Bizarre imagery, interference, and distinctiveness

Previous studies have shown that bizarre and common images produce equivalent levels of recall in unmixed-list designs. Using unmixed lists, we tested the view that bizarre images would be less susceptible than common images to common sources of interference. In all experiments, subjects imaged a list of either bizarre or common sentences and then performed some kind of interfering task before recalling the initial list of sentences. Experiment 1 showed that bizarre images were better accessed than common images after imaging an intervening list of common sentences. Also, components of common images tended to be better recalled than those of bizarre images after imaging an intervening list of bizarre sentences. Experiments 2a and 2b showed that interfering tasks consisting of studying lists of common concrete nouns did not differentially affect memory for bizarre and common images. In Experiment 3, labeling and imaging an interfering list of common pictures produced higher recall of bizarre images. Generally, bizarre images appeared to be less susceptible than common images to interference from certain types of common encodings. Importantly, the superior recall of bizarre images was always due to greater image (sentence) access, whereas higher recall of common images was associated with greater recovery of the image (sentence) constituents. Explanation of the precise pattern of results requires consideration of the distinctive properties of bizarre images.     

The role of gender and taste class in the effects of stress on eating.

Participating in a laboratory study of the effects of stress on eating, healthy, nonsmoking men and women were shown a film about industrial accidents (stress condition) or a pleasant travelogue (control condition) and had access to sweet, salty, and bland snack food. Analyses of food consumption data revealed a significant interaction between sex of subject and the stress manipulation: Stress markedly and significantly decreased food consumption by men but resulted in some increased food consumption by women. Across the three food taste categories, men consistently ate less under stress than they did in the control condition. In contrast, women ate nearly twice as much sweet food and more bland food under stress than they did in the control condition, but these effects were not statistically significant. These results indicate that the relationship between stress and eating depends on the sex of the subject and may relate to type of food available. Contrasting generalizations about stress and eating reported in the archived literature can largely be reconciled by considering these interacting variables.     

An analysis of reinforcement sensitivity theory and the five-factor model

Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) and the Five-Factor Model (FFM) are two prominent personality accounts that have emerged from different backgrounds. Although the two accounts are applied to similar research topics, there is limited empirical work examining the correspondence between them. The current study explored the relationship between RST-based personality traits and the FFM domains and facets in an undergraduate sample (n = 668). Regression analyses indicated that Sensitivity to Punishment (SP) was positively associated with Neuroticism and Agreeableness, and negatively associated with Extraversion, Openness, and Conscientiousness. In contrast, Sensitivity to Reward (SR) was positively associated with Extraversion and Neuroticism, and negatively associated with Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. Exploratory analyses at the facet level specified the relationship between SP, SR, and each domain. A factor analysis was also conducted to explore the higher-order factor structure of RST and the FFM domains. Three factors emerged, which we labelled SP, Stability-Impulsivity, and Sensation Seeking. Taken together, these findings suggest that there is substantial overlap between these two accounts of personality. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dimensional adjectives: factors affecting children's ability to compare objects using novel words

A series of 3 studies tested the hypothesis that children's difficulty acquiring dimensional adjectives, such as big, little, tall, and short, is a consequence of how these words are used by adults. Three- and 4-year-olds were asked to compare pairs of objects drawn from a novel stimulus series using real dimension words (taller and shorter; Study 1) and novel dimension words (maller and borger; Studies 1-3). Characteristics of testing, including the presence or absence of a categorization task, were manipulated. Findings indicated that children easily acquired novel dimension words when they were used in a strictly comparative fashion but had difficulty when also exposed to the categorical form of usage. It is concluded that having to learn both categorical and comparative meanings at once may impede acquisition of dimensional adjectives.