Relationship of the AAHPER Youth Fitness Test to Total Dynamic Strength

Abstract

One hundred high school girls (N = 20 per group) were initially given 10 trials on the Bachman ladder-climb task; each group was given a different length of lay-off (10 min., or 1 day, or 1 week, or 4 weeks, or 13 weeks) before being retested with another 10 trials. Correlations between individual differences across the lay-off decreased as the length of the lay-off period increased (from r = .89 to r = .69). Correlations between adjacent trials remained relatively constant at r =.90 as practice progressed. As remoteness increased, the relation decreased regularly, from r =.92 to r =.68. Individuals became increasingly different from each other as a result of motor learning; intraindividual variance did not change appreciably.     

Putting Measurement First: Understanding ‘Grit’ in Educational Policy and Practice

Non‐cognitive dispositions have recently become psychological constructs of interest in the education, economics, philosophy, sociology, and psychology literature. In this article, I draw the distinction between property‐first and measurement‐first approaches to understanding the meaning of a particular non‐cognitive disposition theoretical term, ‘grit’, as well as the relationship between this term and its corresponding measurement procedure. I argue that, depending on which approach one takes, one is confronted with different norms for judging the success of any disposition‐measurement procedure pair, meaning that the difference in philosophical approaches may have practical import. I argue that the measurement‐first approach is the one educators and educational policy‐makers ought to adopt towards grit as it is less likely to lead to over‐valuing grit in situations where a gritty disposition may be harmful, better respects scientific virtues and values, and provides a clearer understanding of grit than the property‐first approach.     

Brain simulation and personhood: a concern with the Human Brain Project

The Human Brain Project (HBP) is a massive interdisciplinary project involving hundreds of researchers across more than eighty institutions that seeks to leverage cutting edge information and communication technologies to create a multi-level brain simulation platform (BSP). My worry is that some brain models running on the BSP will be persons. If this is right then not only will the in silico experiments the HBP envisions being carried on the BSP be unethical the mere termination of certain brain models running on the BSP will be unethical. To assess the possible personhood of certain brain simulations I consider John Searle’s critique of strong AI. In arguing that Searle’s critique fails I conclude that the HBP must tread carefully and devise strict rules on how research using the BSP ought to proceed.     

Postural Sway of Human Infants while Standing in Light and Dark

Postural sway was measured in 12-14-month-old human infants and in adults while they were standing in the light and dark. Spectral density analyses conducted on all frequencies, at specific frequencies, and for individual subjects showed that infants generally did not sway significantly more in the dark than in the light, whereas adults did. For example, infants' dark/light sway proportions were 1.12 and 1.21 for the anterior-posterior and lateral dimensions, respectively, compared to adult values of 2.23 and 3.43 for one-footed stance, and 1.43 and 2.13 for two-footed stance. A statistical power analysis indicated that if the dark/light proportions for infants had been comparable to those for adults, significant differences could have been detected. These findings indicate that the early regulation of standing posture does not depend on the continuous availability of visual information.