Interaction between preexposure and overshadowing: Further analysis of the extended comparator hypothesis

Three experiments with rats used conditioned suppression of barpress to test predictions of the extended comparator hypothesis, which assumes that the effectiveness of (first-order) comparator stimuli in modulating responding to a target conditioned stimulus (CS) is itself modulated by other (second-order) comparator stimuli. Experiment 1 demonstrated that both pretraining exposure to the target CS alone (i.e., CS-preexposure effect, also known as latent inhibition) and pretraining exposure to a compound of the target CS and nontarget CS (i.e., compound-CS-preexposure effect) counteract overshadowing, and that posttraining deflation (i.e., extinction) of the overshadowing stimulus attenuates responding to the target CS when overshadowing is preceded by a CS-preexposure treatment (i.e., yields a CS-preexposure effect), but not when overshadowing is preceded by a compound-CS-preexposure treatment. Experiment 2 examined the consequences of posttraining associative inflation of the overshadowing stimulus or the preexposure companion stimulus following conjoint compound-CS-preexposure and overshadowing treatment. Experiment 3 examined the consequences of posttraining inflation of the overshadowing stimulus or the context following conjoint CS-alone preexposure and overshadowing treatment. The results support the expression-focused comparator view in contrast to recent acquisition-focused models of retrospective revaluation.     

With Fellow Travelers to Nodal Places: Reply to Dajani,Doñas,and Peltz

In this response to the useful discussions of my paper by Peltz, Dajani, and Doñas (this issue), I emphasize the complexity of the intersections that lie at juncture of the personal and the social registers of the unconscious, problematizing conventional notions of “internal” and “external.” Additionally, I draw out a distinction between the political and politics as regards psychoanalytic practice, and suggest that this practice can fruitfully occur in places beyond the consulting room.     

Brain-Injured Footballers,Voluntary Choice and Social Goods. A Reply to Corlett

ABSTRACT

In this essay, we respond to Angelo Corlett’s criticism of our paper ‘Ethics, Brain Injuries, and Sports: Prohibition, Reform, and Prudence’. To do so, first, we revisit certain assumptions and arguments Corlett makes concerning intercollegiate football and brain injuries in his 2014 paper ‘Should intercollegiate football be eliminated?’. Second, we identify and criticize two key elements in his response regarding (a) ‘luck egalitarianism’, and (b) ‘public goods’. We conclude by reaffirming our critical reading of Corlett’s original 2014 paper and by identifying further elements (i) luck and the nature of individual responsibility; and (ii) the nature of sports as public rather than merely private goods, that he would have to address for his latter 2018 position to hold true.