Atypical depression: enhanced right hemispheric dominance for perceiving emotional chimeric faces

Two studies compared hemispatial bias for perceiving chimeric faces in patients having either atypical or typical depression and healthy controls. A total of 245 patients having major depressive disorder (MDD) or dysthymia (164 with atypical features) and 115 controls were tested on the Chimeric Faces Test. Atypical depression differed from typical depression and controls in showing abnormally large right hemisphere bias. This was present in patients having either MDD or dysthymia and was not related to anxiety, physical anhedonia, or vegetative symptoms. In contrast, patients having MDD with melancholia showed essentially no right hemisphere bias. This is further evidence that atypical depression is a biologically distinct subtype and underscores the importance of this diagnostic distinction for neurophysiologic studies.     

Crying threshold and intensity in major depressive disorder

Clinical lore suggests that depression is associated with frequent and intense crying. To test these postulations empirically, a standardized cry-evoking stimulus was presented to depressed and nondepressed participants, and their likelihood of crying and the magnitude of crying-related changes in their emotion experience, behavior, and autonomic physiology were compared. Unexpectedly, crying was no more likely in depressed than in nondepressed participants. Within the nondepressed group, participants who cried exhibited increases in the report and display of sadness and had greater cardiac and electrodermal activation than did participants who did not cry. There was less evidence of this crying-related emotional activation within the depressed group. The lack of emotional activation among clinically depressed participants who cried provides a tantalizing clue concerning how emotions are dysregulated in this disorder.     

Effects of lexicality and distinctiveness on repetition blindness

The repetition blindness (RB) paradigm developed by K. M. Arnell and P. Jolicoeur (1997) was used to examine effects of lexicality (word vs. nonword target pairs) and target distinctiveness on RB. Distinctiveness was manipulated by having both targets (Experiments 1 and 2) or only the first target (Experiment 3) brighter than nontarget items. All 3 experiments demonstrated strong RB for word targets but no RB for nonword targets. This confirms that RB depends on pre-existing memory representations. In fact, there was repetition facilitation for nonwords in Experiments 2 and 3. These experiments also demonstrated that RB is reduced when targets are distinctive. This finding is better understood interms of RB as a failure of memory rather than as a failure of perception.     

The accuracy of abstracts in psychology journals

This article provides an empirically supported reminder of the importance of accuracy in scientific communication. The authors identify common types of inaccuracies in research abstracts and offer suggestions to improve abstract-article agreement. Abstracts accompanying 13% of a random sample of 400 research articles published in 8 American Psychological Association journals during 1997 and 1998 contained data or claims inconsistent with or missing from the body of the article. Error rates ranged from 8% to 18%, although between-journal differences were not significant. Many errors (63%) were unlikely to cause substantive misinterpretations. Unfortunately, 37% of errors found could be seriously misleading with respect to the data or claims presented in the associated article. Although deficient abstracts may be less common in psychology journals than in major medical journals (R. M. Pitkin, M. A. Branagan, & L. F. Burmeister, 1999), there is still cause for concern and need for improvement.     

Background beliefs in Bayesian inference

We report five experiments in which the role of background beliefs in social judgments of posterior probability was investigated. From a Bayesian perspective, people should combine prior probabilities (or base rates) and diagnostic evidence with equal weighting, although previous research shows that base rates are often underweighted. These experiments were designed so that either piece of information was supplied either by personal beliefs or by presented statistics, and regression analyses were performed on individual participants to assess the relative influence of information. We found that both prior probabilities and diagnostic information significantly influenced judgments, whether supplied by beliefs or by statistical information, but that belief-based information tended to dominate the judgments made.     

Behavior analysis and the study of human aging

As the population of older adults continues to rise, psychologists along with other behavioral and social scientists have shown increasing interest in this age group. Although behavior analysts have contributed to research on aging, the focus has been on applications that remedy age-related deficits, rather than a concern with aging as a developmental process. In particular, there has been little interest in the central theoretical questions that have guided gerontologists. How does behavior change with advancing years, and what are the sources of those changes? We consider the possibility that this neglect reflects the long-standing commitment of behavior analysts to variables that can be experimentally manipulated, a requirement that excludes the key variable—age itself. We review the options available to researchers and present strategies that minimize deviations from the traditional features of behavior-analytic designs. Our comments are predicated on the view that aging issues within contemporary society are far too important for behavior analysts to ignore.     

How (and where) does moral judgment work?

Moral psychology has long focused on reasoning, but recent evidence suggests that moral judgment is more a matter of emotion and affective intuition than deliberate reasoning. Here we discuss recent findings in psychology and cognitive neuroscience, including several studies that specifically investigate moral judgment. These findings indicate the importance of affect, although they allow that reasoning can play a restricted but significant role in moral judgment. They also point towards a preliminary account of the functional neuroanatomy of moral judgment, according to which many brain areas make important contributions to moral judgment although none is devoted specifically to it.     

Progressive-ratio schedules: effects of later schedule requirements on earlier performances

Four rats were studied with variants of a progressive-ratio schedule with a step size of 6 in which different terminal components followed completion of the 20th ratio: (a) a reversal of the progression, (b) a fixed-ratio 6 schedule, or (c) extinction. Responding in the progressive-ratio components of these schedules was compared to performances under conventional progressive-ratio baselines. Under baseline conditions, postreinforcement pauses increased exponentially as a function of increasing ratio size, whereas running rates showed modest declines. The procedure of linking the progressive-ratio schedule to the reversed progression or to the fixed-ratio component resulted in decreased pausing. Linking the progressive-ratio schedule to the extinction component had the opposite effect, that of producing weakened progressive-ratio performances as evidenced by increased pausing. Subjects whose responses were reinforced on half of the ratios also showed exponential increases; however, pauses were substantially shorter following ratios on which the reinforcer was omitted. The results suggested that progressive-ratio pausing reflects the influence of remote as well as local contingencies.     

Quantitative summaries of single-subject studies: What do group comparisons tell us about individual performances?

Kollins, Newland, and Critchfield (1999) responded to our comments about their review by arguing that their quantitative summary was not a meta-analysis and should not be criticized in these terms. We reply that regardless of what they call their review, it included confounding effects that make interpretations of the results problematic. Kollins et al. also argued that unexpected findings of the sort they reported can serve as a spur for further research. We reply that the understanding of findings that deviate from existing knowledge may well require empirical investigation. Such endeavors, however, should begin with an evaluation of the review procedures that suggested the existence of the differences. Finally, we emphasize that quantitative summaries of individual data are, in the end, a form of group comparison. The implications of using group methods to clarify individual data deserve frank recognition in discussions of the outcomes.