Deficits in Implicit Attention to Social Signals in Schizophrenia and High Risk Groups: Behavioural Evidence from a New Illusion

Background An increasing body of evidence suggests that the apparent social impairments observed in schizophrenia may arise from deficits in social cognitive processing capacities. The ability to process basic social cues, such as gaze direction and biological motion, effortlessly and implicitly is thought to be a prerequisite for establishing successful social interactions and for construing a sense of "social intuition." However, studies that address the ability to effortlessly process basic social cues in schizophrenia are lacking. Because social cognitive processing deficits may be part of the genetic vulnerability for schizophrenia, we also investigated two groups that have been shown to be at increased risk of developing schizophrenia-spectrum pathology: first-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients and men with Klinefelter syndrome (47,XXY). Results We compared 28 patients with schizophrenia, 29 siblings of patients with schizophrenia, and 29 individuals with Klinefelter syndrome with 46 matched healthy control subjects on a new paradigm. This paradigm measures one's susceptibility for a bias in distance estimation between two agents that is induced by the implicit processing of gaze direction and biological motion conveyed by these agents. Compared to control subjects, patients with schizophrenia, as well as siblings of patients and Klinefelter men, showed a lack of influence of social cues on their distance judgments. Conclusions We suggest that the insensitivity for social cues is a cognitive aspect of schizophrenia that may be seen as an endophenotype as it appears to be present both in relatives who are at increased genetic risk and in a genetic disorder at risk for schizophrenia-spectrum psychopathology. These social cue-processing deficits could contribute, in part, to the difficulties in higher order social cognitive tasks and, hence, to decreased social competence that has been observed in these groups

Aligning the Goals of Learning Analytics with its Research Scholarship: An Open Peer Commentary Approach

To promote cross-community dialogue on matters of significance within the field of learning analytics], we as editors-in- chief of the Journal of Learning Analytics have introduced a section for papers that are open to peer commentary. The first of these papers, “A LAK of Direction: Misalignment Between the Goals of Learning Analytics and its Research Scholarship” by Motz et al. (2023), appeared in the journal’s early access section in March 2023, a few days before the start of the 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK ’23). “A LAK of Direction” takes as its starting point the definition of learning analytics used in the call for papers of the first LAK conference (LAK ’11) and used since then by the Society for Learning Analytics Research (SoLAR): “Learning analytics is the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data about learners and their contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs” (Long & Siemens, 2011, p. 24). Following the conference, an invitation to submit proposals for commentaries on the paper was released, and 12 of these proposals were accepted. This paper brings those commentaries togethe

Aligning the Goals of Learning Analytics with its Research Scholarship: An Open Peer Commentary Approach

To promote cross-community dialogue on matters of significance within the field of learning analytics (LA), we as editors-in-chief of the Journal of Learning Analytics (JLA) have introduced a section for papers that are open to peer commentary. An invitation to submit proposals for commentaries on the paper was released, and 12 of these proposals were accepted. The 26 authors of the accepted commentaries are based in Europe, North America, and Australia. They range in experience from PhD students and early-career researchers to some of the longest-standing, most senior members of the learning analytics community. This paper brings those commentaries together, and we recommend reading it as a companion piece to the original paper by Motz et al. (2023), which also appears in this issu

Straylight Effects with Aging and Lens Extraction

Purpose: To assess possible gains and losses in straylight values among the population to consider straylight as added benefit of lens extraction. Design: In this cross-sectional design, data from a multicenter study on visual function in automobile drivers were analyzed. Methods: On both eyes of 2,422 subjects, visual acuity (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] in steps of 0.02 log units), straylight on the retina (psychophysical compensation comparison method), and lens opacity (slit-lamp scoring using the Lens Opacities Classification System III [LOCS III] system) were determined. Three groups were defined: 220 pseudophakic eyes, 3,182 noncataractous eyes (average LOCS III score, 3.0). Results: Noncataractous straylight values increases strongly with age as: log(s) = constant + log(1 + (age / 65)4), doubling by the age of 65 years, and tripling by the age of 77 years. Population standard deviation around this age norm was approximately 0.10 log units. The cataract eyes (in this active driver group) had relatively mild straylight increase. In pseudophakia, straylight values may be very good, better even than in the noncataract group. Visual acuity and straylight were found to vary quite independently. Conclusions: Lens extraction holds promise not only to improve on the condition of the cataract eye, but also to improve on the age-normal eye. Lens extraction potentially reverses the strong age increase in straylight value, quite independently from visual acuity

Data from: Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

This record contains the underlying research data for the publication "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science" and the full-text is available from: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/5257Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams

Reproducibility Project: Psychology

Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available