Inhibition of return: A “depth-blind” mechanism?

When attention is oriented to a peripheral visual event, observers respond faster to stimuli presented at a cued location than at an uncued location. Following initial reaction time facilitation responses are slower to stimuli subsequently displayed at the cued location, an effect known as inhibition of return (IOR). Both facilitatory and inhibitory effects have been extensively investigated in two-dimensional space. Facilitation has also been documented in three-dimensional space, however the presence of IOR in 3D space is unclear, possibly because IOR has not been evaluated in an empty 3D space. Determining if IOR is sensitive to the depth plane of stimuli or if only their bi-dimensional location is inhibited may clarify the nature of the IOR. To address this issue, we used an attentional cueing paradigm in three-dimensional (3D) space. Results were obtained from fourteen participants showed IOR components in 3D space when binocular disparity was used to induce depth. We conclude that attentional orienting in depth operates as efficiently as in the bi-dimensional space.     

The tie effect in simple arithmetic: An access-based account

Simple arithmetic problems with repeated operands (i.e., ties such as 4 + 4, 6 x 6, 10 - 5, or 49 / 7) are solved more quickly and accurately than similar nontie problems (e.g., 4 + 5, 6 x 7, 10 - 6, or 48 / 6). Further, as compared with nonties, ties show small or nonexistent problem-size effects (whereby problems with smaller operands such as 2 + 3 are solved more quickly and accurately than problems with larger operands such as 8 + 9). Blankenberger (2001) proposed that the tie advantage occurred because repetition of the same physical stimulus resulted in faster encoding of tie than of nontie problems. Alternatively, ties may be easier to solve than nonties because of differences in accessibility in memory or differences in the solution processes. Adults solved addition and multiplication (Experiment 1) or subtraction and division (Experiment 2) problems in four two pure formats (e.g., 4 + 4, FOUR + FOUR) and two mixed formats (e.g., 4 + FOUR, and FOUR + 4). Tie advantages were reduced in mixed formats, as compared with pure formats, but the tie x problem-size interaction persisted across formats. These findings support the view that tie effects are strongly related to memory access and are influenced only moderately by encoding factors.     

Archival note: an inquiry into the relationshp between Alfred Binet and Cyril Burt

Two recent archival items offer material for analysis of Alfred Binet's (1857-1911) and Cyril Burt's (1883-1971) relationship in the early twentieth century. Burt's letter to Binet's biographer Theta Wolf was an answer to her request for information about his contact with Binet. An analysis of Burt's account prompts more questions than it answers. His statements in the letter are compared with previous ones and are put into the context of the activities of the two men, but these do not enlighten us about his actual relations with Binet. The problem arises because of Burt's desciptive vagueness and lack of supporting evidence. Despite attacks against Burt's integrity made from 1976 onward, we found no conclusive evidence of false claims. The negative outcome of this analysis probably results from Burt's faulty memory, and herein lies the caveat that personal memories make unreliable material for historical accounts.