Young Children's Understanding of Changes in Their Mental States

3-year-old children have difficulty reporting their past false beliefs. We investigated their ability to remember and report other types of past mental state, in particular, pretenses, images, perceptions, desires, and intentions. In a series of tasks, children were placed in one mental state, that state was changed, and they were asked to report the initial state. 4-year-olds were generally able to report all their past mental states, including beliefs. 3-year-olds were able to report past pretenses, images, and perceptions extremely well. They had great difficulty reporting past beliefs. Reporting past desires and intentions was more difficult than reporting pretenses, images, and perceptions, but slightly less difficult than reporting beliefs. The evidence suggests that 3-year-olds have difficulty understanding the nature of representation.     

Orthographic processing and visual sequential memory in unexpectedly poor spellers

Does unexpectedly poor spelling in adults result from inferior visual sequential memory? In one experiment, unexpectedly poor spellers performed significantly worse than better spellers in the immediate reproduction of sequences of visual symbols, but in a second experiment, the effect was not replicated. Poor spellers were also no worse at the immediate recognition of symbol sequences. Overall, the results indicate that inferior visual memory is not characteristic of unexpectedly poor spellers. However, they do have less efficient orthographic processing skill: they were significantly slower and more error prone than better spellers at classifying both regularly and strangely spelt words, as well as at detecting letter transpositions in long words. They can thus be considered as subtly worse word readers than better spellers. While the findings question the notion of unexpectedly poor spelling in relation to normal adults, they provide confirmation of the intimate relationship between reading and spelling processes.     

Navigating privacy tensions when responding to online aggression at postsecondary institutions

Postsecondary institutions have a legal responsibility to ensure that students have access to a safe learning environment. While institutions adopt policies and hire administrators to protect students from harm, many are underprepared to support students when these harmful incidents happen online. This is of increased concern now that online aggression is pervasive across universities worldwide. While faculty, administrators and students agree that online aggression is a significant issue and that institutions ought to provide prevention and response services, there is concern that these efforts might violate privacy norms. We used the theory of privacy as contextual integrity (CI) to explore the tensions that postsecondary students and staff perceive regarding student privacy when responding to incidents of online aggression. To do so, we conducted focus groups with undergraduate students and student affairs administrators from a Historically Black College and University (HBCU) in the Mid-Atlantic USA. Our analysis surfaced three considerations that inform students' and staff's decision to report an incident of online aggression: their closeness to the person making the post, their perception of the online post content as a real threat and their knowledge of an authority figure who could help resolve the situation. We used CI theory to explain how these considerations can inform institutional policy, practice and future research.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic

• Online aggression is a pervasive issue at postsecondary institutions worldwide that can contribute to psychological, academic and developmental issues.
• Postsecondary students and staff are unsure of how to respond to incidents of online aggression.
• There is a gap in policies and procedures for responding to online aggression at postsecondary institutions.

What this paper adds

• A novel use of Nissenbaum's (2010) theory of contextual integrity to understand students' and staff's perceptions of privacy.
• Students' and staff's decisions to intervene or report an online aggression incident are determined by their relationship to the perpetrator, the severity of the social media post and their knowledge of who to tell on campus.
• Students and staff are reluctant to inform the police out of fear of violence against the perpetrator.

Implications for practice and/or policy

• Raise awareness about responding to online aggression incidents.
• Implement online bystander intervention training programs to increase awareness and self-efficacy to intervene in unclear situations.
• Develop clear policies regarding online aggression, as well as a trustworthy procedure for how to respond.