Generalization decrement and not overshadowing by associative competition among pairs of landmarks in a navigation task

When they are trained in a Morris water maze to find a hidden platform, whose location is defined by a number of equally spaced visual landmarks round the circumference of the pool, rats are equally able to find the platform when tested with any two of the landmarks (Prados, & Trobalon, 1998; Rodrigo, Chamizo, McLaren, & Mackintosh, 1997). This suggests that none of the landmarks was completely overshadowed by any of the others. In Experiment 1 one pair of groups was trained with four equally salient visual landmarks spaced at equal intervals around the edge of the pool, while a second pair was trained with two landmarks only, either relatively close to or far from the hidden platform. After extensive training, both male and female rats showed a reciprocal overshadowing effect: on a test with two landmarks only (either close to or far from the platform), rats trained with four landmarks spent less time in the platform quadrant than those trained with only two. Experiment 2 showed that animals trained with two landmarks and then tested with four also performed worse on test than those trained and tested with two landmarks only. This suggests that generalization decrement, rather than associative competition, provides a sufficient explanation for the overshadowing observed in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 provided a within-experiment replication of the results of Experiments 1 and 2. Finally, Experiment 4 showed that rats trained with a configuration of two landmarks learn their identity.     

Measure of the ability to rotate mental images

The aim of this study was to design an innovative test to measure the ability to rotate mental images. An unfolded cube was designed, which participants had to reassemble mentally, prior to mentally rotating the image, and answering 23 questions concerning the cube. The Measure of the Ability to Rotate Mental Images (MARMI) test was administered to 354 participants. Cronbach alpha was .90, and high correlations between this test and other image rotation and spatial image tests were found. However, poor correlations were observed between test scores and the responses to the visual imagery vividness questionnaire. Both test reliability and validity underscore that it is a good instrument for measuring the ability to rotate mental images.     

Method in Kant and Hegel

ABSTRACT

For Kant as for Hegel method is not a structure or procedure imported into philosophy from without, as, e.g. a mathematical demonstration in modern physics or in the proof-structure of philosophies such as Spinoza’s or Wolff’s. For both Hegel and Kant method is the arrangement that reason gives its contents and cognitions; for both, that is, method and object do not fall asunder, unlike in all disciplines other than philosophy. For Kant method is the design and plan of the whole, the scientific form that guides the organization of cognitions (KrV A 707/B 736, Ak 24, 780). Likewise, Hegel writes that method is the consciousness of the form of its inner movement (WL 1, 49, SL 53, W 3 47, PhS 28). Unfortunately, Hegel never considers Kant an example or a precursor or a positive role model. It is important to ask why Hegel never takes seriously Kant’s Doctrine of Method. Why, if he shares so many central points with the Architectonic of the first Critique, does he never acknowledge Kant as a possible ally? Why does he misunderstand Kant on analysis and synthesis as he does? These are some of the questions I plan to discuss in this paper.