The story of some: Everyday pragmatic inference by children and adults

The statement, some elephants have trunks, is logically true but pragmatically infelicitous. Whilst some is logically consistent with all, it is often pragmatically interpreted as precluding all. In Experiments 1 and 2, we show that with pragmatically impoverished materials, sensitivity to the pragmatic implicature associated with some is apparent earlier in development than has previously been found. Amongst 8-year-old children, we observed much greater sensitivity to the implicature in pragmatically enriched contexts. Finally, in Experiment 3, we found that amongst adults, logical responses to infelicitous some statements take longer to produce than do logical responses to felicitous some statements, and that working memory capacity predicts the tendency to give logical responses to the former kind of statement. These results suggest that some adults develop the ability to inhibit a pragmatic response in favour of a logical answer. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of pragmatic inference.

The suppression of q card selections: Evidence for deductive inference in Wason's Selection Task

The results of three experiments investigating the role of deductive inference in Wason's selection task are reported. In Experiment 1, participants received either a standard one-rule problem or a task containing a second rule, which specified an alternative antecedent. Both groups of participants were asked to select those cards that they considered were necessary to test whether the rule common to both problems was true or false. The results showed a significant suppression of q card selections in the two-rule condition. In addition there was weak evidence for both decreased p selection and increased not-q selection. In Experiment 2 we again manipulated number of rules and found suppression of q card selections only. Finally, in Experiment 3 we compared one- and two-rule conditions with a two-rule condition where the second rule specified two alternative antecedents in the form of a disjunction. The q card selections were suppressed in both of the two-rule conditions but there was no effect of whether the second rule contained one or two alternative antecedents. We argue that our results support the claim that people make inferences about the unseen side of the cards when engaging with the indicative selection task.

Revealing differences in gene network inference algorithms on the network level by ensemble methods

Motivation: The inference of regulatory networks from large-scale expression data holds great promise because of the potentially causal interpretation of these networks. However, due to the difficulty to establish reliable methods based on observational data there is so far only incomplete knowledge about possibilities and limitations of such inference methods in this context.

Results: In this article, we conduct a statistical analysis investigating differences and similarities of four network inference algorithms, ARACNE, CLR, MRNET and RN, with respect to local network-based measures. We employ ensemble methods allowing to assess the inferability down to the level of individual edges. Our analysis reveals the bias of these inference methods with respect to the inference of various network components and, hence, provides guidance in the interpretation of inferred regulatory networks from expression data. Further, as application we predict the total number of regulatory interactions in human B cells and hypothesize about the role of Myc and its targets regarding molecular information processing.

'Murder or Mercy?' an innovative module helping UK medical students to articulate their own ethical standpoints regarding end-of-life decisions

Objectives This student selected component (SSC) was designed to equip United Kingdom (UK) medical students to respond ethically and with sensitivity to requests they might receive as qualified doctors in regard to euthanasia and assisted dying. The aim was to expose students to relevant opinions and experiences and to provide opportunities to explore and justify their own views and rehearse ethical decision making in a safe learning environment. Method The module is delivered by specialists from a number of disciplines including law, theology, medicine and nursing, each providing students with a working knowledge allowing them to actively discuss cases, articulate their own views and practise ethical reasoning through group and individual study. Visits to local intensive care units, palliative care wards and hospices are integrated effectively with theory. Student assessment comprises a dissertation, student-led debate and reflective commentary. Module impact was evaluated by analysis of student coursework and a questionnaire. Results Students found the content stimulating and relevant to their future career and agreed that the module was well-structured and that learning outcomes were achieved. They greatly appreciated the clinical context provided by the visits and opportunities to apply ethical reasoning to real cases and to debate ethical issues with peers. Students reported an increased discernment of the ethical and legal position and practical considerations and a greater awareness of the range of professional and lay viewpoints held. Student perceptions were confirmed on analysis of their submitted coursework. Many participants were less strongly in favour of euthanasia and assisted dying on module completion than at the outset but all felt better equipped to justify their own viewpoint and to respond appropriately to patient requests. Conclusions The multi-disciplinary nature of this course is helpful in preparing students to deal effectively and sensitively with ethical dilemmas they will encounter in their medical career. Use of an integrated, learner-centred approach equips students to actively engage with their peers in discussion of such issues and to formulate and defend their own position.