External focus of attention improves performance in a speeded aiming task

Athletic skills are often executed better when learners focus attention externally (e.g., on the trajectory of the ball after a tennis serve), rather than internally (e.g., on the position of their arm) (e.g., Wulf, 2007a). The current study explored the effects of attention focus on learning of speeded responses, and examined whether these benefits hold for retention and transfer. Participants performed a computerized speeded aiming task while focusing on the direction of the cursor (external focus) versus the direction in which their hand moved the mouse (internal focus). One week later, half of the participants performed the same task again (retention), and half performed the task under conditions in which the mouse movements were changed (transfer). Relative to internal focus, external focus led to faster acquisition and better maintenance of speeded responses over the retention interval.     

Lateralized repetition priming for familiar faces: Evidence for asymmetric interhemispheric cooperation

Repetition priming refers to facilitated recognition of stimuli that have been seen previously. Although a great deal of work has examined the properties of repetition priming for familiar faces, little has examined the neuroanatomical basis of the effect. Two experiments are presented in this paper that combine the repetition priming paradigm with a divided visual field methodology to examine lateralized recognition of familiar faces. In the first experiment participants were presented with prime faces unilaterally to each visual field and target faces foveally. A significant priming effect was found for prime faces presented to the right hemisphere, but not for prime faces presented to the left hemisphere. In Experiment 2, prime and target faces were presented unilaterally, either to the same visual field or to the opposite visual field (i.e., either within hemisphere or across hemispheres). A significant priming effect was found for the within right hemisphere condition, but not for the within left hemisphere condition, replicating the findings of the first experiment. Priming was also found in both of the across hemispheres conditions, suggesting that interhemispheric cooperation occurs to aid recognition. Taken in combination these experiments provide two main findings. First, an asymmetric repetition priming effect was found, possibly as a result of asymmetric levels of activation following recognition of a prime face, with greater priming occurring within the right hemisphere. Second, there is evidence for asymmetric interhemispheric cooperation with transfer of information from the right hemisphere to the left hemisphere to facilitate recognition.     

Specificity effects in training and transfer of speeded responses

In 3 experiments, participants, on signal, moved a cursor from a central position to 1 of 8 numerically labeled locations on the circumference of a clock face. Movements were controlled by a mouse in 1 of 4 conditions: vertical reversal, horizontal reversal, combined reversals, or normal (i.e., no reversals). Participants were trained in 1, 2, or 3 of these conditions and were tested 1 week later with either the same or a different condition. There were improvements across training and perfect retention across the delay. There was little or no transfer, however, even when training involved combined reversals or multiple conditions. These results illustrate severe specificity of training and are interpreted in terms of acquired inhibition of normal responses.     

Lateralized repetition priming for familiar faces: Evidence for asymmetric interhemispheric cooperation

Repetition priming refers to facilitated recognition of stimuli that have been seen previously. Although a great deal of work has examined the properties of repetition priming for familiar faces, little has examined the neuroanatomical basis of the effect. Two experiments are presented in this paper that combine the repetition priming paradigm with a divided visual field methodology to examine lateralized recognition of familiar faces. In the first experiment participants were presented with prime faces unilaterally to each visual field and target faces foveally. A significant priming effect was found for prime faces presented to the right hemisphere, but not for prime faces presented to the left hemisphere. In Experiment 2, prime and target faces were presented unilaterally, either to the same visual field or to the opposite visual field (i.e., either within hemisphere or across hemispheres). A significant priming effect was found for the within right hemisphere condition, but not for the within left hemisphere condition, replicating the findings of the first experiment. Priming was also found in both of the across hemispheres conditions, suggesting that interhemispheric cooperation occurs to aid recognition. Taken in combination these experiments provide two main findings. First, an asymmetric repetition priming effect was found, possibly as a result of asymmetric levels of activation following recognition of a prime face, with greater priming occurring within the right hemisphere. Second, there is evidence for asymmetric interhemispheric cooperation with transfer of information from the right hemisphere to the left hemisphere to facilitate recognition.     

Case vignette -- mandated child abuse reporting

Case Vignette: Martha Harris has been a licensed mental health professional for nearly a decade. As she arrived at her office early this morning, the phone was ringing. Speaking in a tremulous voice, the caller stated, "I was given your name by my internist, Dr. Williams. I think my husband may be abusing our 5-year-old sexually. Can you help?" After a few minutes of conversation, Martha offers to schedule a prompt appointment. The caller interrupts and asks, "You won't have to report this will you?" As a mandated reporter under the state's child protection statute, Martha has no choice but to inform the authorities; she tells the caller, who immediately hangs up. Suddenly, Martha realizes that she does not have the name or any other identifying information about the caller. A call to Dr. Williams results in a response that the internist does not want to "get involved." Commentators on this case are Richard Bourne, JD, PhD, one of whose special areas of expertise is child protection and related professional obligations; Eli H. Newberger, MD, a pediatrician with a special interest in child maltreatment; and C. Sue White, PhD, one of whose primary interests is how clinicians may inappropriately use techniques to interview children suspected of child sexual abuse, causing contaminating influences to interfere with children's memories for their own experiences.