Inhibition of response mode in task switching

Task inhibition was explored in two experiments that employed a paradigm in which participants switched among three tasks. Two tasks required manual choice responses based on numerical judgment (parity or magnitude), whereas a third task required an unconditional double-press of both response keys. Both experiments showed that switching to a just-abandoned task (n-2 task repetition) generally leads to a performance cost relative to switching to another task. Specifically, this task inhibition effect also occurred for the double-press task, suggesting inhibition of response mode. Prolonging the task-cuing interval showed that advance task preparation reduced only inhibition of the double-press task but not of the choice tasks (Experiment 1). Prolonging the response-cue interval led to a decrease of the inhibition effect in all tasks (Experiment 2), suggesting a time-based release of task inhibition. Together, the experiments support the notion of a response-related component of task inhibition.     

A paradoxical dissociation in the effects of midazolam on recollection and automatic processes in the process dissociation procedure

This study used midazolam-induced amnesia to explore the plausibility of the estimates provided by the process dissociation procedure (PDP), which is designed to estimate the contributions of recollection (R) and automatic (A) processes to implicit memory performance. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subject design with 24 participants, single midazolam doses were administered intravenously, and word stem completion performance was used to calculate PDP estimates. A dissociation was observed such that midazolam decreased R but increased A estimates relative to placebo. Given that a manipulation that induces amnesia would not be expected to facilitate a memory process, these results add to the accumulating body of evidence suggesting that PDP estimates are not always theoretically plausible. Such evidence raises important questions about the use of the PDP.     

Holistic thinking is not the whole story: alternative or adjunct approaches for increasing the accuracy of legal evaluations

There are a number of very helpful, but often underutilized, principles and procedures that can augment decision making in clinical and legal settings. Psychologists often restrict their range of decision-making strategies and options--at the cost of maximizing diagnostic and predictive accuracy--in part as the result of "ontological-epistemological one-worldedness" (O-E O-W). However, no philosophical, logical, or scientific necessity demands strict consistency between views regarding the nature of psychological phenomena and views about how to best assess or learn about those phenomena. Relaxing this unnecessary and largely psychologically-based O-E O-W may promote greater comfort with and utilization of the methods that are discussed in this article for increasing judgmental accuracy.     

Accountability Reduces Unconscious Plagiarism

We investigated how holding participants accountable for their responses affected unconscious plagiarism when solving a Boggle puzzle task (finding words in a 4 × 4 letter matrix). Both experimental and control participants (N = 60) generated puzzle solutions with a computer partner, recalled their own previously generated solutions, and then produced new solutions to the puzzles. Accountability was manipulated by telling participants in the experimental group before beginning the initial‐generation phase that at the end of the session, they would review their generated responses with the researcher (accountable participants). Accountable participants plagiarized less than control participants when generating words with the computer and generating new solutions on their own but not when they were attempting to recall words they initially generated. The data are discussed in terms of the leading theoretical explanation of unconscious plagiarism, the source‐monitoring framework. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Testing a dual process model of prejudice: Assessment of group threat perceptions and emotions

Using American college student samples, two studies were conducted to establish the connection between perceptions of threat posed by people of the Muslim world and intergroup emotions toward this group. Study 1, a correlational study, situated these relationships within Duckitt??s (2001) dual process model. Path analyses revealed that perceptions of economic threat from Muslims were predicted by a motivation for hierarchical group relations, as manifested by social dominance orientation. Perceptions of value threat from Muslims were predicted by a motivation for social stability and security, as manifested by right-wing authoritarianism. These economic and value threat perceptions subsequently predicted the intergroup emotions of anger and disgust, respectively. Study 2, an experimental study, involved a manipulation of value threat from Muslims. Results showed that perceiving Muslims to pose a greater threat to Westerners?? values heightened feelings of disgust, which subsequently predicted behavioral inclinations to maintain traditional Western values.     

Emotion Dysregulation and Eating Disorder Symptoms: Examining Distinct Associations and Interactions in Adolescents

Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology - Emotion dysregulation has been posited as a key transdiagnostic factor of mental health difficulties, including eating disorders. However, how...     

Psychological Wellbeing,Dyadic Adjustment,and Parental Stress among Spanish Families during the COVID-19 Outbreak

Journal of Child and Family Studies - Due to COVID-19, many countries, like Spain, imposed lockdown on the entire population to prevent the virus from spreading. The purpose of this exploratory...