Action-based and vision-based selection of input: Two sources of control

In the first part of this paper we review evidence suggesting that there exists a mechanism that selects input on the basis of its similarity to the required action. This response-based input selection differs from the more established space- and object-based input selection in that it is not constrained by the structure of the input. Our evidence suggests that the two-choice Stroop effect is caused by this response-based selection mechanism. By contrast, it is known that the flanker effect is determined by the space- and object- based selection mechanisms. We explore whether the conflict resolution of the Stroop and flanker tasks is different as well by embedding these two tasks in a PRP (Psychological Refractory Period) paradigm. We show that the Stroop and the PRP effects are additive whereas the flanker and the PRP effects are underadditive, suggesting that the processes in charge of the conflict resolution in the Stroop and the flanker tasks are indeed different. We discuss possible reasons for this difference, and discuss possible ways in which the response-based mechanism can be implemented in information processing models.     

The effect of similarity between elemental stimuli and compounds in olfactory patterning discriminations

We studied the ability of honeybees to discriminate between single odorants and binary olfactory mixtures. We analyzed the effect of the number of common elements between these two stimulus classes on olfactory discrimination. We used olfactory conditioning of the honeybees' proboscis extension reflex (PER), a paradigm in which odors can be associated with a reinforcement of sucrose solution. Bees were asked to discriminate reinforced from nonreinforced olfactory stimuli. They were trained with two elemental odors (A and B) versus a binary olfactory mixture. The mixture was either AB (group 2CE, two common elements), AC (group 1CE, one common element A), or CD (group 0CE, no common element). Three groups followed a positive patterning schedule (mixture reinforced and elements nonreinforced: groups 2CE+, 1CE+, and 0CE+) and three other groups a negative patterning schedule (mixture nonreinforced and elements reinforced: groups 2CE-, 1CE-, and 0CE-). We showed that a reduction of similarity (number of common elements) between elemental odors and compounds enhanced the ability to discriminate elements from compounds and that the kind of compound processing used by the bees supports theories that assume nonelemental compound processing (i.e., that exclude the mere summation of the elemental associative strengths upon compound presentation).     

Who is exaggerating cognitive impairment and who is not?

This chart review examined the effects of effort on neuropsychological assessment and test performance patterns among genuine and exaggerating patients, with and without neurological findings, as aids to diagnosing symptom exaggeration. The sample consisted of 561 consecutive patients involved in compensation claims. With a flexible neuropsychological test (NPT) battery, the claims were assessed over 2 days. The sample included 303 patients evaluated for traumatic brain injury, 55 patients with neurological disease, and 203 patients assessed for other conditions (eg, depression or chronic pain). An average of 38 ability measures per patient were used to generate an overall NPT domain score. Composite scores were also computed for symptom validity tests, self-report measures of psychiatric symptoms, and memory complaint inventory. Seven NPT cognitive subdomain scores were multiply regressed onto the symptom validity test composite, accounting for 45% of its total variance. Patients were also assigned to Genuine or Exaggerator groups based on symptom validity test performance. The NPT for Exaggerating patients averaged 1.43 standard deviations below that of Genuine patients, suggesting that NPT scores for most Exaggerating patients are underestimates of their true ability. Factor analysis results differed between these groups. As a result, clinicians might avoid falsely identifying genuine patients as exaggerating by incorporating their self-reports of psychiatric symptoms and memory complaints into the diagnostic process.     

Activation of Syntactic Information During Language Production

In order to produce utterances, people must draw upon syntactic information. This paper considers how evidence from syntactic priming experiments casts light upon the nature of syntactic information activation during language production. We examine three issues: the way in which syntactic information is initially activated, the circumstances under which activation may persist or dissipate, and the effects of residual activation of syntactic information on subsequent language production. Evidence from dialog experiments suggests that the information that is initially activated is the same in both production and comprehension. Evidence about the persistence of activation following initial activation is more complex. We suggest that persistence may be related to the potential relevance of the information for subsequent syntactic processing. We show that current evidence is inconclusive about how long syntactic information remains activated.     

Commentary: A Patient's Perspective on Predictive Testing for Alzheimer Disease

Commentary

Commentary: A Patient's Perspective on Predictive Testing for Alzheimer Disease     

Group collaboration in recognition memory

Group collaboration was examined in item and associative recognition. The present study distinguishes between group effects versus collaborative processes and defines the latter as interactive information exchange among group members. By that definition, many group effects do not involve collaboration. For example, group performance can exceed individual performance by pooling the increased resources of the group. Specifically, a group advantage can be obtained by deferring to a majority vote or to the group's best member. For both item and associative recognition, a group advantage was obtained that could not be accounted for by resource pooling. Collaborative facilitation was shown reliably in recognizing targets but not for rejecting distractors.     

The Factor Structure of the Beavers Interactional Scales

Confirmatory factor analysis and regression analyses of the Beavers Interactional Scales did not appear to support the model offered by its developers, namely, several specified family attributes contributing respectively to two global factors of Family Competence and Family Style. Moreover, regression analysis indicated that only three of 12 items predicted raters' assessments of Global Family Health, and one of seven items predicted Global Family Style. Individuals interested in the family dynamic centripetal/centrifugal might best think of that as a unitary entity and rate it accordingly.     

Plantinga’s Reformed Epistemology: What’s the Question?

Alvin Plantingas Warranted Christian Belief is without questionone of the central texts of the Reformed epistemology movement. Critiques of Plantingas defence have been both multiple and varied. As varied as these responses are, however, it is my contention that many of them amount to the same thing. It is the purpose of this paper to offer an overview of the main lines of attack that have been directed as Plantingas project, and thereafter to show how many, if not most, of these objections can be understood as versions or aspects of the same criticism, what I call the Inadequacy Thesis.