Development of a complex multiple schedule in the chimpanzee

The development of chimpanzee behavior on a four-component, three-lever multiple schedule is described. Component schedules included the Sidman avoidance procedure with a concurrent discriminated avoidance schedule on a second lever, fixed ratio performance for food, differential reinforcement of low rate for water requiring a dual response chain, and a symbol discrimination task for continuous food reinforcement using three levers. The avoidance component of this schedule was employed during the January 31, 1961 suborbital space flight of the chimpanzee “Ham.” On November 29, 1961, the chimpanzee “Enos” performed on the multiple schedule during three orbits around the earth in a Mercury capsule.     

Broad or narrow affect scores for the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List? Comment on Hunsley's “dimensionality of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List-Revised”

Hunsley's paper constitutes the second independent replication of four of the five factors in the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List-Revised (MAACL-R), even though he used the trait instead of the state form used to construct the scales and a more stringent factor loading criterion than Zuckerman and Lubin. Hunsley also did a two-factor analysis (positive and negative affects) of the MAACL items and concluded on the basis of the scree test that this was a more optimal solution than the five-factor one. This conclusion is questioned on the basis that the scales were devised to improve discriminant validity of the subscales, which they have done, particularly if standard scores are used. Since four of the five factors are replicable in state and trait versions of the MAACL-R and clinical studies show discriminant validity for the subscales, there is no reason to ignore the components of the two broader affect factors. Such factors can be assessed through use of the two standard summary scores for the MAACL: Dysphoria (A + D + H) and Positive Affect plus Sensation Seeking (PA + SS).     

The attentional requirements of consciousness

It has been widely claimed that attention and awareness are doubly dissociable and that there is no causal relation between them. In support of this view are numerous claims of attention without awareness, and awareness without attention. Although there is evidence that attention can operate on or be drawn to unconscious stimuli, various recent findings demonstrate that there is no empirical support for awareness without attention. To properly test for awareness without attention, we propose that a stimulus be studied using a battery of tests based on diverse, mainstream paradigms from the current attention literature. When this type of analysis is performed, the evidence is fully consistent with a model in which attention is necessary, but not sufficient, for awareness.