Some effects of stimulant medication on response allocation: a double-blind analysis

Children who are diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (or who engage in behavior consistent with such a diagnosis) are often prescribed stimulant medications for hyperactive or inattentive behaviors. However, the mechanisms by which stimulant medications affect individuals' behavior are rarely evaluated. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the effects of stimulant medication on response allocation when antecedents and consequences were held constant and equated. Results indicated that the presence of an amphetamine medication (Adderall) influenced response allocation across two concurrently available responses while all other stimulus conditions were held constant.     

The Nature and Time Course of Pragmatic Plausibility Effects

The experiments reported in this article used a delayed same/different sentence matching task with concurrent measurement of eye movements to investigate the nature of the plausibility effect. The results clearly show that plausibility effects are not due to low level lexical associative processes, but arise as a consequence of the processing of the earliest or most basic form of sentential meaning. In fact, when sentential implausibility and lexical association are varied simultaneously, it is only sentential implausibility that exerts an effect. Effects of implausibility occur rapidly—sometimes parafoveally—and are localised in the regions of the sentence where the implausibility occurs, suggesting an incremental interpretive process progressing on a roughly word-by-word basis. It is suggested that plausibility effects result from the operation of a heuristically-driven process of sentential interpretation. This appears to behave in a ‘modular’ fashion, despite being influenced by real world knowledge and probabilities.Particular thanks are due to Ken Forster for kindling the ideas which led to much of this work and to Merrill Garrett for posing impossible challenges, which, probably to everyone’s surprise, could in fact be met. I am also much indebted to Claire Boissiere, Emma Clayes, Clare Dobbin, Alan Kennedy, Julie-Ann Marshall, Ashley Murray, and Murray Rowan for their collaboration in this research.     

P-E Fit as moderator of the accountability – employee reactions relationships: Convergent results across two samples

The current two-sample investigation, which incorporated Conservation of Resources (COR) and Person-Environment (P-E) fit theories, investigated the interaction effects of felt accountability × P-E fit on the work outcomes of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, depressed mood, and work intensity. Consistent with the conceptual underpinnings of felt accountability as either a threat or opportunity, satisfaction, work intensity, and organizational commitment increased in settings possessing both heightened answerability and high levels of P-E fit. Further, individuals reported a reduction in depressed mood when heightened accountability was coupled with high P-E fit perceptions. These findings were consistent across samples providing evidence of generalizability. Implications, strengths and limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.     

The Interactive Effects of Chronic Pain, Guilt, and Perfectionism on Work Outcomes

Two studies were conducted examining the interactive effects of chronic pain, perceived perfectionism (e.g., self- and socially prescribed), and guilt on job tension and job satisfaction. It was hypothesized that chronic pain would have its most adverse effects on these work outcomes when concurrently coupled with high levels of perceived perfectionism and guilt. In both studies, the results supported the interaction effect of Chronic Pain × Socially Prescribed Perfectionism × Guilt on tension and satisfaction in the expected direction. As predicted, the results also indicated a Chronic Pain × Guilt × Self-Oriented Perfectionism interaction on job tension. Implications for theory and practice, strengths and limitations, and avenues for future research are provided.     

Does group efficacy increase group identification? Resolving their paradoxical relationship

Although group identification and group efficacy are both important predictors of collective action against collective disadvantage, there is mixed evidence for their (causal) relationship. Meta-analytic and correlational evidence suggests an overall positive relationship that has been interpreted as consistent with the idea that group identification leads to group efficacy. However, experimental evidence has not supported this causal relationship. To resolve this paradox, we show in an experiment that it is group efficacy that leads to increased group identification because group efficacy puts individuals' identity into action. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.     

Reliability of 16 balance tests in individuals with Down syndrome

To assess test-retest reliability scores on 16 balance tests of 21 individuals with Down syndrome whose ages ranged from 5 to 31 yr., participants performed a standing test on firm and soft surfaces with the eyes open and closed, the balance subset of the Bruininks-Oseretsky test, full turn, timed-up-and-go test, forward reach, and sit-to-stand. Each participant completed all 16 tests twice in one day and then again on a subsequent day for a total of 4 sessions. The interclass reliability correlation coefficients (ICC) value for each measure of balance varied considerably by age and sex. Based on having an ICC > .50, only 3 tests were reliable in young males and young females, whereas 5 tests could reliably be used in adult females and 9 tests could reliably be used in adult males. The results of this study raise suspicions as to the reliability of tests commonly used to assess balance and differences in reliability due to age and sex. Results of balance tests should be interpreted with caution in males and females with Down syndrome across the age span.     

Personality variables and problem‐construction activities: An exploratory investigation

Problem‐construction and problem‐finding activities have been shown to have a marked impact on creative achievement. Although cognitive operations play an important role in problem construction, there is reason to suspect that personality variables might influence effective process application. In the present study we constructed measures of personality characteristics that might influence adaption to novel, ill‐defined tasks. These measures were administered to 250 undergraduates who were also asked to complete a problem‐construction task. A series of discriminant analyses indicated that personality variables could be used to identify individuals who generated high‐quality, original problems. The implications of our findings for understanding exactly how personality variables interact with cognitive operations in the problem‐construction process are discussed.