Spatial attention in Ponzo-like patterns.

A variant of Ponzo's pattern was devised by drawing converging oblique lines at the ends of each of two horizontal lines that were located directly one above the other. Pairs of converging or diverging fins (either between or outside the horizontal shafts) were systematically removed. The results showed that, as predicted by integrative field theory, oblique lines between the shafts produced more distortion than did oblique lines outside the shafts. Also, it was shown that the attentive field construct in integrative field theory was crucial for predicting patterns of means and variances in this experiment. The modified Ponzo effect was shown to have much in common with the classical Müller-Lyer illusion. The subtle differences between the two were explained by proposing that the size of the optimum attentive field was larger in the Ponzo tasks than in the Müller-Lyer tasks because expansion fins are found on both shafts in the Ponzo-like figure.     

Preference can be more powerful than detection of oddity as a test of discriminability.

Subjects presented with sets of three samples, two of distilled water and one of tap water, were significantly more consistent in choosing the tap water as preferable than they were in identifying it as the odd sample in the set. The result is opposite to the prediction of high-threshold models of sensory discrimination, which say that if a difference is not noticed, preferences will be random, whereas if a difference is noticed, preferences may still be in either direction. The result can be quantitatively explained by a model advanced by Frijters to explain an analogous anomaly found with the triangle test used in the food industry. Applying his model to the observed proportions yields essentially equivalent estimates of sensory difference (d' = 1.5, approximately) from the two tasks, and a direction of preference almost unanimously in favor of the tap water that was used. Since the model predicts that the proportion of subjects choosing the odd item will depart further from chance in the preference task than in the oddity task, the former has greater power to reject the null hypothesis of no sensory difference if one exists and if preference is overwhelmingly in one direction.     

Response competition: a major source of interference in a tactile identification task.

Two experiments investigated the ability of subjects to identify a moving, tactile stimulus. In both experiments, the subjects were presented with a target to their left index fingerpad and a nontarget (also moving) to their left middle fingerpad. Subjects were instructed to attend only to the target location and to respond "1" if the stimulus moved either to the left or up the finger, and to respond "2" if the stimulus moved either right or down the finger. The results showed that accuracy was better and reaction times were faster when the target and nontarget moved in the same direction than when they moved in different directions. When the target and nontarget moved in different directions, accuracy was significantly better and reaction times were significantly faster when the two stimuli had the same assigned response than when they had different responses. The results provide support for the conclusion that movement information is processed across adjacent fingers to the level of incipient response activation, even when subjects attempt to focus their attention on one location on the skin.     

Categorical time production: evidence for discrete timing in motor control.

Subjects performed a repetitive manual tapping task, attempting to match a given rate of auditory stimulus pulses, first with the pulses audible (synchronization) and then with the pulses turned off (continuation). In different sessions, the interstimulus interval (ISI) was selected from the range 175 to 825 msec in steps of 25 msec, with different ISI values presented in a random order. Across this range of ISI conditions, interresponse intervals (IRIs) exhibited alternating positive bias (too slow) and negative bias (too fast). We interpret this pattern of bias in terms of a discrete, or categorical, timing mechanism in motor timing. Categorical time production can be viewed as extending our conception of the timekeeper in Wing's (Wing & Kristofferson, 1973a, 1973b) two-process model of motor timing and may be related to the system of multiple clocks proposed by Kristofferson (1980) to explain a categorical pattern of variability measures in duration discrimination.     

Fixed-ratio pausing: Joint effects of past reinforcer magnitude and stimuli correlated with upcoming magnitude

Pigeons responded on fixed-ratio schedules ending in small or large reinforcers (grain presentations of different duration) interspersed within each session. In mixed-schedule conditions, the response key was lit with a single color throughout the session, and pausing was directly related to the past reinforcer (longer pauses after large reinforcers than after small ones). In multiple-schedule conditions, different colors accompanied the ratios ending in small and large reinforcers, and pausing was affected by the upcoming reinforcer as well as the past one. Pauses were shorter before large reinforcers than before small ones, but they continued to be longer after large reinforcers than after small ones. The influence of the past reinforcer was modulated by the magnitude of the upcoming reinforcer; in the presence of the stimulus before the small reinforcer, the effect of the past reinforcer was enhanced relative to its effect in the stimulus before the large reinforcer. These results show that pausing between ratios is jointly determined by two competing factors: past conditions of reinforcement and stimuli correlated with upcoming conditions.     

Discriminability between alternatives in a switching-key concurrent schedule

Six pigeons were trained to discriminate between two intensities of white light in a symbolic matching-to-sample procedure. These stimuli were then used to signal which schedule was available on the main key in a switching-key concurrent schedule. The concurrent schedules led to a symbolic matching-to-sample phase in which the subject identified the concurrent schedule to which it last responded before a reinforcer could be obtained. The concurrent schedules were varied across conditions. Discriminability, measured during the symbolic matching-to-sample performance, was high throughout and did not differ across the two procedures. Performance in the concurrent schedules was like that typically obtained using these schedules. Delays were then arranged between completion of the concurrent schedules and presentations of the symbolic matching-to-sample phase. A series of conditions with an intervening delay of 10 s showed that both concurrent-schedule performance and symbolic matching-to-sample performance were affected by the delay in a similar way; that is, choice responding was closer to indifference.     

Effects of reinforcer delays on choice as a function of income level

Three rats earned their daily food ration by responding during individual trials either on a lever that delivered one food pellet immediately or on a second lever that delivered three pellets after a delay that was continuously adjusted to ensure substantial responding to both alternatives. Choice of the delayed reinforcer increased when the number of trials per session was reduced. This result suggests that models seeking closure on choice effects must include a parameter reflecting how preference changes with sessionwide income. Moreover, models positing that reinforcer probability and immediacy (1/delay) function equivalently in choice are called into question by the finding that probability and immediacy produce opposing effects when income level is changed.     

Time-place learning by pigeons, Columba livia

In each of two experiments, 2 pigeons received discrimination training in which food reinforcement for key pecking was conditional upon both spatial and temporal cues. In Experiment 1, food was available for periods of 30 s at each of three locations (pecking keys) during trials that lasted 90 s. In Experiment 2, food was available for periods of 15 min at each of four locations (pecking keys) during a 60-min trial. In both experiments, pigeons' key pecking was jointly controlled by the spatial and temporal cues. These data, and other recent experiments, suggest that animals learn relationships between temporal and spatial cues that predict stable patterns of food availability.     

Towards a postmodern ethics: Sir Isaiah Berlin and John Caputo

Conclusions It may seem to their opponents that they are trying to have their cake and eat it too. Postmodernists admit that their own paradigm must be and will be placed into question by future thinkers. But if they can anticipate an eventual reaffirmation of their paradoxical stand in an ongoing oscillating debate, then cannot it be said that they have arrived at a truth that transcends their time and place in history? And, if so, is not their fallibilist stance in fact self-referentially inconsistent? The response of postmodernists is the claim that each reaffirmation of a fallibilist epistemology and ethics throughout history is in fact sui generis. And this is the case because each reaffirmation has its own unique context within which it is made. Modernists will of course argue that these contextual differences are nonessential and irrelevant. And the debate over the problem of the One and the Many is once again launched in a new context. Thus far from running away from the paradoxical position that what they assert is both true and false, postmodernists revel in such inconsistencies.But does not such an ethical stance resemble the Sisyphean nightmare of being condemned to roll a heavy stone up a cliff only to have it keep falling back to the bottom ad infinitum? If no decision is innocent of doing some harm in the world, why should we bother to play the moral game at all? Indeed, what possible help is a postmodernist ethics when it comes to making some of the complex and crucial decisions we face today if it refuses to say anything substantial beyond the recommendations that we be cautious and balanced?And the postmodernist can only reply that we are letting our neurotic need for solid foundations frighten us. For ethics is an art not a science. There are no absolute rules. If we do not like the way the game is set up, then we are simply revealing our ultimate hubris in the face of a mystery requiring deep humility.