simple productive rules for combining words, nouns and noun phrases, and referential functions; others use whole phrases and formulas, pronouns, compressed sentences, and expressive or social functions. The evidence for 2 styles of acquisition and their continuity over time is examined. Explanations in terms of hemispheric functions, cognitive maturation, cognitive style, and environmental context are considered, and an explanation in terms of the interaction of individual and environment in different functional contexts is suggested. Implications for development and the mastery of complex systems are discussed. (51 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency.

Research on group differences in response latency often has as its goal the detection of Group ?×? Treatment interactions. However, accumulating evidence suggests that response latencies for different groups are often linearly related, leading to an increased likelihood of finding spurious overadditive interactions in which the slower group produces a larger treatment effect. The authors propose a rate-amount model that predicts linear relationships between individuals and that includes global processing parameters based on large-scale group differences in information processing. These global processing parameters may be used to linearly transform response latencies from different individuals to a common information-processing scale so that small-scale group differences in information processing may be isolated. The authors recommend linear regression and z-score transformations that may be used to augment traditional analyses of raw response latencies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sexual-orientation-related differences in verbal fluency.

This study examined the performance of 60 heterosexual men, 60 gay men, 60 heterosexual women, and 60 lesbians on 3 tests of verbal fluency known to show gender differences: letter, category, and synonym fluency. Gay men and lesbians showed opposite-sex shifts in their profile of scores. For letter fluency, gay men outperformed all other groups; lesbians showed the lowest scores. For category fluency, gay men and heterosexual women jointly outperformed lesbians and heterosexual men. Finally, gay men outperformed all other groups on synonym fluency, whereas lesbians and heterosexual men performed similarly. A difference between heterosexual men and women was demonstrated on category and synonym fluency only. The findings implicate within-sex differences in the functioning of the prefrontal and temporal cortices. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being.

Five studies tested two general hypotheses: Individuals differ in their use of emotion regulation strategies such as reappraisal and suppression, and these individual differences have implications for affect, well-being, and social relationships. Study 1 presents new measures of the habitual use of reappraisal and suppression. Study 2 examines convergent and discriminant validity. Study 3 shows that reappraisers experience and express greater positive emotion and lesser negative emotion, whereas suppressors experience and express lesser positive emotion, yet experience greater negative emotion. Study 4 indicates that using reappraisal is associated with better interpersonal functioning, whereas using suppression is associated with worse interpersonal functioning. Study 5 shows that using reappraisal is related positively to well-being, whereas using suppression is related negatively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in causal uncertainty.

Presents a scale that measures chronic individual differences in people's uncertainty about their ability to understand and detect cause-and-effect relationships in the social world: the Causal Uncertainty Scale (CUS). The results of Study 1 indicated that the scale has good internal and adequate test–retest reliability. Additionally, the results of a factor analysis suggested that the scale appears to be tapping a single construct. Study 2 examined the convergent and discriminant validity of the scale, and Studies 3 and 4 examined the predictive and incremental validity of the scale. The importance of the CUS to work on depressives' social information processing and for basic research and theory on human social judgment processes is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in student cheating.

The incidence and causes of cheating were investigated using a questionnaire, consisting of 21 cheating behaviors, which was distributed to students at an English university. Respondents were asked to indicate, confidentially, which of the behaviors they had engaged in. Reported cheating was widespread and some types of cheating (e.g., on coursework) were more common than others. Reported cheating was more common in men than women; more common with less able students than more able ones; more common in younger students than mature ones; and more common in science and technology students than those in other disciplines. It is suggested that students' motivation, in particular whether they are studying to learn rather than simply to obtain good grades, is a major factor in explaining these differences. The results also indicate that cheating consists of a number of different types of behavior rather than being a unitary concept. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in cognitive processes.

Studied the effects of verbal ability and sex on performance in a simultaneous matching task. The 537 undergraduates who participated were administered the verbal battery of the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test. Ss with high-verbal ability (high verbals) were much faster than Ss with low-verbal ability (low verbals) in making taxonomic category identity matches and homophone identity matches. Results suggest that verbal ability is related to the speed of retrieval from long-term memory. In addition, high verbals were faster in making physical identity word matches, suggesting that either lexicographically coded information stored in long-term memory is used in such a task or that verbal ability is also related to the speed of retrieval from short-term memory. As expected, males did not differ from females in the time they required to perform any of the matching tasks, although males made slightly more errors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in dream recall.

Ss who typically fail to remember dreams at home (nonreporters) and Ss who frequently remember dreams (reporters) slept in the laboratory for 4 nights each. Gradual or abrupt awakenings were made at each EEG Stage-I REM (dream) period. Although nonreporters and reporters did not differ in REM-period frequency or EEG patterns during sleep, nonreporters did report dreaming less frequently following REM-period awakenings. Ss showed self-consistency in frequency of dream reporting and in type of failure to report. Some nonreporters typically failed to remember any content; others typically said they were awake and thinking. Comparisons among reporters and sub-groups of nonreporters for eye-movement frequency, arousal threshold, and dreamlike-report content indicate that it may be useful to distinguish different kinds of nonreporters. (17 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in rational thought.

Much research in the last 2 decades has demonstrated that humans deviate from normative models of decision making and rational judgment. In 4 studies involving 954 participants, the authors explored the extent to which measures of cognitive ability and thinking dispositions can predict discrepancies from normative responding on a variety of tasks from the heuristics and biases literature including the selection task, belief bias in the syllogistic reasoning, argument evaluation, base-rate use, covariation detection, hypothesis testing, outcome bias, if-only thinking, knowledge calibration, hindsight bias, and on false consensus paradigm. Significant relationships involving cognitive ability were interpreted as indicating algorithmic level limitations on the computation of the normative response. Relationships with thinking dispositions were interpreted as indicating that styles of epistemic regulation can predict individual differences in performance of these tasks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in cognitive arithmetic.

Investigated the convergence of mental processes assessed by paper-and-pencil measures defining the Numerical Facility factor and component processes for cognitive arithmetic identified by using chronometric techniques. 100 undergraduates responded to 320 arithmetic problems in a true–false reaction-time (RT) verification paradigm and were administered a battery of ability measures spanning Numerical Facility, Perceptual Speed, and Spatial Relations factors. The 320 cognitive arithmetic problems comprised 80 problems of each of 4 types: simple addition, complex addition, simple multiplication, and complex multiplication. Information-processing results indicate that regression models that included a structural variable consistent with memory network retrieval of arithmetic facts were the best predictors of RT to each of the 4 types of arithmetic problems. Generally, results provide evidence for continuity of intellectual abilities identified with the use of factor-analytic methods and elementary component processes isolated with the use of RT techniques. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in nonverbal behavior: Dimensions of style.

Style, which is also known as expressive movement, refers to the way in which behavior is performed. Two studies were conducted to develop measures of style, explore their dimensionality, and assess the validity of the dimensions. In the 1st study, Ss' style was rated by peers in everyday situations. A factor analysis produced 4 dimensions—Expressiveness, Animation, Expansiveness, and Coordination—which were internally consistent, stable over time, and stable across raters. In the 2nd study, style was assessed both by trained raters and by peers. There was evidence for the convergent validity of the dimensions: Within-trait, cross-method correlations were of a magnitude similar to those typically found in personality research. Sex differences and relationships with other personality traits, including masculinity–femininity, were also examined. Implications for person perception are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in adult decision-making competence.

The authors evaluated the reliability and validity of a set of 7 behavioral decision-making tasks, measuring different aspects of the decision-making process. The tasks were administered to individuals from diverse populations. Participants showed relatively consistent performance within and across the 7 tasks, which were then aggregated into an Adult Decision-Making Competence (A-DMC) index that showed good reliability. The validity of the 7 tasks and of overall A-DMC emerges in significant relationships with measures of socioeconomic status, cognitive ability, and decision-making styles. Participants who performed better on the A-DMC were less likely to report negative life events indicative of poor decision making, as measured by the Decision Outcomes Inventory. Significant predictive validity remains when controlling for demographic measures, measures of cognitive ability, and constructive decision-making styles. Thus, A-DMC appears to be a distinct construct relevant to adults' real-world decisions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in preferences to photographs.

Individual differences in preferences to photographs were explored based on an alternative framework. This framework predicts that the primary difference between individuals in this respect is their ability to process photographic information, which in turn influences their preferences. Chiefly, people with well-developed schemes in photography (e.g., photo professionals) should have a higher ability to process photographic information than people with less developed schemes (e.g., psychology students). Consequently, people with well-developed schemes in photography should prefer photographs that are relatively more demanding to process. Ten psychology students and 5 photo professionals assessed 32 photographs on six general concepts: Preference, Hedonic Tone, Expressiveness, Familiarity, Uncertainty, and Dynamics. As predicted, photo professionals had a higher ability to process photographic information and preferred photographs that were relatively uncertain and unfamiliar. These results are in concordance with previous research and give strong support to the utility of the present framework in experimental aesthetics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in beliefs about groups.

The current research examined individual differences in peoples' positive versus negative beliefs about groups. Three studies were conducted to develop and validate a 16-item Beliefs About Groups (BAG) scale. Factor analyses in Studies 1 and 2 identified and replicated a 4-factor solution, with factors reflecting preferences for group versus individual work, positive group performance beliefs, negative group performance beliefs, and beliefs that others will work hard on group tasks. Study 2 also provided evidence for convergent and divergent validity, and explored relationships between the Big Five personality dimensions and group beliefs. Study 3 provided evidence for test–retest reliability. Across these 3 studies, the BAG scale had total score alphas ranging from .83 to .88. Implications of beliefs about groups for member motivation and group performance, as well as for future research and practice, are highlighted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in complex spatial processing.

Presents an information-processing model for a laboratory visualization task that represents an adaptation of a standardized spatial ability test. The laboratory visualization task includes item types varying in processing complexity and number of stimulus elements. 34 undergraduates provided latency and accuracy data to (a) test the fit of the information-processing model and (b) estimate 4 processing parameters: encoding and comparison, rotation, search, and preparation response. Positive (same) and negative (different) trial data were well fit by the model both at the group and individual S level, with plausible and reliable parameter estimates. Analyses of individual differences showed that search speed and error rates for positive and negative trials were most highly correlated with reference test scores. The pattern of results suggests that individual differences are a function of differences in the accuracy and/or quality of the mental representation, not just speed of processing. Both speed and accuracy differences in task performance are argued to be manifestations of this qualitative difference. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in dyadic cooperative learning.

The impact of individual differences on the performance of 2 roles—learner and learning facilitator—was assessed during dyadic cooperative learning. Eighty university students, 40 men and 40 women, participated in same-sex groups of 4. Each student cooperatively learned a text passage with 1 partner and then learned a 2nd passage with another partner. In a later session, the students recalled the information contained within both text passages and completed several personality measures. A social relations analysis (D. A. Kenny & L. LaVoie, 1984) was used to partition the variability in recall for the passages into various sources. Variability in recall depended strongly on individual differences in learning ability and (to a lesser extent) on individual differences in the ability to facilitate others' learning. Differences in the ability to learn text passages were independent of individual differences in the ability to facilitate others' learning. Effective learners were high in verbal ability, whereas effective learning facilitators were low in public self-consciousness and in self-monitoring. The influence of cognitive and rapport factors on the performance of the learner role and the learning facilitator role is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Monitoring text comprehension: Individual differences in epistemological standards.

Examined individual differences in reading comprehension standards by asking 9 undergraduates enrolled in a "Fundamentals of Psychology" course to describe the criteria they used to decide whether or not they had comprehended textbook chapters. Ss were classified as having a dualistic (fact-oriented) or a relativistic (context-oriented) conception of knowledge on the basis of their ratings of attitude statements drawn from the work of W. G. Perry (1968). Comprehension criteria reported by dualists more often involved the knowledge category found in the B. S. Bloom et al (1956) book, Taxonomy, and those reported by relativists, the comprehension or application categories. The nature and number of reported comprehension criteria were found to be predictive of course grades. Ss reporting the use of comprehension or application criteria earned better grades than those reporting the use of knowledge criteria; Ss reporting the use of more than one criterion earned better grades than those reporting the use of a single criterion. These data suggest that one's epistemological beliefs may dictate one's choice of comprehension standards and that these epistemological standards, in turn, may control the effectiveness of one's text processing efforts. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)