Attentional biases in geometric form perception

This paper reports the operation of robust attentional bias to the top and right during perception of small, single geometric forms. Same/different judgements of successively presented standard and comparison forms are faster when local differences are located at top and right rather than in other regions of the forms. The bias persists when form size is reduced to approximately one degree of visual angle, and it is unaffected by saccadic eye movements and by instructions to attend to other reliably differentiating regions of the forms. Results lend support in various degrees to two of the possible explanations of the bias: (1) a static, skewed distribution of attentional resources around eye fixation; and (2) biased, covert scanning that commences invariably at the top and right of stim ulus forms. Origins of the bias in terms of possible left-hemispheric capacity for constructing representations of visual stimuli from parts, as well as in terms of reading experience and prevailing optic flow during locomotion through space are considered. Recent investigations of conditions under which the bias can be maintained or reduced are mentioned.     

Training Observers to Detect Deception Effects of Self-Monitoring and Rehearsal

It was predicted that trained observers would detect deception more accurately than untrained observers. More specifically, it was predicted that the highest deception detection accuracy would be found among trained observers judging the veracity of low self-monitors and unrehearsed liars, whereas the lowest detection accuracy would be found among untrained observers judging the veracity of high self-monitors and rehearsed deceivers. It also was hypothesized that the discrepancy between observers‘actual ability to detect deception and their certainty in the accuracy of their judgments would be smaller for trained observers than for untrained observers. Observers trained to detect deception used six behavioral cues based on research by deTurck and Miller (1985): (a) message duration, (b) response latency, (c) adaptors, (d) pauses, (e) nonfluencies, and (f) hand gestures. Results confirmed both hypotheses.