Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Consumer Behavior

This article describes a dual‐system model of consumer behavior. This model is based on the assumption that all human behaviors are a joint function of reflective and impulsive mechanisms. Those mechanisms have different principles of operation but contribute to the act of buying. However, the relative contribution of impulsive and reflective processes depends on personal and contextual circumstances. The operation and interaction of the 2 systems at different stages of information processing is described and applied to the dynamics of consumer behavior, with a special emphasis on impulse buying.     

Double drive learning in rats without previous selective reinforcement

Can rats which have never been selectively satiated by food or water respond appropriately by choosing the relevant reward when they are made hungry or thirsty ? A group of 21 rats was put on a diet of wet mash and trained both hungry and thirsty in a T-maze with water on one side and food on the other. 8 out of 10 of the animals which were made thirsty on the test-run chose correctly in spite of an established preference for the other reward. Only 1 out of the 11 animals made hungry chose correctly. Possible explanations of this result are examined.     

Development of a new spatial test

The development of a new colored spatial test is described. Some psychometric characteristics of this new test are presented from a correlational study, and some suggestions about its incorporation into research are offered.     

The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: evidence for content-dependent central interference

Recent debate regarding dual-task performance has focused on whether costs result from limitations in central capacity, and whether central operations can be performed in parallel. While these questions are controversial, the dominant models of dual-task performance share the assumption that central operations are generic--that is, their interactions are independent of stimulus and response modalities. To examine these issues, we conducted a series of dual-task experiments with different input and output modality pairings. One condition combined a visual-manual task with an auditory-vocal task, and the other condition reversed the input-output pairings, combining a visual-vocal task with an auditory-manual task. Input/output modality pairings proved to be a key factor; throughout practice, dual-task costs were generally more than twice as large with visual-vocal/auditory-manual tasks than with the opposite arrangement of modalities (Experiments 1 and 2). These differences could be explained neither by competition for peripheral resources nor by differences in single-task response times (Experiment 3). Moreover, the persistent dual-task costs did not appear to stem from a central bottleneck. Contrary to the dominant models of dual-task performance, we propose that central interference between tasks depends not just on the duration of central operations, nor just strategic adaptation, but also on the content of those operations. Implications for structural and strategic accounts of dual-task interference are discussed.     

Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection after practice

E. H. Schumacher, T. L. Seymour, J. M. Glass, D. E. Kieras, and D. E. Meyer (2001) reported that dual-task costs are minimal when participants are practiced and give the 2 tasks equal emphasis. The present research examined whether such findings are compatible with the operation of an efficient response selection bottleneck. Participants trained until they were able to perform both tasks simultaneously without interference. Novel stimulus pairs produced no reaction time costs, arguing against the development of compound stimulus-response associations (Experiment 1). Manipulating the relative onsets (Experiments 2 and 4) and durations (Experiments 3 and 4) of response selection processes did not lead to dual-task costs. The results indicate that the 2 tasks did not share a bottleneck after practice.     

Task goals and change in dynamical degrees of freedom with motor learning

In this article, the authors examined the hypothesis that the direction of the change (increase or decrease) in the dynamical degrees of freedom (dimension) regulated as a function of motor learning is task-dependent. Adult participants learned 1 of 2 isometric force-production tasks (Experiment 1: constant force output; Experiment 2: sinusoidal force output) over 5 days of practice and a 6th day with augmented information withdrawal. The results showed that over practice, the task goal induced either an increase (Experiment 1) or a decrease (Experiment 2) in the dimension of force output as performance error was reduced. These findings support the proposition that the observed increase or decrease in dimension with learning is dependent on both the intrinsic dynamics of the system and the short-term change required to realize the task goal.