陈莲笙道长生平

陈莲笙道长生于1917年10月25日,上海市人.历任中国道教协会副会长,中国道教协会顾问,上海市道教协会会长.上海市道教协会名誉会长,上海城隍庙住持,上海道学院院长,<上海道教>杂志主编,上海市宗教学会理事,上海市政协第七届委员,上海市政协第八、九届常委等职.     

Binocular cues in the perception of distance of a point source of light

The ability to make egocentric distance estimates of a single point source of light, seen in darkness and without the cues of changing size and luminance, was investigated in sixteen observers. The attenuation required to maintain constant luminance, when the target was viewed from different distances, was shown to follow the inverse square law providing the angle subtended by the light was less than 20 s arc. Distance changes were also simulated by means of a split mirror which produced vergence cues, or by test lenses to provide accommodation cues. Over the range 0.5 to 9.2 m distance estimates were surprisingly accurate, although there was some overestimation of near and underestimation of far distances. Most observers made good judgements when only convergence cues were varied, whereas no observers made consistently good judgements when only accommodation cues were varied. The difficulties are discussed in terms of the accommodation-convergence link. When distance was simulated by changing convergence and accommodation cues, estimates were not as good as when real distance was changed. Since good estimates were made with brief target exposures, these judgements were not based on subsequent convergence or accommodation changes. It is suggested that the metric or reference against which the apparently absolute judgements were made was the efferent demand signal associated with a 'resting' position of convergence in darkness.     

Book reviews

TOATES, F. Animal Behaviour: A Systems Approach. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. 1980. Pp. 299. Hardback £17. Paper back £6.40 ISBN 0 471 27724.

DICKINSON, A. Contemporary Animal Learning Theory. Cambridge: University Press. 1980. Pp. 177. Hardback £12.50. Paperback £3.95. ISBN 0 521 23469 7.     

The Faulty Magnitude Detector: Why SNARC‐Like Tasks Cannot Support a Generalized Magnitude System

Do people represent space, time, number, and other conceptual domains using a generalized magnitude system (GMS)? To answer this question, numerous studies have used the spatial‐numerical association of response codes (SNARC) task and its variants. Yet, for a combination of reasons, SNARC‐like effects cannot provide evidence for a GMS, even in principle. Rather, these effects support a broader theory of how people use space metaphorically to scaffold their understanding of myriad non‐spatial domains, whether or not these domains exhibit variation in magnitude.