艾耶尔在哲学史上的地位

其次,是对知识论中关于知觉、他人心理,历史、归纳等问题的一种有益的图式化表述,这些问题起源于那种由于各种信仰(关于物质事物、过去事件,他人心理、自然规律的)和用来证明它们的唯一证据(感觉材料,记忆及其痕迹、行为和观察到的规则)之间的鸿沟而导致的怀疑主义。和这种图式的其他支持者一样,艾耶尔认识到了对待这些鸿沟的四个基本途径。一是直觉,据称它可以直接到达鸿沟的另一端;二是关于一般原则的理论,它可以用作跨越鸿沟的桥梁;三是还原主义,它可以通过定义那些被断定用来证明它们的事物填平这一鸿沟;四是怀疑主义的忧郁选择。艾耶尔还想像出第五种被称之为“描述分析法”的途径,它似乎承认这种鸿沟,但又对它无可奈何。     

Longitudinal Development of the Automatic Postural Response in Infants

In this longitudinal study, the development of automatic postural responses elicited during stance following perturbation of the support surface was investigated. Infants (N = 9) unable to stand without support were tested initially: follow-up tests were performed until the infants were able to stand and walk independently. Surface electromyographic recordings of leg and trunk muscle activity following a postural perturbation induced by a forward or backward translation of the support surface were made for each infant. Muscle onset latencies following the perturbation and the proportion of trials in which muscle activity was recorded were determined. First, infants activated appropriate muscles either in isolation or in pairs and then combined these muscles into functional synergies. Although activation of all three postural muscles was recorded in infants before they were able to stand and walk independently, the three-muscle response was not consistent in the youngest children. The proportion of trials eliciting muscle activity continued to increase (p <.O5) after infants began to walk independently, with postural muscle activity recorded in virtually every trial by late independent walking. Thus. the automatic postural response elicited during stance was shown to begin with activity in single or paired muscles, followed by activation of the postural muscles in functional synergies. These data illustrate the progressive development of an effective sensory-motor organization.     

The Timing Effects of Accent Production in Periodic Finger-Tapping Sequences

When subjects are required to produce short sequences of equally paced finger taps and to accentuate one of the taps, the interval preceding the forceful tap is shortened and the one that immediately follows the accent is lengthened. Assuming that the tapping movements are triggered by an internal clock, one explanation attributes the rnistiming of the taps to central factors: The momentary rate of the clock is accelerated or decelerated as a function of motor preparation to, respectively, increase or decrease the movement force. This hypothesis predicts that the interresponse intervals measured between either tap movement onsets or movement terminations (taps) will show the same timing pattern. A second explanation for the observed interval effects is that the tapping movements are triggered by a regular internal clock but the timing of the successive taps is altered because the forceful movement is completed in less time than the other tap movements are. This "peripheral" hypothesis predicts regular timing of movement onsets but distorted timing of movement terminations. In the present study, the trajectories of the movements performed by subjects were recorded and the interresponse intervals were measured at the beginning and the end of the tapping movements. The results of Experiment 1 showed that neither model can fully explain the interval effects: The fast forceful movements were initiated with an additional delay that took into account the small execution time of these movements. Experiment 2 reproduced this finding and showed that the timing of the onset and contact intervals did not evolve with the repetition of trial blocks. Therefore, the assumption of an internal clock that would trigger the successive movements must be rejected. The results are discussed in the framework of a modified two-stage model in which the internal clock, instead of triggering the tapping movements, provides target time points at which the movements have to produce their meaningful effects, that is, contacts with the response key. The timing distortions are likely to reflect both peripheral and central components.     

Resistance To Change As A Function Of Stimulus-reinforcer And Location-reinforcer Contingencies

Pigeons responded on two keys in each component of a multiple concurrent schedule. In one series of conditions the distribution of reinforcers between keys within one component was varied so as to produce changes in ratios of reinforcer totals for key locations when summed across components. In a second series, reinforcer allocation between components was varied so as to produce changes in ratios of reinforcer totals for components, summed across key locations. In each condition, resistance to change was assessed by presenting response-independent reinforcers during intercomponent blackouts and (for the first series) by extinction of responding on both keys in both components. Resistance to change for response totals within a component was always greater for the component with the larger total reinforcer rate. However, resistance to change for response totals at a key location was not a positive function of total reinforcement for pecking that key; indeed, relative resistance to extinction for the two locations showed a weak negative relation to ratios of reinforcer totals for key location. These results confirm the determination of resistance to change by stimulus—reinforcer contingencies.