Do incompatible arguments cause extensive processing in the evaluation of arguments? The role of congruence between argument compatibility and argument quality.

Previous studies have demonstrated that arguments incompatible with prior beliefs are subjected to more extensive refutational processing, scrutinized longer, and judged to be weaker than arguments compatible with prior beliefs. However, this study suggests whether extensive processing is implemented when evaluating arguments is not decided by argument compatibility, but by congruence between two evaluating tendencies elicited by both argument compatibility and argument quality. Consistent with this perspective, the results of two experiments show that relative to congruent arguments, participants judged arguments eliciting incongruent evaluating tendencies as less extreme in strength, spent more time, and felt more hesitant generating strength judgments for them. The results also show that it is mainly incongruent arguments, not congruent arguments, whose strength ratings were more closely associated with the perceived personal importance of the issue, which intensified the tendency to evaluate arguments depending on argument compatibility. These results suggest that it is the incongruity between argument compatibility and argument quality, and not simply the argument compatibility, that plays a more important role in activating an extensive processing in the evaluation of arguments.

CDX2 protein expression compared to alcian blue staining in the evaluation of esophageal intestinal metaplasia.

AIM: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of CDX2 and alcian blue (AB) pH 2.5 staining in identifying esophageal intestinal metaplasia. METHODS: One hundred and ninty-nine biopsies from 186 patients were retrospectively reviewed and categorized as Barrett's esophagus (BE) (n = 108); non-Barrett's esophagus (NBE) (n = 48); columnar blue cells (CB) and esophageal glands (EG) (n = 43). The biopsies were stained with AB and immunostained for CDX2 using a mouse monoclonal antibody from Biogenex (clone CDX2-88) and the Ventana Discovery X automated immunostainer. The positive and negative predictive value of each group was used to determine the predictive power of CDX2 and AB in diagnosing intestinal metaplasia. RESULTS: All of the 108 BE biopsies (100%) were positive for AB and 102 of them (94.4%) were positive for CDX2. The six BE patients (5.6%) who failed to stain with CDX2 were found to have lost the focus of intestinal metaplasia upon deeper sectioning for immunostaining. Both AB and CDX2 were negative in 43 out of 48 (89.6%) NBE cases. Five NBE patients (10.4%) were falsely positive for AB due to the presence of EG and CB in these biopsies. These cases were all CDX2 negative. In addition, 5 AB negative NBE were found to be CDX2 positive. Based on these results the CDX2 immunostain had similar sensitivity but higher specificity (100% vs about 91%) than AB in detecting intestinal type metaplasia in these samples. Our data shows that CDX2 has a better PPV in detecting intestinal metaplasia as compared to AB (95.6% vs 71.5%, respectively). CONCLUSION: CDX2 has a better positive predictive value than AB in detecting intestinal metaplasia. CDX2 may be useful when challenged by gastro-esophageal biopsies containing mimikers of BE.