Argument practices

The move to Postmodernism in argumentation is often predicated on the rejection of the formal basis of argument in logic. While this rejection may be justified, and is widely discussed in the literature, the loss of logic creates problems that a Postmodern theory of argument must address without recourse to logic and its attendant modernist assumptions. This essay argues that conceiving of argument in terms ofpractices will address the key problematics of Postmodernism without abandoning those features of argumentation that make it an important social, cultural and political practice. Implications for both theory and pedagogy are discussed.The author would like to acknowledge the invaluable commentary of, and discussions with, John Lyne, Charles Willard, Steven Fuller, and Ed Schiappa.     

Effects of initial success or failure in a stressful or relaxed environment on subsequent task performance

Forty male and 40 female undergraduate subjects worked on anagram problems in either a stressful or a relaxed environment after having experienced either success or failure on a similar task. Internal arousal, which was expected to be minimal following success in a relaxed setting and maximal following failure in the stressful environment, was assumed to bear an inverted U-shaped relation to performance. Consistent with the implications of these assumptions, achievement in a stressful setting was lower following initial failure than following initial success, while initial failure in a relaxed environment facilitated subsequent performance. The interpretation of these results was supported by the effects of the experimental variables on indirect measures of arousal as well as by the relationship between direct measures of arousal and task performance. In addition, the achievement of female subjects tended to be facilitated by failure while the performance of males was consistently debilitated by it.     

Hemispheric specialization in reading and word recognition

Three experiments dealing with hemispheric specialization are presented. In Experiment 1, words and/or faces were presented tachistoscopically to the left or right of fixation. Words were more accurately identified in the right visual field and faces were more accurately identified in the left visual field. A forced choice error analysis for words indicated that errors made for word stimuli were most frequently visually similar words and this effect was particularly pronounced in the left visual field. Two additional experiments supported this finding. On the basis of the results, it was argued that word identification is a multistage process, with visual feature analysis carried out by the right hemisphere and identification and naming by the left hemisphere. In addition, Kinsbourne's attentional model of brain function was rejected in favor of an anatomical model which suggests that simultaneous processing of verbal and nonverbal information does not constrict the attention of either hemisphere.     

Distance and fusion in Robinson Jeffers' “the purse-seine” and other poems

Distance and fusion are fundamental ideas in Bowenian thinking, especially as expressed in the dynamic of distancing and pursuing. In this paper I have used these ideas as a means to briefly examine a short selection of Robinson Jeffers' poetry, which provides us with a literary example of these concepts in action.My thanks to M. K. Lane and the anonymous reviewers of an earlier draft of this article for their many suggestions, especially to the reviewer who helped me better distinguish between distance and fusion, and intimacy and autonomy.     

In defence of iconic memory

According to a model of visual information-processing which originated with Sperling (1960), and which currently enjoys wide acceptance, the contents of brief alphanumeric displays are initially held in a high-capacity fast-decay visual-information store (“iconic memory”). Some of these items are subsequently transferred to a more durable form of storage; the remaining non-transferred items are lost. Observers can select which items are to be transferred on the basis of physical characteristics of the items (such as colour, location, size, shape or brightness).

This model has recently been attacked by Holding (1970, 1971, 1972, 1973), sometimes by claiming that iconic memory does not exist, and at other times by claiming that transfer from iconic memory cannot be selectively controlled by the observer. We argue in this paper that Holding's criticisms are incorrect, and that, even if they were correct, the experiment we report would not be open to objections he has raised concerning previous studies of iconic memory. Despite this, evidence fully supporting the orthodox model was obtained, and we therefore conclude that this model remains tenable.