Enhanced orienting effects: Evidence for an interaction principle

Predictive arrow cues, as used in the classic “Posner paradigm”, that were long thought to engage and isolate voluntary attention, may in fact trigger a strong interaction between voluntary and involuntary attention (Ristic & Kingstone, 2006). This interaction produces an orienting effect that exceeds both the effects of involuntary and voluntary attention alone, and the additive combination of involuntary and voluntary orienting. The present study shows that nonpredictive peripheral cues—understood to engage and isolate involuntary attention—if made predictive, result in enhanced orienting effects similar to predictive arrows. The important contribution of these data is that they suggest an “interaction principle”: If attention cues can elicit reliable involuntary orienting, then when they are made spatially predictive, the resulting attention effect will be greater than the sum of involuntary and voluntary orienting alone.     

Against deliberative indispensability as an independent guide to what there is

Philosophical Studies - David Enoch has recently proposed that the deliberative indispensability of irreducibly normative facts suffices to support their inclusion in our ontology, even if they are...     

Trait anxiety, defensiveness and selective processing of threat: an investigation using two measures of attentional bias

Attentional biases for threat were examined in a non-clinical sample (N=60), with each participant tested on both the modified Stroop colour-naming and dot probe tasks. Three groups were selected on the basis of trait anxiety and social desirability scale (SDS) scores: “low anxiety” (LA: low trait, low SDS), “repressor” (REP: low trait, high SDS) and “high anxiety” (HA: high trait, low SDS). Results from the colour-naming task suggested that high levels of defensiveness (in combination with low trait anxiety) were associated with greater avoidance of threat. The REP group showed less interference in colour-naming threat than neutral words; whereas the HA group showed increased interference due to threat words. On the dot probe task, there was a general tendency for this non-clinical sample as a whole to show avoidance of social threat relative to neutral words, but there was no bias for physical threat words. Avoidance of social threat was significant only within the REP group. No relationships were found between the measures of cognitive bias from the two tasks, suggesting different underlying mechanisms. Results are discussed in relation to previous findings and theoretical views of the effects of anxiety and defensiveness on the processing of threat.     

Against the perceptual model of utterance comprehension

Philosophical Studies - What accounts for the capacity of ordinary speakers to comprehend utterances of their language? The phenomenology of hearing speech in one’s own language makes it...     

Protocols for the Investigation of Information Processing in Human Assessment of Fundamental Movement Skills

Fundamental movement skill (FMS) assessment remains an important tool in classifying individuals’ level of FMS proficiency. The collection of FMS performances for assessment and monitoring has remained unchanged over the last few decades, but new motion capture technologies offer opportunities to automate this process. To achieve this, a greater understanding of the human process of movement skill assessment is required. The authors present the rationale and protocols of a project in which they aim to investigate the visual search patterns and information extraction employed by human assessors during FMS assessment, as well as the implementation of the Kinect system for FMS capture.     

A unified framework for inhibitory control

Inhibiting unwanted thoughts, actions and emotions figures centrally in daily life, and the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is widely viewed as a source of this inhibitory control. We argue that the function of the PFC is best understood in terms of representing and actively maintaining abstract information, such as goals, which produces two types of inhibitory effects on other brain regions. Inhibition of some subcortical regions takes a directed global form, with prefrontal regions providing contextual information relevant to when to inhibit all processing in a region. Inhibition within neocortical (and some subcortical) regions takes an indirect competitive form, with prefrontal regions providing excitation of goal-relevant options. These distinctions are crucial for understanding the mechanisms of inhibition and how they can be impaired or improved.