Productivity and uniqueness in continued word association as a function of subject creativity and stimulus properties

Ninety-six male and 44 female college students gave written continued associations for 2 minutes to each of 24 stimulus words and then completed the Remote Associates Test and the Revised Art Scale No significant relationship was found between the creativity measures for either sex Few relationships, differing for males and females, were found between the creativity measures and associative productivity or uniqueness Productivity and uniqueness were found to be substantially related, and common responses occurred earlier in time than unique responses The properties of the stimulus words (frequency, form class, and slope of associative hierarchy) had marked effects on response productivity and uniqueness The study confirms the strong impact of stimulus properties on associative productivity and demonstrates similar effects on uniqueness The creativity data, yielding weaker and less consistent relationships, are in keeping with a specificity theory but lend only limited support to Mednick's associative hypotheses.     

Radical Interpretation and Logical Pluralism

I examine Quine’s and Davidson’s arguments to the effect that classical logic is the one and only correct logic. This conclusion is drawn from their views on radical translation and interpretation, respectively. I focus on the latter, but I first address, independently, Quine’s argument to the effect that the ‘deviant’ logician, who departs from classical logic, is merely changing the subject. Regarding logical pluralism, the question is whether there is more than one correct logic. I argue that bivalence may be subject matter dependent, but that distribution and the law of excluded middle can probably not be dropped whilst maintaining the standard meanings of the connectives. In discussing the ramifications of the indeterminacy of interpretation, I ask whether it forces Davidsonian interpreters to adopt Dummett’s epistemic conception of truth vis-à-vis their interpretations. And, if so, does this cohere with their attributing a nonepistemic notion of truth to their interpretees? This would be a form of logical pluralism. In addition, I discuss Davidson’s arguments against conceptual schemes. Schemes incommensurable with our own could be construed as wholesale deviant logics, or so I argue. And, if so, their possibility would yield, in turn, the possibility of a radical logical pluralism. I also address Davidson’s application of Tarski’s definition of truth.

     

The what–where trade-off in multiple-identity tracking

Observers are poor at reporting the identities of objects that they have successfully tracked (Pylyshyn, Visual Cognition, 11, 801-822, 2004; Scholl & Pylyshyn, Cognitive Psychology, 38, 259-290, 1999). Consequently, it has been claimed that objects are tracked in a manner that does not encode their identities (Pylyshyn, 2004). Here, we present evidence that disputes this claim. In a series of experiments, we show that attempting to track the identities of objects can decrease an observer's ability to track the objects' locations. This indicates that the mechanisms that track, respectively, the locations and identities of objects draw upon a common resource. Furthermore, we show that this common resource can be voluntarily distributed between the two mechanisms. This is clear evidence that the location- and identity-tracking mechanisms are not entirely dissociable.     

Resource demands of object tracking and differential allocation of the resource

The attentional processes for tracking moving objects may be largely hemisphere-specific. Indeed, in our first two experiments the maximum object speed (speed limit) for tracking targets in one visual hemifield (left or right) was not significantly affected by a requirement to track additional targets in the other hemifield. When the additional targets instead occupied the same hemifield as the original targets, the speed limit was reduced. At slow target speeds, however, adding a second target to the same hemifield had little effect. At high target speeds, the cost of adding a same-hemifield second target was approximately as large as would occur if observers could only track one of the targets. This shows that performance with a fast-moving target is very sensitive to the amount of resource allocated. In a third experiment, we investigated whether the resources for tracking can be distributed unequally between two targets. The speed limit for a given target was higher if the second target was slow rather than fast, suggesting that more resource was allocated to the faster of the two targets. This finding was statistically significant only for targets presented in the same hemifield, consistent with the theory of independent resources in the two hemifields. Some limited evidence was also found for resource sharing across hemifields, suggesting that attentional tracking resources may not be entirely hemifield-specific. Together, these experiments indicate that the largely hemisphere-specific tracking resource can be differentially allocated to faster targets.     

White's effect: removing the junctions but preserving the strength of the illusion

White's effect (also known as the Munker White effect) is a lightness illusion in which, contrary to expectations based on simultaneous contrast and Wallach's rule, a gray rectangle predominantly surrounded by white appears lighter than an identical rectangle that is mainly surrounded by black. The illusion is often explained in terms of T-junctions that are formed by the three-way intersection of the gray rectangle, a black stripe, and a white stripe. I present a circular variant of White's effect in which all the junctions have been removed without significantly affecting the strength of the illusion, suggesting that junctions are not an important consideration in all versions of White's effect.     

Comparing meta-analytic moderator estimation techniques under realistic conditions

One of the most problematic issues in contemporary meta-analysis is the estimation and interpretation of moderating effects. Monte Carlo analyses are developed in this article that compare bivariate correlations, ordinary least squares and weighted least squares (WLS) multiple regression, and hierarchical subgroup (HS) analysis for assessing the influence of continuous moderators under conditions of multicollinearity and skewed distribution of study sample sizes (heteroscedasticity). The results show that only WLS is largely unaffected by multicollinearity and heteroscedasticity, whereas the other techniques are substantially weakened. Of note, HS, one of the most popular methods, typically provides the most inaccurate results, whereas WLS, one of the least popular methods, typically provides the most accurate results.