Differences between early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded-sighted people in haptic spatial-configuration learning and resulting memory traces

The roles of visual and haptic experience in different aspects of haptic processing of objects in peripersonal space are examined. In three trials, early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded-sighted individuals had to match ten shapes haptically to the cut-outs in a board as fast as possible. Both blind groups were much faster than the sighted in all three trials. All three groups improved considerably from trial to trial. In particular, the sighted group showed a strong improvement from the first to the second trial. While superiority of the blind remained for speeded matching after rotation of the stimulus frame, coordinate positional-memory scores in a non-speeded free-recall trial showed no significant differences between the groups. Moreover, when assessed with a verbal response, categorical spatial-memory appeared strongest in the late-blind group. The role of haptic and visual experience thus appears to depend on the task aspect tested.     

The effect of experience on children's ability to show response and place learning

From a developmental perspective, it has been reasoned that over the course of development children make differential use of available landmarks in the surroundings to orient in space. The present study examined whether children can learn to apply different spatial strategies, focusing on different landmark cues. Children aged 7 and 10 years were tested on an object‐location memory task in which they learned a location relative to a direct cue or to indirect cues. Both age groups performed equally well on the direct test condition. However, children 7 years of age had difficulties with orienting relative to the indirect landmarks. Interestingly, their performance increased significantly with more relevant experience. Different explanations for these findings are discussed.     

Outcomes of work–life balance on job satisfaction,life satisfaction and mental health: A study across seven cultures

This study investigates the effects of work–life balance (WLB) on several individual outcomes across cultures. Using a sample of 1416 employees from seven distinct populations – Malaysian, Chinese, New Zealand Maori, New Zealand European, Spanish, French, and Italian – SEM analysis showed that WLB was positively related to job and life satisfaction and negatively related to anxiety and depression across the seven cultures. Individualism/collectivism and gender egalitarianism moderated these relationships. High levels of WLB were more positively associated with job and life satisfaction for individuals in individualistic cultures, compared with individuals in collectivistic cultures. High levels of WLB were more positively associated with job and life satisfaction and more negatively associated with anxiety for individuals in gender egalitarian cultures. Overall, we find strong support for WLB being beneficial for employees from various cultures and for culture as a moderator of these relationships.     

Criticism in Need of Clarification

It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical stance, even if she does not adopt an opposite standpoint, but merely doubts the proponent’s opinion. Thus, there is some kind of burden of criticism. In some situations, there should an obligation for the opponent to offer explanatory counterconsiderations, if requested, whereas in others, there is no real dialectical obligation, but a mere responsibility for the opponent to cooperate by providing her motivations for being critical. In this paper, it will be shown how a set of dialogue rules may encourage an opponent, in this latter type of situation, to provide her counterconsiderations, and to do so at an appropriate level of specificity. Special attention will be paid to the desired level of specificity. For example, the critic may challenge a thesis by saying “Why? Says who?,” without conveying whether she could be convinced by an argument from expert opinion, or from position to know, or from popular opinion. What are fair dialogue rules for dealing with less than fully specific criticism?