The subjective tempo difference between interaural and monaural sequences as a function of sequence length

Previous research has demonstrated that the subjective tempo of sequences of clicks that alternate between ears is slower than that of nonalternating sequences. Although the stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) between the clicks are the same in both conditions, their perceptual onset asynchronies (POAs) differ by 25 msec at all SOA values between 40 and 2,130 msec. It has been suggested that this subjective tempo difference originates only after a few clicks have been processed. The present study shows this not to be the case: The POA difference between interaural and monaural click sequences could also be established with sequences comprising only a few clicks.     

A component analysis of action events

Summary Three experiments are reported, that examine the basis of the recall superiority of subject-performed tasks (SPTs) over verbal-memory tasks (VTs), and the interitem variability for SPTs. In Experiments 1 and 2 a component analysis of SPTs is undertaken in order to explore the importance of (a) involvement of external objects, (b) multimodality, and (c) enactment, for the superior memory performance for SPTs over that for VTs. In Experiment 3 the role of retrieval support, in terms of a high degree of match between the encoding and retrieval situations, was investigated in order to find out why some SPTs are easier to recall than others. The results indicate that it is difficult to separate out a single component as the most critical one for the superiority of SPT recall over VT recall, and that a high degree of match between encoding and retrieval conditions improves SPT recall. It is suggested that, in order to explain the large differences in memorability between SPTs and VTs, it is sufficient to consider the more supportive encoding situation for SPTs, but to explain differences in recallability between various SPTs, the compatibility between encoding and test has to be taken into consideration.     

The effects of visual presentation method on single-trial free recall

In two experiments four different conditions of visual presentation were studied with the purpose of furthering our understanding of the role of temporal and spatial factors underlying modality effects in single-trial free recall. Enriching spatial factors in the visual presentation did not produce a higher performance in the recency part of the serial-position curve, and it was therefore concluded that the modality effect could not be due to any visual handicap. A lag distribution measure was suggested and applied to the data to characterize output order (the order of recall) in single-trial free recall. The two experiments carried out used a within-subjects and a between-subjects design, respectively, and illustrate the importance of the methodological difference between these two designs.     

Autoranging amplifier expands computer’s A/D sensitivity by two decades

This device accepts an analog signal from 0 to +14 V, automatically changes gain to condition the analog output to the limits of a ±1 V A/D converter, and transmits the gain mode as two digital bits. A computer with a 10-bit A/D converter and two sense lines uses this device to obtain the dynamic range of a 16-bit A/D converter. The relatively simple principle of the circuit may be of interest to expand the voltage sensitivity range of other analog devices for slowly changing signals.     

Recognition failure of categorized words

Previous research has demonstrated that the phenomenon of recognition failure of recallable words does not hold for categorized word pairs (e.g.,flower-ROSE). We tested the hypothesis that such an exceptional finding is attributable to the use of homogeneous lists that create a situation in which the functional recall cues do not contain any information not already contained in the recognition cues. In three experiments in which categorized word pairs were used, but whose design ruled out the invariant informational overlap between recognition and recall cues, recognition failure was found to the extent expected by Tulving and Wiseman’s (1975) function. These results add to the evidence that the relation between recognition and cued recall in recognition-failure experiments is largely invariant over many otherwise relevant variables that affect recognition and recall.     

Making the morally relevant features explicit: a response to Carson Strong

Carson Strong criticizes the application of my moral theory to bioethics cases. Some of his criticisms are due to my failure to make explicit that both the irrationality or rationality of a decision and the irrationality or rationality of the ranking of evils are part of morally relevant feature 3. Other criticisms are the result of his not using the two-step procedure in a sufficiently rigorous way. His claim that I come up with a wrong answer depends upon his incorrectly regarding a weakly justified violation as one that all impartial rational persons would agree was permitted, rather than as one about which rational persons disagree.