Fixation and attention in apparent motion

The likelihood of reporting a figure in motion was measured when the point of fixation was systematically separated from the point of attention. More reports of optimal motion were made when the two points were separated than when they were close together. Control tests showed that the reduction in the probability of seeing motion through the center of fixation was more likely due to the structure of the eye than to the conflict of fixation point and object in illusory motion. The notion of attention as a perceptual event contributes little to these results.     

Addendum to “Remembering operations”

An error in analysis of data presented in the earlier paper is corrected here.     

Remembering operations

Two commonplace assumptions about encoding are that sentences are encoded and recognized on the basis of their semantic features primarily and that information regarding form features such as typography is typically ignored or discarded. These assumptions were tested m the present experiment where, within a signal-detection paradigm, S sorted sentences according to whether he had seen them before or not (old vs new) and, if they were old, whether their reappearance was in the same typography as on the first occurrence or a different one. Of the two typographies, one was familiar and the other unfamiliar. Results show that a considerable amount of information regarding surface features is stored for many minutes and that ease of initial encoding is inversely related to likelihood of subsequent recognition: sentences in the unfamiliar typography were remembered better. The results are probably not due to time spent encoding; control tests suggest that time spent encoding a difficult typography does not by itself increase recognition of the semantic content embodied in the typography. Other control tests show that pictorial features or images of the sentences play no significant role in their subsequent recognition. One interpretation of the results is that the analytic activities or cognitive operations that characterize initial acquisition play a significant role in subsequent recognition.     

On sentential anagrams: Making sentences out of words

Perception and production of language often have a problem-solving component to them, and this has not been much studied. The present article describes an exploratory approach to some aspects of production which required college students to reorder sentential anagrams. The main finding was that the number of words to be ordered was the greatest influence on performance, whereas little if any influence was exerted by the grammatical variables studied. Although the problem-solving process does not model all language use, it may model the more creative aspect, in which people try to make nonstandard statements. In contrast to a common current view that sentences are holistic, well-formed linguistic objects in mind, the present work emphasizes the developmental and interactive aspect of language production.This work was supported by Grant A7655 from the National, Research Council of Canada and by Leave Fellowship W 760 174 from Canada Council.     

Size in the visual processing of faces and words

We studied the influence of variations of stimulus size upon recognition of words and faces. Size played an important role in the recognition of faces but was irrelevant to the recognition of words, over a range of sizes. More detailed analysis revealed that although irrelevant to recognition, size of words was nevertheless encoded, with some consequences similar to those for recognition of faces. The results were interpreted in terms of stimulus-specific analyses, and this view was contrasted with other notions of mental representation.     

Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials?

Antidepressants, in particular newer agents, are among the most widely prescribed medications worldwide with annual sales of billions of dollars. The introduction of these agents in the market has passed through seemingly strict regulatory control. Over a thousand randomized trials have been conducted with antidepressants. Statistically significant benefits have been repeatedly demonstrated and the medical literature is flooded with several hundreds of "positive" trials (both pre-approval and post-approval). However, two recent meta-analyses question this picture. The first meta-analysis used data that were submitted to FDA for the approval of 12 antidepressant drugs. While only half of these trials had formally significant effectiveness, published reports almost ubiquitously claimed significant results. "Negative" trials were either left unpublished or were distorted to present "positive" results. The average benefit of these drugs based on the FDA data was of small magnitude, while the published literature suggested larger benefits. A second meta-analysis using also FDA-submitted data examined the relationship between treatment effect and baseline severity of depression. Drug-placebo differences increased with increasing baseline severity and the difference became large enough to be clinically important only in the very small minority of patient populations with severe major depression. In severe major depression, antidepressants did not become more effective, simply placebo lost effectiveness. These data suggest that antidepressants may be less effective than their wide marketing suggests. Short-term benefits are small and long-term balance of benefits and harms is understudied. I discuss how the use of many small randomized trials with clinically non-relevant outcomes, improper interpretation of statistical significance, manipulated study design, biased selection of study populations, short follow-up, and selective and distorted reporting of results has built and nourished a seemingly evidence-based myth on antidepressant effectiveness and how higher evidence standards, with very large long-term trials and careful prospective meta-analyses of individual-level data may reach closer to the truth and clinically useful evidence.     

The 9th annual INDUS-EM 2013 Emergency Medicine Summit, “Principles,Practices, and Patients,” a level one international meeting,Kerala University of Health Sciences and Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute,Thrissur, Kerala,India, October 23–27, 2013

INDUS-EM is India’s only level one conference imparting and exchanging quality knowledge in acute care. Specifically, in general and specialized emergency care and training in trauma, burns, cardiac, stroke, environmental and disaster medicine. It provides a series of exchanges regarding academic development and implementation of training tools related to developing future academic faculty and residents in Emergency Medicine in India. The INDUS-EM leadership and board of directors invited scholars from multiple institutions to participate in this advanced educational symposium that was held in Thrissur, Kerala in October 2013.     

“Are You My Mommy?” On the Genetic Basis of Parenthood

What exactly is it that makes someone a parent? Many people hold that parenthood is grounded, in the first instance, in the natural derivation of one person's genetic constitution from the genetic constitution of others. We refer to this view as "Geneticism". In Part I we distinguish three forms of geneticism on the basis of whether they hold that direct genetic derivation is sufficient, necessary, or both sufficient and necessary, for parenthood. (Call these 'Sufficiency', 'Necessity', and 'Strong' Geneticism, respectively.) Part I also explores the relationship between geneticism and the debate over surrogacy. Parts two through four examine three arguments for geneticism: the Property argument, the Causal argument, and the Parity argument. We conclude that none of these arguments succeeds. The failure of positive arguments for a view cannot demonstrate that the view is false; however, in light of our arguments we provisionally conclude that 'Strong' and 'Necessity' Geneticism are unacceptable. Our arguments do not undermine 'Sufficiency' Geneticism, so this thesis is considerably more promising than the others. But sufficiency geneticism is also compatible with a much more pluralistic account of the nature of parenthood.