Trouble articulating the right words: Evidence for a response‐exclusion account of distraction during semantic fluency

It is widely held that single‐word lexical access is a competitive process, a view based largely on the observation that naming a picture is slowed in the presence of a distractor‐word. However, problematic for this view is that a low‐frequency distractor‐word slows the naming of a picture more than does a high‐frequency word. This supports an alternative, response‐exclusion, account in which a distractor‐word interferes because it must be excluded from an articulatory output buffer before the right word can be articulated (the picture name): A high, compared to low, frequency word accesses the buffer more quickly and, as such, can also be excluded more quickly. Here we studied the respective roles of competition and response‐exclusion for the first time in the context of semantic verbal fluency, a setting requiring the accessing of, and production of, multiple words from long‐term memory in response to a single semantic cue. We show that disruption to semantic fluency by a sequence of to‐be‐ignored spoken distractors is also greater when those distractors are low in frequency, thereby extending the explanatory compass of the response‐exclusion account to a multiple‐word production setting and casting further doubt on the lexical‐selection‐by‐competition view. The results can be understood as reflecting the contribution of speech output processes to semantic fluency.     

‘Oh I do like to be beside the seaside’: opportunity structures for four un/underemployed young people living in English coastal towns

Long-term unemployed young people are a ‘social concern’ in many countries. The focus for research is usually cities, but may also include rural areas. The qualitative study described in this paper focuses instead on four young people living in coastal towns in South East England. The study suggests that their experiences in education and employment markets are shaped, negatively, by their particular location and the ongoing opportunity structures. The paper outlines their views and discusses the three main themes that emerged from the analysis: opportunity structures, supported resilience and the impact of living in a coastal town. Implications for targeted youth guidance are considered, alongside a consideration of the reflexive role of the researcher in such work.     

Why Did They "Choose" to Stay? Perspectives of Hurricane Katrina Observers and Survivors

ABSTRACT— Models of agency—powerful implicit assumptions about what constitutes normatively "good" action—shaped how observers and survivors made meaning after Hurricane Katrina. In Study 1 , we analyzed how 461 observers perceived survivors who evacuated ( leavers ) or stayed ( stayers ) in New Orleans. Observers described leavers positively (as agentic, independent, and in control) and stayers negatively (as passive and lacking agency). Observers' perceptions reflected the disjoint model of agency, which is prevalent in middle-class White contexts and defines "good" actions as those that emanate from within the individual and proactively influence the environment. In Study 2 , we examined interviews with 79 survivors and found that leavers and stayers relied on divergent models of agency. Leavers emphasized independence, choice, and control, whereas stayers emphasized interdependence, strength, and faith. Although both leavers and stayers exercised agency, observers failed to recognize stayers' agency and derogated them because observers assumed that being independent and in control was the only way to be agentic.     

REVERSAL OF BASELINE RELATIONS AND STIMULUS EQUIVALENCE: II. CHILDREN

In a systematic replication of a study using college-student subjects (Pilgrim & Galizio, 1990), 5- to 7-year-old children learned two conditional discriminations (i.e., A1B1, A2B2, A1C1, and A2C2) in a two-choice arbitrary match-to-sample task and showed the emergence of two three-member equivalence classes (A1B1C1 and A2B2C2). Baseline conditional discrimination performances were quickly controlled by reversals of the AC reinforcement contingencies (i.e., choosing Comparison Stimulus C2 was reinforced given Sample A1, and choosing C1 was reinforced given Sample A2) when the reversals were introduced in restricted baselines. On reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity/equivalence probes following the reversal, there was some limited indication of equivalence-class reorganization (i.e., A1B1C2 and A2B2C1) in keeping with the concurrently performed baseline relations for 2 of 5 subjects, but the predominant pattern across probe trials was one of inconsistent conditional control. These findings suggest that, given similar challenges, equivalence-class performances may be more easily disrupted in young children than in adults.     

The fee in psychotherapy: Practitioners' accounts

This paper addresses the real and symbolic significance of fee-paying in the psychotherapeutic relationship through the context of available (mostly American) literature in this area and the extent to which the concerns expressed in the literature are reflected in the attitudes of a small sample of psychotherapists in Britain. Therapists were interviewed to establish whether they saw fee-paying as an essential or important element in the therapeutic relationship, whether they saw its presence or absence as affecting process or outcome and whether any counter-transferential issues could be deduced from the way therapists explored their money-relationships with their clients. Analysis of the interviews reflected the debates in the literature and indicated that those who felt most strongly that fee-paying was essential for effective psychotherapy, and that the payment of a fee was symbolically important for their clients, were also those who were most heavily dependent upon fee-paying for their livelihood and who tended to be less likely to express ambivalence about receiving money. Speculations on the basis of this research centre around whether therapists may assert client need in order to defend themselves against or legitimate their own need.