The doctrine that the Content of the conclusion of a deductively valid argument is included in the Content of its premises, taken jointly, is a familiar one. It has important consequences for the question of what value valid arguments possess, since it indicates the poverty of three traditional answers: that arguments may and should be used as instruments of persuasion, that they may and should be used as instruments of justification; and that they may and should be used to advance knowledge. The truth is, however, that in each of these cases the argument has only a managerial role and, if there is any work done, it is the premises that do it. It will be maintained that this point has little force against the critical rationalist answer, which I shall defend, that the principal purpose of deductive reasoning from an assemblage of premises is the exploration of their Content, facilitating their criticism and rejection. That said, the main aim of the present paper is not to promote critical rationalism but to consider some published objections to the doctrine that a statement asserts every statement that is validly deducible from it. The alleged counterexamples to be considered fall roughly into two groups: statements that emerge with time from a rich mathematical or empirical theory, but were originally unformulated and are deducible from the theory only in a non-trivial way (Frederick 2011, 2014; Williamson 2012); and statements, notably disjunctions, that are easily formulated and are deducible from a theory in a trivial way (Schurz & Weingartner 1987; Mura 1990, 2008; Gemes 1994; Yablo 2014). Each of these counterexamples will be evaluated and dismissed.

Introduction: University students are a vulnerable group mental health problems. The aim of this study to design, develop and validate a training self-esteem by McKay and Fanning and its effectiveness on emotional repression in students Methods: The present research was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, cognitive techniques of McKay and Fanning (2016), self-esteem sessions were developed. Then, 8 psychology experts determined the Content validity of the sessions. In the second stage, a semi-experimental design with pre-test, post-testand with a control group and follow-up 2 months was used. The statistical population was female students at Hadith College of Tehran City in the winter of 2024 and was evaluated by twostage sampling. In the first stage, screening was done based on subjective sampling. In the second stage, based on the simple random method, 30 people were selected from among female students with the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study and were randomly replaced in an experimental group (15 people) and a control group (15 people). The self-esteem sessions were administered to the experimental group for 16 sessions, and after 2 months, was followed up. The self-esteem sessions was administered to the experimental group for 16 sessions, and after 2 month, was followed up. Data was collected using Weinberger adjustment inventory short form (WAI-SF) of Weinberger & Schwartz (1990). Data analysis was performed using SPSS-28 software with analysis of variance with repeated measures and Bonferroni. Results: The results indicated that self-esteem sessions have acceptable Content validity. Furthermore, the results of training intervention showed that tarning self-esteem significantly reduced the distress (F=18.306 and p-value =0.001), inhibition (F=0.46 and p-value=0.001), defensiveness (F=11.89 and p-value =0.001) and total score emotional repression (F=93.90 and p-value =0.001) and this effect was significant in the follow-up phase. Conclusion: Tarning self-esteem can be considered as a valid and effective program for reduced the symptoms of emotional repression by university counseling centers and psychological services for female students.

Background: Measuring Content validity of instruments are important. This type of validity can help to ensure construct validity and give confidence to the readers and researchers about instruments. Content validity refers to the degree that the instrument covers the Content that it is supposed to measure. For Content validity two judgments are necessary: the measurable extent of each item for defining the traits and the set of items that represents all aspects of the traits. Purpose: To develop Content valid scale for assessing experience with computer usage. Methods: First a review of 2 volumes of International Journal of Nursing Studies, was conducted with only1 article out of 13 which documented Content validity did so by a 4-point Content validity index (CVI) and the judgment of 3 experts. Then a scale with 38 items was developed. The experts were asked to rate each item based on relevance, clarity, simplicity and ambiguity on the four-point scale. Content validity Index (CVI) for each item was determined. Result: Of 38 items, those with CVI over 0.75 remained and the rest were discarded resulting to 25-item scale. Conclusion: Although documenting Content validity of an instrument may seem expensive in terms of time and human resources, its importance warrants greater attention when a valid assessment instrument is to be developed.