Threshold variability in subliminal perception experiments: fixed threshold estimates reduce power to detect subliminal effects.

In studies of subliminal perception, a threshold for awareness is usually estimated for each S (e.g., the stimulus duration that yields chance discrimination performance). This article shows that if the S's true threshold varies randomly from trial to trial, estimation of a fixed threshold has important consequences. Specifically, the estimated threshold approaches the minimum of the distribution of true thresholds, and the power of an experiment to detect subliminal perception is reduced. Because there is much evidence that true thresholds vary across trials, threshold variability may have seriously weakened previous experiments that tested for subliminal perception. Fortunately, it is possible to estimate the maximum power loss resulting from threshold variability and therefore to design an experiment with acceptable power even in the presence of variability.     

Imagery and meaning,the cognitive science connection

Taking the integrated viewpoints of causal theory of reference, cognitive science and the notion of correspondence principles from physics, this paper addresses the problems of creativity, the nature of visual imagery and the manner in which science progresses.     

Discrete versus continuous stage models of human information processing: in search of partial output

This article introduces a new technique designed to study the flow of information through processing stages in choice reaction time tasks. The technique was designed to determine whether response preparation can begin before stimulus identification is complete ("continuous" models), or if a stimulus must be fully identified prior to any response activation ("discrete" models). To control the information available at various times during stimulus identification, some relevant stimulus characteristics were made easy to discriminate and some were made hard to discriminate. The experimental strategy was to look for effects of partial output based on information conveyed by characteristics that were easy to discriminate. The technique capitalized on the fact, demonstrated in Experiment 1, that preparation of two response fingers on the same hand is more effective than preparation of two response fingers on different hands. The usefulness of partial output was varied by manipulating the assignments of stimuli to responses. For some mappings partial information could contribute to effective response preparation because the responses consistent with partial information were assigned to fingers on the same hand. For other mappings partial information could not contribute to effective response preparation because the responses consistent with partial information were assigned to fingers of different hands. Performance differences between these mappings were considered evidence that partial information about a stimulus was transmitted to response activation processes before the stimulus was uniquely identified, and thus were considered evidence against discrete transmission of information about the stimulus as a whole. A variety of stimulus sets were studied; the results suggest that information is transmitted discretely with respect to stimulus codes, although distinct codes activated by a single stimulus may be transmitted at different times.     

In defense of monotheistic father religion

Many questions are currently being raised, by women especially, regarding the religious, social, and psychological effects of the emphasis on God as father in Western religion. Viewed in the light of key insights from developmental psychoanalysis, patriarchal monotheism does indeed seem to confront us with a dilemma. However, a resolution of this dilemma does not appear to lie in a move toward androgyny or matriarchy. Evaluated from the point of view of its overall capacity to mediate a meaningful, unified, personal religious reality to both sexes, monotheistic father religion is still the preferable ultimate symbolic configuration.     

Controllability and human stress: method, evidence and theory.

Concepts are defined and evidence reviewed on whether control reduces stress in man. Individuals seem to prefer instrumental control over an aversive event, seem to prefer to administer it to themselves, and are less aroused when waiting for a controllable event. When groups without control have equal predictability, having control is still less arousing; as potential (but unexercised) control seems to be. The evidence also suggests that controllable events may hurt less. Methodological weaknesses and empirical gaps in these data are pointed out. These data are grossly inconsistent with Relevant Feedback theory and rather inconsistent with Information-seeking theory and Safety Signal theory. A Minimax hypothesis is proposed: When individuals control aversive events, they believe relief to be caused by a stable source—their own response. This belief entails that maximum future danger will be minimized. When they have no control, they believe relief to be less stable, which entails no guarantee that maximum future danger will be minimized. The data are largely consistent with the Minimax hypothesis and wholly consistent when Minimax is supplemented by the premise that aversive events hurt less when encountered against a background of relaxation.