Quantification of three-dimensional structures

A mathematical model, based on additive subcomponents of grouping, subitizing and adding, was derived to account for quantification latencies of three-dimensional block arrangements. Subitizing is the process that people use to directly quantify a small number of objects without counting. It was found that most people consistently subitized up to four blocks. With more than four blocks, people resorted to grouping and adding, and the model was able to account for these data. The structural variables of compactness, symmetry, linearity, and planarity were shown to have small effects on quantification latencies relative to the large effect of number of blocks. Of these structural variables, compactness had the largest effect, and in terms of the model, it is suggested that visual structure had its effect on the perceptual grouping subcomponent.     

The consequences of noncooperation for the target of third party instigated aggression

Consequences for a new target as a function of noncooperation was investigated in the instigative aggression paradigm. Subjects instigated partners to aggress against an opponent by suggesting what shock intensity to deliver. The partner was either cooperative (i.e., complied with the suggestion) or noncooperative (i.e., refused to set high shocks). Subsequently, subjects were given the opportunity to be directly aggressive by actually setting the shocks themselves. During this phase a new target who was nonprovocative was introduced. Subjects aggressed alone, in the presence of their partner, or in the presence of a new person. Results revealed that noncooperation reduced the level of instigative aggression and carried over to the second phase of the experiment. Subjects who had had cooperative partners were more aggressive toward the new target than were subjects who had had noncooperative partners. The presence or absence of the partner was not significant.     

Feedback modalities as a consideration in biofeedback applications

Effects associated with specific feedback modalities are neither clear nor well explored. The present paper provides an overview of feedback modalities typically used for the presentation of information from major physiological systems. Some consideration of feedback modality in relation to theory is provided with a discussion of trends in past applications.     

Effects of visual familiarity on “same” and “different” decision processes

An experiment was conducted in which subjects matched upper and lower case versions of well-known abbreviations, such as BBC and etc, and meaningless controls. “Same” RT showed a familiarity effect for upper case versions of abbreviations such as BBC and GPO, but not for the lower case versions bbc and gpo. The converse did not occur for abbreviations such as etc, which were thought to occur most frequently in lower case. The “different” RT was inhibited by familiarity, with pairs such as IBM GPO being classified less rapidly than their lower case versions or controls. These effects occurred for subjects instructed to report “No” for “same” displays and “Yes” for “different” displays as well as for subjects given a conventional decision-report assignment. Some implications of these results for an account of the manner in which familiarity affects graphemic comparison processes are considered.     

A feed delivery system for the study of choice behavior in cows

A feed delivery system for the study of choice behavior in cows is described. Supportive data are provided for six dairy cows exposed to two-alternative, concurrent variable-interval schedules.     

Judgments of average lightness and darkness: A further consideration of inverse attributes

Twenty subjects judged the average lightness and darkness of paired Munsell gray papers according to magnitude estimation and category rating instructions. The data from category rating were approximately consistent with an averaging model but those from magnitude estimation were not. An analysis in terms of a two-stage model suggested that category ratings and magnitude estimates of each attribute were produced on the basis of the same composition rule, but implicated different output transformations. In judging darkness, subjects appeared to have reversed the scales employed in judging lightness, by a linear transformation in the case of category rating and by a reciprocal transformation in the case of magnitude estimation. However, differences between the input parameters obtained from judgments of lightness and darkness suggested that the scales of these attributes constructed from judgments of average magnitude may be biased.