Shades of the mirror effect: Recognition of faces with and without sunglasses

A mirror effect was found for a stimulus manipulation introduced at test. When subjects studied a set of normal faces and then were tested with new and old faces that were normal or wearing sunglasses, the hit rate was higher and the false alarm rate was lower for normal faces. Hit rate differences were reflected in remember and sure recognition responses, whereas differences in false alarm rates were largely seen in know and unsure judgments. In contrast, when subjects studied faces wearing sunglasses, the hit rate was greater for test faces with sunglasses than for normal faces, but there was no difference in false alarm rates. These findings are problematic for single-factor theories of the mirror effect, but can be accommodated within a two-factor account.     

Temporal contiguity and the judgement of causality by human subjects

Three experiments examined the role of the degree of temporal contiguity between an action and an outcome in human causality judgement. In all the experiments subjects were required to perform an action—pressing a key on a computer keyboard—and to judge the extent to which the action caused an outcome on the computer screen to occur. The action and outcome occurred on a free-operant schedule. In the first experiment a 2-sec delay between the action and outcome reduced causality judgements relative to a situation in which there was no delay. In the second experiment judgements in conditions with delays of 0, 4, 8, and 16 sec were compared with judgements in conditions in which the same pattern of outcomes occurred non-contingently with respect to the subjects' responding. In both of these experiments the events were controlled by random ratio schedules, following the procedure of Wasserman, Chatlosh, and Neunaber (1983), in which each condition was divided into 1-sec intervals. In the third experiment judgements in conditions with delays of 0, 2, 4, or 8 sec were compared in a continuous procedure rather than one divided into 1-sec intervals. In all experiments the increasing delays led to progressively lower judgements of causality. The results are related to three accounts of the mechanism underlying human causality judgement and are also compared with results from analogous animal conditioning studies.     

Performance on ratio and interval schedules with matched reinforcement rates

In the first study, rats were trained to pull a chain on a schedule (RPI) that regulates the probability of reinforcement to maintain a constant average reinforcement rate without differentially reinforcing long inter-response times (IRTs). Although the response rate was sensitive to the overall rate of reinforcement, performance was unaffected by variations between 1 and 50 in the IRT memory size used in programming the schedule. In the second study, two groups of animals performed on either a random-interval (RI) schedule or a RPI schedule, with reinforcement rates determined by those generated by a third group performing on a random ratio (RR) 20 schedule. The RI group responded at a lower rate than the RPI group, which, in turn, responded at a lower rate than the RR group, even though the three groups experienced comparable rates of reinforcement. The fact that the RPI group responded at a lower rate than the RR group suggests that the standard response rate difference observed between ratio and interval schedules, which have been matched for reinforcement rate, cannot be attributed solely to the fact that conventional interval schedules differentially reinforce long IRTs.     

Daily stress and anxiety and their relation to daily fluctuations of symptoms in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients

Although stress and anxiety have long been assumed to play an exacerbatory role in asthma, no study has systematically documented that daily exacerbations of asthma symptoms are related to stress and/or anxiety. In this study, 24 airways obstruction patients (12 asthmatics and 12 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients) were instructed to monitor the severity of daily respiratory symptoms. In addition, subjects recorded their daily anxiety level and the number and perceived impact of daily stressors. The results showed that although there were differences between high- and low-stress days for both groups, there were no differences between groups on symptom severity or between high- and low-anxiety days, as measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Thus, although the number and impact of daily stressors were found to be directly associated with the severity of asthma symptoms, anxiety does not appear to have a direct role in the exacerbation of asthma. The findings failed to support the anxiety theory of asthma but provided an explanation for the poor results obtained in previous treatment studies which employed anxiety management with asthmatics.