Comparison of tendency-oriented perimetry and dynamic strategy in octopus perimetry as a screening tool in a clinical setting: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the results of tendency-oriented perimetry (TOP) and a dynamic strategy in octopus perimetry as screening methods in clinical practice. DESIGN: A prospective single centre observational case series was performed. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: In a newly opened general ophthalmologic practice 89 consecutive patients (171 eyes) with a clinical indication for octopus static perimetry testing (ocular hypertension or suspicious optic nerve cupping) were examined prospectively with TOP and a dynamic strategy. The visual fields were graded by 3 masked observers as normal, borderline or abnormal without any further clinical information. RESULTS: 83% eyes showed the same result for both strategies. In 14% there was a small difference (with one visual field being abnormal or normal, the other being borderline). In only 2.9% of the eyes (5 cases) was there a contradictory result. In 4 out of 5 cases the dynamic visual field was abnormal and TOP was normal. 4 of these cases came back for a second examination. In all 4 the follow-up examination showed a normal second dynamic visual field. CONCLUSIONS: Octopus static perimetry using a TOP strategy is a fast, patient-friendly and very reliable screening tool for the general ophthalmological practice. We found no false-negative results in our series.

[The child with a bleeding tendency]

In this review some basic aspects of the clinical presentation, the laboratory testing and the management of a child with a bleeding tendency are discussed. It should help the physician in making the decision whether a laboratory examination in a child with a history of bleedings is necessary or not. In addition, the most frequent mechanisms for a defective hemostasis are explained.

Unresolved Problems with the "I", the "A" and the "T": Logical and Psychometric Critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT)

The Implicit Association Test (IAT) had already gained the status of a prominent assessment procedure before its psychometric properties and underlying task structure were understood. The present critique addresses five major problems that arise when the IAT is used for diagnostic inferences: (1) the asymmetry of causal and diagnostic inferences; (2) the viability of the underlying association model; (3) the lack of a testable model underlying IAT-based inferences; (4) the difficulties of interpreting difference scores; and (5) the susceptibility of the IAT to deliberate faking and strategic processing. Based on a theoretical reflection of these issues, and a comprehensive survey of published IAT studies, it is concluded that a number of uncontrolled factors can produce (or reduce) significant IAT scores independently of the personality attribute that is supposed to be captured by the IAT procedure.

To boldly go: individual differences in boldness influence migratory tendency

Partial migration, whereby only a fraction of the population migrates, is thought to be the most common type of migration in the animal kingdom, and can have important ecological and evolutionary consequences. Despite this, the factors that influence which individuals migrate and which remain resident are poorly understood. Recent work has shown that consistent individual differences in personality traits in animals can be ecologically important, but field studies integrating personality traits with migratory behaviour are extremely rare. In this study, we investigate the influence of individual boldness, an important personality trait, upon the migratory propensity of roach, a freshwater fish, over two consecutive migration seasons. We assay and individually tag 460 roach and show that boldness influences migratory propensity, with bold individuals being more likely to migrate than shy fish. Our data suggest that an extremely widespread personality trait in animals can have significant ecological consequences via influencing individual-level migratory behaviour.

Logical omniscience as infeasibility

Logical theories for representing knowledge are often plagued by the so-called Logical Omniscience Problem. The problem stems from the clash between the desire to model rational agents, which should be capable of simple logical inferences, and the fact that any logical inference, however complex, almost inevitably consists of inference steps that are simple enough. This contradiction points to the fruitlessness of trying to solve the Logical Omniscience Problem qualitatively if the rationality of agents is to be maintained. We provide a quantitative solution to the problem compatible with the two important facets of the reasoning agent: rationality and resource boundedness. More precisely, we provide a test for the logical omniscience problem in a given formal theory of knowledge. The quantitative measures we use are inspired by the complexity theory. We illustrate our framework with a number of examples ranging from the traditional implicit representation of knowledge in modal logic to the language of justification logic, which is capable of spelling out the internal inference process. We use these examples to divide representations of knowledge into logically omniscient and not logically omniscient, thus trying to determine how much information about the reasoning process needs to be present in a theory to avoid logical omniscience.