Short-term memory and working memory as indices of children's cognitive skills

In the current literature, empirical and conceptual distinctions have been drawn between a more or less passive short-term memory (STM) system and a more dynamic working memory (WM) system. Distinct tasks have been developed to measure their capacity and research has generally shown that, for adults, WM, and not STM, is a reliable predictor of general cognitive ability. However, the locus of the differences between the tasks has received little attention. We present data from children concerning measures of matrices reasoning ability, reading, and numerical skill along with forward and backward order serial recall of WM, STM, and STM with articulatory suppression tasks. As indices of children's cognitive skills, STM and WM are shown to be rather similar in terms of memory per se. Neither the opportunity for rehearsal nor task complexity provides satisfactory explanations for differences between memory tests.     

Modifying driver behaviour with passenger feedback

A feedback programme was employed to help drivers improve their safety behaviour based on the idea that particular types of driver error result from contingency traps as defined by Fuller [Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 24 (1991) 73]. Two drivers and their single respective passengers participated. For each driver, repeated in-car observations were made of four unsafe driving behaviours. Two of these were sequentially targeted in the behavioural intervention that involved the passengers providing informational feedback to their driver. Both drivers showed a marked improvement across the targeted behaviours. The study demonstrated the applicability of behaviour analysis to the traffic domain and the efficacy of individual feedback as a behavioural tool for positive behaviour modification.     

A constrained optimization model of risky decisions

A decision model is formulated for individual choices between gambles whose probabilities and payoffs are explicitly stated. The decision situation is characterized as R_N = (X, P, Z, T, α) where X is a payoff matrix, P is the objective probability distribution over the states of nature, Z is a class of objective functions, T is tolerable regret and 1 ? α is the maximum probability for accepting regrets greater than T. Given R_N, the problem of selecting a strategy is the solution of a chance constrained optimization problem. The solutions for choice situations having two alternatives and n states of nature are developed in a series of theorems. Some implications for experimentation and possible applications are discussed.     

Visuo-spatial representations of the alphabet in synaesthetes and non-synaesthetes

Visuo-spatial representations of the alphabet (so-called 'alphabet forms') may be as common as other types of sequence-space synaesthesia, but little is known about them or the way they relate to implicit spatial associations in the general population. In the first study, we describe the characteristics of a large sample of alphabet forms visualized by synaesthetes. They most often run from left to right and have salient features (e.g., bends, breaks) at particular points in the sequence that correspond to chunks in the 'Alphabet Song' and at the alphabet mid-point. The Alphabet Song chunking suggests that the visuo-spatial characteristics are derived, at least in part, from those of the verbal sequence learned earlier in life. However, these synaesthetes are no faster at locating points in the sequence (e.g., what comes before/after letter X?) than controls. They tend to be more spatially consistent (measured by eye tracking) and letters can act as attentional cues to left/right space in synaesthetes with alphabet forms (measured by saccades), but not in non-synaesthetes. This attentional cueing suggests dissociation between numbers (which reliably act as attentional cues in synaesthetes and non-synaesthetes) and letters (which act as attentional cues in synaesthetes only).     

SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement

This paper presents two approximate methods for multiattribute utility measurement, SMARTS and SMARTER, each based on an elicitation procedure for weights. Both correct an error in SMART, originally proposed by Edwards in 1977, and in addition SMARTER is simpler to use. SMARTS uses linear approximations to single-dimension utility functions, an additive aggregation model, and swing weights. The paper proposes tests for the usability of these approximations. SMARTER, based on a formally justifiable weighting procedure developed by Barron and Barrett, uses the same procedures as SMARTS except that it omits the second of two elicitation steps in swing weights, substituting calculations based on ranks. It can be shown to perform about 98% as well as SMARTS does, without requiring any difficult judgments from elicitees.