General and relationship-based perceptions of social support: are two constructs better than one?

Two hypotheses derived from a theory of perceived social support were investigated: (a) relationship-based perceptions of social support are distinct from general perceptions of support, and (b) measures of each construct contribute uniquely to the prediction of loneliness. Ninety-four male and 116 female undergraduates completed measures of loneliness and general perceived social support and the Quality of Relationships Inventory, a new instrument to assess relationship-based perceptions of social support, conflict, and depth in specific relationships. General and relationship-based perceptions of social support were found to be related, but empirically distinct, constructs. Relationship-based perceptions of support and conflict from mothers and friends each added to the prediction of loneliness after considering the contribution of general perceived social support. Implications of these findings for understanding the perceived social support construct are discussed.     

Are two heads better than one? Peer support and children's eyewitness reports

This study examined the effects of peer support on children's event reports. In Experiment 1, 48 children aged between 5 and 10 years who had been scheduled for a school dental visit involving an invasive procedure were interviewed about it 2–4 days later. Children were interviewed alone, with an informed peer (who had also recently had a dental appointment), or with an uninformed peer. Anxiety was assessed both prior to the dental appointment and at the time of the recall interview. Peer support did not influence children's anxiety or the amount or the accuracy of information reported in prompted recall. However, younger children interviewed alone were significantly more likely to be misled than those interviewed in the presence of a support child. In Experiment 2, children aged between 5 and 7 years took part in a neutral event contrived for the study. They were interviewed about it 3 days later, either alone or with an informed or uninformed support child present. The support child was encouraged to take an active part in the interview and to help the target child to describe what happened. Peer support did not influence the recall of the target child in either prompted recall or in response to questions. However, together the target and informed support children reported more information than did children interviewed alone or with uninformed support. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When is one head better than two? Interdependent information in group decision making

Research on information exchange in group decision making has frequently assumed that information items have independent meanings. Relaxing this assumption raises new issues and presents new possibilities. In the experiment presented here, dyads worked on hidden profile decision tasks in which pairs of unshared information items had interdependent meanings. Dyad decisions were more likely to be accurate when each pair of interdependent items was allocated to a single member (a “connected” hidden profile) than when each pair of interdependent items was separated between the two members (a “disconnected” hidden profile). These information distributions influenced the degree to which dyads considered unshared information. Cognitive load was manipulated, and it impaired decision makers’ ability to identify connections among interdependent information items. The differentiated distribution of information inherent in transactive memory systems moderated the negative effects of cognitive load on dyad decisions.     

Measuring consciousness: Is one measure better than the other?

What is the best way of assessing the extent to which people are aware of a stimulus? Here, using a masked visual identification task, we compared three measures of subjective awareness: The Perceptual Awareness Scale (PAS), through which participants are asked to rate the clarity of their visual experience; confidence ratings (CR), through which participants express their confidence in their identification decisions, and Post-decision wagering (PDW), in which participants place a monetary wager on their decisions. We conducted detailed explorations of the relationships between awareness and identification performance, looking to determine (1) which scale best correlates with performance, and (2) whether we can detect performance in the absence of awareness and how the scales differ from each other in terms of revealing such unconscious processing. Based on these findings we discuss whether perceptual awareness should be considered graded or dichotomous. Results showed that PAS showed a much stronger performance-awareness correlation than either CR or PDW, particularly for low stimulus intensities. In general, all scales indicated above-chance performance when participants claimed not to have seen anything. However, such above-chance performance only showed when we also observed a correlation between awareness and performance. Thus (1) PAS seems to be the most exhaustive measure of awareness, and (2) we find support for above-chance performance in the absence of subjective awareness, but such unconscious knowledge only contributes to performance when we observe conscious knowledge as well. Similarities and differences between scales are discussed in the light of consciousness theories and response strategies.     

Recognising faces seen alone or with others: why are two heads worse than one?

The ability to identify an unfamiliar target face from an identity lineup declines when the target is accompanied by a second face during visual encoding. This two-face disadvantage is still little studied and its basis remains poorly understood. We investigated several possible explanations for this phenomenon. Experiments 1 and 2 varied the number of potential targets (1 or 2) and the number of faces in a lineup (5 or 10) to explore if this effect arises from the number of identity comparisons that need to be made to detect a target in a lineup. We also explored if this effect arises from an uncertainty concerning which is the to-be-identified target in two-face displays, by cueing the relevant face during encoding. In experiment 3 we then examined whether the two-face disadvantage reflects the depth of face encoding or a memory effect. The results show that this effect arises from the additional comparisons that are necessary to compare two potential targets to an identity lineup when memory demands are minimised (experiment 1), but it reflects a difficulty in remembering several faces when targets and lineups cannot be viewed simultaneously (experiments 2 and 3). However, in both cases the two-face disadvantage could not be eliminated fully by cueing the target. This hints at a further possible locus for this effect, which might reflect perceptual interference during the initial encoding of the target. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Differentiating categorical and dimensional data with taxometric analysis: are two variables better than none?

Taxometric analyses have proven helpful for distinguishing categorical and dimensional data. Many taxometric procedures require at least 3 variables for analysis. What if a construct is defined by only 2 conceptually nonredundant characteristics or a data set contains only 2 empirically nonredundant variables? In Study 1, we performed extensive simulations to determine whether informative results can be obtained when only 2 variables are available for taxometric analysis. The mean above minus below a cut (MAMBAC) and maximum slope (MAXSLOPE) procedures, used with parallel analyses of comparison data, successfully differentiated categorical and dimensional structure. With just 2 variables, it seems especially important that indicators vary across as many distinct values as possible and that investigators obtain as large a sample as possible. Additional findings address questions about the most effective way to implement taxometric analyses. In Study 2, the potential utility of 2-variable taxometric analysis is illustrated using data on proactive and reactive childhood aggression, where the results provided strong support for dimensional structure. As long as high-quality data are available, it appears that one can have confidence in the results of taxometric analyses performed with only 2 variables.     

Are two heuristics better than one? The fluency and distinctiveness heuristics in recognition memory

Four experiments were conducted to test the impact of having multiple heuristics (distinctiveness and fluency) available during a recognition test. Recent work by Gallo, Perlmutter, Moore, and Schacter (Memory & Cognition 36:461–466, 2008) suggested that fluency effects are reduced when the distinctiveness heuristic can be applied to a recognition decision. In Experiment 1, we used a response reversal paradigm (Van Zandt & Maldonado-Molina Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30:1147–1166, 2004) to demonstrate that participants transitioned from an early response strategy that was largely reliant on fluency to a later strategy in which the influences of fluency and distinctiveness were both observable. Experiments 2a, 2b, and 3 showed no evidence for reduction of the fluency heuristic after picture study when the test required a delayed response (Exp. 2a), confidence ratings (Exp. 2b), or the application of conceptual fluency (Exp. 3). The results are consistent with models of memory that assume that familiarity and recollection influence individual memory decisions Wixted (Psychological Review, 114:152–176, 2007).     

Are two heads better than one? Experimental investigations of the social facilitation of memory

The hypothesis that two people collaborating in recall would remember more than a single person was examined in a series of four experiments. All the experiments used variations on the same ‘sequential’ design where, in social conditions, people recalled alone initially and then recalled jointly in pairs: as a control for reminiscence, some people recalled alone on two separate occasions. On the second recall in all of the experiments two people always recalled more than one, but this was simply due to the independent statistical summation of two people's memories: no evidence whatsoever was found for the pairs of people generating new information that was not available to either member of the pair. This surprising result was not attributable to artefacts linked to the complexity or familiarity of stimulus material, nor was it linked to variations in people's cognitive perspectives. No evidence of social facilitation of memories was therefore found: two people recalling together certainly pool their separate memories so as to outperform individuals but the social interaction does not appear to generate previously unavailable memories.     

Normative theories of argumentation: are some norms better than others?

Norms—that is, specifications of what we ought to do—play a critical role in the study of informal argumentation, as they do in studies of judgment, decision-making and reasoning more generally. Specifically, they guide a recurring theme: are people rational? Though rules and standards have been central to the study of reasoning, and behavior more generally, there has been little discussion within psychology about why (or indeed if) they should be considered normative despite the considerable philosophical literature that bears on this topic. In the current paper, we ask what makes something a norm, with consideration both of norms in general and a specific example: norms for informal argumentation. We conclude that it is both possible and desirable to invoke norms for rational argument, and that a Bayesian approach provides solid normative principles with which to do so.     

Are two spaces better than one? The effect of spacing following periods and commas during reading

The most recent edition of the American Psychological Association (APA) Manual states that two spaces should follow the punctuation at the end of a sentence. This is in contrast to the one-space requirement from previous editions. However, to date, there has been no empirical support for either convention. In the current study, participants performed (1) a typing task to assess spacing usage and (2) an eye-tracking experiment to assess the effect that punctuation spacing has on reading performance. Although comprehension was not affected by punctuation spacing, the eye movement record suggested that initial processing of the text was facilitated when periods were followed by two spaces, supporting the change made to the APA Manual. Individuals’ typing usage also influenced these effects such that those who use two spaces following a period showed the greatest overall facilitation from reading with two spaces.     

Are two narcissists better than one? The link between narcissism, perceived creativity, and creative performance

The current research examines the link between narcissism and creativity at the individual, relational, and group levels of analysis. It finds that narcissists are not necessarily more creative than others, but they think they are, and they are adept at persuading others to agree with them. In the first study, narcissism was positively associated with self-rated creativity, despite the fact that blind coders saw no difference between the creative products offered by those low and high on narcissism. In a second study, more narcissistic individuals asked to pitch creative ideas to a target person were judged by the targets as being more creative than were less narcissistic individuals, in part because narcissists were more enthusiastic. Finally, a study of group creativity finds evidence of a curvilinear effect: Having more narcissists is better for generating creative outcomes (but having too many provides diminishing returns).     

Is two better than one? Comparing children’s narrative competence in an individual versus joint storytelling task

This research looks at the potential of peer interaction practices in improving narrative competence by analyzing the efficacy of peer learning on children’s oral narrative productions. Gains on a macro-level (structure and coherence of the narrative) and a micro-level (cohesion of the narrative) were analyzed. Fifty-six primary school children participated in this study. Each child told a narrative either individually (individual condition) or while interacting with a peer (joint condition). We explored whether children produced longer, more structured, coherent and cohesive narratives in a joint condition rather than individually, and in which condition the joint task was more beneficial for children’s narrative competence in terms of narrative scores in the individual condition, discrepancy between the members of the same pair, and quality of the interaction. The advantage of peer learning does not derive from the direct comparison of the individual versus the joint condition but depends on specific conditions: the joint condition was beneficial for individuals with lower individual competence and for pairs with a high discrepancy between individual scores. Children’s quality of interaction did not seem to influence the efficacy of peer learning on their narrative competence.     

Spatial sustained attention: better focused than divided?

Visuospatial attention was studied using three different reaction time tasks in a sustained attention paradigm (N = 35). Contrasting with findings from a phasic attention paradigm, our results suggest an equal ability to divide or focus sustained attention in the left and right fields in simple RT, a Go/No go-task, and choice RT.     

Cognitive subprocesses of mental rotation: why is a good rotator better than a poor one?

The Vanderberg-Kuse Mental Rotation Test is a standard test of mental rotation ability. Recent experiments have demonstrated that mental rotation is a complex cognitive process wherein different subprocesses (focused attention, visual scanning, perceptual decision, visual memory) play important roles in performance. We classified the population as good and poor rotators by performance of mental rotation (ns = 47: 22 men and 25 women, respectively; mean age: 20.7 yr.). To examine differences cognitive subprocesses of mental rotation of these two groups were compared. There were significant differences between poor and good rotators in performance on Raven's test and the Pieron Focused Attention test scores. The good rotators scored better because their perceptual decision-analytical intelligence (Raven) and focused attention scores were higher.     

Only one or two cultures?

One Culture: Essays in Science and Literature, edited by George Levine, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987, 359 pages, hb $45, pb $12.95     

Memory for faces: Are caricatures better than photographs?

Because photographs capture an individual at a moment in time, they contain fleeting features as well as more stable ones. Caricature line drawings, however, include stable features and emphasize distinctive ones. As such, caricatures are closer to schematic memory representations than are photographs. Three experiments using faces of public figures test the hypothesis that caricatures yield better performance than do photographs. Contrary to hypothesis, photographs lead to better performance than do line-drawing caricatures in three different tasks: name recall, face recognition, and name-face verification reaction time. Photographs are also rated as more characteristic or representative of their targets than are line-drawing caricatures.     

‘Three is better than two’: Increasing donations with the attraction effect

Five experiments (N_total = 2,503) tested the attraction effect and its boundary conditions in the context of helping behaviour. Participants could choose one donation appeal in a set of either two or three alternatives. The three alternatives set included a decoy – an alternative that resembled but was clearly inferior to a target (i.e., the most beneficial) alternative. A clear and consistent pattern emerged: Participants chose the target alternative more frequently and perceived it as more beneficial (and somewhat less costly) when the decoy was present compared to when it was absent. This finding was robust when the attribute ratings of the alternatives were unclear, when the target alternative offered a bundle of unrelated products, and when participants could refrain from donating altogether, or contribute any amount they wished. Our findings offer concrete and simple strategies that charities can implement at zero cost to increase giving and the perceived benefits that people’s good deed bring about to those in need.     

Comparing the effect of haptic modalities on walking balance control: Is using one or two arms better?

BackgroundAdding haptic input by lightly touching a railing or using haptic anchors may improve walking balance control. Typical use of the railing(s) and haptic anchors requires the use of one and two arms in an extended position, respectively. It is unclear whether it is arm configuration and/or the number of arms used or the addition of sensory input that affects walking balance control.Research questionThis study examined whether using one arm or two arms to add haptic input through light touch on a railing or using the haptic anchors affects walking balance control.MethodsIn this study, young adults (n = 24) walked while using (actual use) or pretending to use (pretend use) the railing(s) and haptic anchors with one or two arms. Inertial-based sensors (Mobility Lab, APDM) were used to measure stride velocity, relative time spent in double support (%DS), and peak normalized medio-lateral trunk velocity (pnMLTV).ResultsUsing two arms lead to a decrease in pnMLTV compared to using one arm and pnMLTV was lower in the actual use trials compared to the pretend use trials for the anchors only. Stride velocity and %DS did not change between trials when one or two arms were used or when participants actually or pretended to use the haptic tools. Participants walked slower when using the railing compared to the anchors.SignificanceThe importance of considering the number of arms is highlighted in the improved balance control when using two arms with either tool. The augmented sensory input adds to the stabilizing effect of arm configuration for the anchors but not the railings. These results have implications for future research and rehabilitation efforts emphasizing sensorimotor integration to improve walking balance control.