The present study attempted to investigate the effects of food-deprivation and pretest experience on operant level bar pressing. In addition, these effects were assessed over an extended number of sessions. Thirty male albino rats were assigned to two major conditions; one which received pretest experience in the experimental chambers for 15 sessions and one which did not. Ss in the major conditions were then factorially assigned to three feeding schedules; one an ad lib. or no deprivation schedule, one a 15 gm. or mildly deprived schedule, and one a 5 gm. or severely deprived schedule. All Ss were then placed in the experimental chambers for 15 sessions. The results indicated that Ss which had no pretest experience exhibited decreased responding as a function of deprivation, while following pretest experience deprivation Ss’ operant level. In addition, operant level fluctuated widely over sessions. It was concluded that the present results integrated the findings of other investigators working on operant level. / Arts, Faculty of / Psychology, Department of / Graduate

I attempt in this paper to develop a theory of paternalism which indicates when and why a paternalistic action is justified. In the first two chapters I consider the extant theories on this subject: in the first chapter I develop a utilitarian theory of the justification of paternalistic interference, and in the second chapter I consider various non-utilitarian theories that have been offered. Although I do not agree with the utilitarian analysis of rights, and so with their rationale for paternalistic intervention, I argue that such a theory does provide a strong presumption against such interference. Nor do I find any of the non-utilitarian theories satisfactory, although they each contain certain important insights. In the third chapter I develop my own theory. I claim that there is really only a problem in justifying paternalism when the subject has the prima facie right to do what he proposes to do. It is therefore necessary to determine under what conditions any prima facie right can be interfered with. From results of this investigation I conclude that consent, either tacit or explicit, prior or subsequent to interference, is the key to the justification of paternalistic interference. More specifically, I argue that consent, or the disposition to consent upon receipt of factual information or correction of a logical error, is a necessary condition for justification, and that it is also sufficient except where it is gained by "warping" the subject's preferences, or where it is due to lack of relevant information, or a logical error. / Arts, Faculty of / Philosophy, Department of / Graduate

Thesis (M.A.)--West Virginia University, 2003. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains vii, 68 p. : ill. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 46-50).

A set of stimuli comprises an equivalence class if the three relations of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity are present (Sidman & Tailby, 1982). Although behaviorological researchers have suggested that the training and testing sequence may affect equivalence class formation, this has not been studied directly. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of two different arrangements of training and testing on the formation of classes of equivalent stimuli. Five middle school students were taught eight conditional discriminations with four classes of stimuli, three stimuli per class (A1B1C1, A2B2C2, A3B3C3, and A4B4C4). A fifth class of stimuli, A5B5C5, was used as control stimuli. Experimental stimuli consisted of five chemical elements, with three attributes per element (name, symbol, and atomic number). The formation of three-member equivalence classes was evaluated by testing students for symmetrical and transitive conditional discriminations involved in the training relations. Two phase arrangements were used with each student. Phase Arrangement I (incorporating n-stage testing) was as follows: (a) AM; (b) B1C1; (c) A1B1 and B1C1 mixed together; (d) test (A1C1, C1A1, A5C5, and C5A5); (e) AM; (f) B2C2; (g) A2B2 and B2C2 mixed together; (h) test (A2C2, C2A2, A5C5, and C5A5); (i) AM, B1C1, AM, and B2C2 all mixed together; and (j) test (AlCl, C1A1, A2C2, C2A2, A5C5, and C5A5). Phase Arrangement II was similar, except that test phases (d) and (h) were eliminated. Stimulus classes A3B3C3 and A4B4C4 were arranged analogously to provide a counterbalanced design. One student performed equally well on equivalence tests with both phase arrangements. Two students performed slightly better on equivalence tests with intermediate testing. One student's performance on equivalence tests demonstrated no equivalence class formation with n-stage testing and much more accurate, although varied, responding with intermediate testing. A 5th student who did not meet the pretest requirements for the study was nevertheless allowed to complete the experimental tasks because his test results were unusual. His first test score was far below chance level, but scores improved with subsequent testing. The results suggest that an intermediate testing arrangement may decrease intersubject variability and, for some individuals, may improve equivalence test performance. / Department of Special Education

No description available.

Typescript. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1985. / Bibliography: leaves 149-156. / Microfilm. / xi, 156 leaves ill. 29 cm

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1981. / Description based on print version record. Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 144-154).

M.A. (Clinical Psychology) / This study traces the description of Paradox as a therapeutic measure by numerous therapists since Erikson first used the paradox in the form of positive reframing during the thirties. Major theoretical definitions of the paradoxical communication are reviewed. The therapeutic Paradoxical intervention is categorized into a series of relatively circumscribed intervention strategies, each of which shares theoretical similarities but emphasizes different aspects of the paradox. The paradoxical intervention has been utilized in a number of ways depending on the epistemological premise of the therapist, and the theory of change accepted within this epistemology. The study initially discusses the paradoxical intervention as designed as an isolated intervention within a linear cause and effect paradigm. Within a context of power and control, the paradoxical intervention was used by therapists of the Mental Research Institute (Watzlavick et a1. 1977) to emphasize and maintain the hierarchical distinction between the therapists and patient. The Strategic approaches including those of Fisch, Weakland and Segal (1982) Haley (1963) and Papp (1979) involve direct and planned influence of persons and are based, in large part, on an analysis of the power relationships that they aim to modify (Golann 1988.) According to Bogdan (1982) the Milan approach even with its systemic circular approach, involves the use of the paradoxical intervention as a means of simultaneously influencing the behavior of all the members of a family. The paradoxical intervention is discussed within a circular cybernetic paradigm following De Shazer's (1982) explanation of a therapeutic intervention. De Shazer (1982) sees the paradoxical intervention as one type of intervention within a pattern of isomorphic interventions, and stresses the necessity for this intervention to follow the family interaction patterns. De Shazer developed the concept of Isomorphism and used this as a prescriptive tool for guiding the therapists efforts to promote change, by intervening from a different angle, based on the description of family patterns. Where the family's interactive patterns are paradoxical in nature, a paradoxical intervention would be appropriate. With this emphasis on a more encompassing pattern of interventions based on patterns of client-family interactions, the significance of the feedback processes within the relationship between therapist and client in the design and utilization of the paradoxical intervention is stressed. The study concludes that the psychotherapeutic relationship between the therapist system and the client system can be seen to contextualize and provide meaning to the paradoxical intervention.

No description available.

No description available.