Non-Modality Specific Speech Coding: The Processing Of Lip-Read Information

Two experiments investigated the nature of the code in which lip-read speech is processed. In Experiment 1 subjects repeated words, presented with lip-read and masked auditory components out of synchrony by 600 ms. In one condition the lip-read input preceded the auditory input, and in the second condition the auditory input preceded the lip-read input. Direction of the modality lead did not affect the accuracy of report. Unlike auditory/graphic letter matching (Wood, 1974), the processing code used to match lip-read and auditory stimuli is insensitive to the temporal ordering of the input modalities. In Experiment 2, subjects were presented with two types of lists of colour names: in one list some words were heard, and some read; the other list consisted of heard and lip-read words. When asked to recall words from only one type of input presentation, subjects confused lip-read and heard words more frequently than they confused heard and read words. The results indicate that lip-read and heard speech share a common, non-modality specific, processing stage that excludes graphically presented phonological information.     

Induction by reinforcer schedules.

Traditional strategies for determining whether a reinforcer schedule enhances the occurrence of an activity are reviewed and critically evaluated. A basic assumption underlying these strategies is that it is possible to isolate the effect of reinforcer intermittency on schedule induction. It is concluded that this is not, in fact, possible. An alternative approach is proposed that emphasizes the inductive effects of the reinforcer schedule as a unit and the effects of particular aspects of the reinforcer schedule (e.g., interreinforcer interval, repetition of the reinforcer, reinforcer magnitude).     

Issues in diagnosing anxiety disorders

Research progress in the anxiety disorders is predicated on a useful classification system. In this paper, we review the reliability and validity data for theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed. (DSM-III) anxiety disorders and discuss the salient issues associated with both the conceptualization of anxiety disorders and the diagnostic criteria offered in the DSM-III. It is concluded that the diagnostic reliability for these disorders is, overall, satisfactory. A dearth of validity data, however, hinders progress in both the diagnosis and the treatment of the anxiety disorders. Nevertheless, the DSM-III work group has proposed several changes in the diagnostic criteria for the anxiety disorders. We find some of these proposed changes helpful in that they clarify current diagnostic criteria; changes in diagnostic criteria that alter the basic classification schema, however, seem to be premature.Preparation of this paper was supported in part by MIMH Research Grant 1368.On sabbatical leave from Indiana State University.     

Psychopathology in anxiety disorders

Complaints of anxiety, often meetingDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed. (DSM-III), criteria for anxiety disorder, are among the most common problems presenting to health practitioners. In spite of the frequency of anxiety and anxiety disorders, little is known about the basic psychopathology of these conditions that would lead to the development of more efficient and effective treatments and possible preventive efforts. Recently, there has been an increase in research on the psychopathology of anxiety disorders from biological, psychological, and social perspectives. The National Institute of Mental Health's Clinical Research Branch sponsored a 2-day workshop of investigators representing diverse research approaches to discuss emerging issues and research practices within the anxiety disorders. Discussions centered on a review of the general areas of classification, phenomenology, and etiology. A selective summary of this workshop is presented along with recommendations for specific research directions.     

Smoking and academic performance

Smokers and nonsmokers were compared on three aspects of academic achievement. Although exactly the same percentage of smokers and nonsmokers passed the first-year university examination, smokers obtained significantly higher marks. Similarly, smokers achieved significantly higher marks in their final year examinations in comparison with nonsmokers. Finally, a comparison of the tutorial essay marks of the smokers and nonsmokers again showed that smokers obtained significantly higher marks than nonsmokers. These data are consistent with the idea that ambitious students adopt smoking in the belief that it will help them study and sustain concentration.