PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

T C Callahan

Publications and source records attributed to T C Callahan.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

High-probability stimulus control topographies with delayed S+ onset in a simultaneous discrimination procedure.

Experimenters and teachers use discrimination learning procedures to encourage reliable attending to stimulus differences defined as relevant for their purposes. Put another way, the goal of discrimination training is to establish high-probability stimulus control topographies that are coherent with experimenter or teacher specifications. The present research was conducted to investigate a novel procedure for encouraging stimulus control topography coherence. Participants were 13 adolescents with severe intellectual handicaps. During an initial Condition A, all were exposed to a simultaneous discrimination procedure. Participants could select a form alternating with a black field (S+) or an identical form that did not alternate (S-). Accuracy scores were typically low, and there was little evidence of coherent stimulus control topographies. Subsequently, the procedure was changed. During Condition B, every trial initially presented two identical nonalternating S- forms (Trial State 1). If the participant made no selection for 5 s, one of the forms began to alternate with the black field, and he or she could make the S+/S- discrimination (Trial State 2). Selections during Trial State I prolonged the delay to Trial State 2 until there had been no response for 5 s. During Condition B, S+/S- discrimination accuracy scores improved rapidly and markedly for most participants. Reinstating Condition A often resulted in diminished accuracy scores. This study thus (a) demonstrated a novel procedure for encouraging stimulus control topography coherence and (b) provided support for the interpretation that intermediate accuracy scores may be due to different topographies of stimulus control that co-occur in the same discriminative baseline.

Adolescent↗

Why alternative medicine cannot be evidence-based.

The concept of evidence-based medicine (EBM) has been widely adopted by orthodox Western medicine. Proponents of EBM have argued that complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities ought to be subjected to rigorous, controlled clinical trials in order to assess their efficacy. However, this does not represent a scientific necessity, but rather is a philosophical demand: promoters of EBM seek to establish their particular epistemology as the primary arbiter of all medical knowledge. This claim is problematic. The methods for obtaining knowledge in a healing art must be coherent with that art's underlying understanding and theory of illness. Thus, the method of EBM and the knowledge gained from population-based studies may not be the best way to assess certain CAM practices, which view illness and healing within the context of a particular individual only. In addition, many alternative approaches center on the notion of non-measurable but perceptible aspects of illness and health (e.g., Qi) that preclude study within the current framework of controlled clinical trials. Still, the methods of developing knowledge within CAM currently have limitations and are subject to bias and varied interpretation. CAM must develop and defend a rational and coherent method for assessing causality and efficacy, though not necessarily one based on the results of controlled clinical trials. Orthodox medicine should consider abandoning demands that CAM become evidence-based, at least as "evidence" is currently narrowly defined, but insist instead upon a more complete and coherent description and defense of the alternative epistemic methods and tools of these disciplines.

Complementary Therapies↗