SOCIETAL MEMBERSHIP,SCORE STATUS,AND GAME BEHAVIOR

Appartenance sociale, bilan relatif des gains acquis et comportement de jeu. Analyse phénoménologique. — Etude des preférénces, des raisons et du comportement reel de choix de sujets belges et américains dans une tâche qui laisse la possibilité de se comporter coopérativement ou compétitivement. La tâche utilisée est un jeu à somme non-nulle dont la matrice est structuréd de telle sorte que l'on puisse différencier deux objectifs parmi trois possibles : maximiser son propre gain (ou le gain conjoint des deux partenaires) ou bien maximiser la différence entre son propre gain et celui de l'autre. Les Auteurs ont comparé 15 dyades de sujets belges et 15 dyades de sujets américains, jouant en 100 essais. Les résultats montrent que le choix réel des sujets est trés semblable d'une culture à l'autre et que, dans chaque culture, il varie selon que les gains déjà acquis par un sujet sont supérieurs, inférieurs ou égaux à ceux du partenaire, au moment du choix. Enfin, on note que, bien qu'aucune différence marquée n'apparaisse dans le comportement réel, il y a des différences sensibles d'une culture à l'autre dans les raisons invoquées par les sujets pour justifier leurs préférences : ces différences sont encore plus apparentes si on tient également compte de l'état relatif des gains déjà acquis par un sujet par rapport à son partenaire. En général, les sujets belges ont tendance à justifier leur préférence pour la compétition par des raisons de compétition; les sujets américains, surtout quand ils ont l'avantage, par des raisons relatives à leur gain personnel. Cette dernière réaction est “irrationnelle” dans la présente tâche puisque la préférence pour une attitude coopérative permet de maximiser son propre gain.     

The Personality of Select Theological Students

When 72 male students in a southern theological institution were compared by the manner in which they intended to fulfill their religious vocation (i.e., as missionaries, pastors, or religious education workers), a homogeneity of personality behavior was observed on each of 16 factors. The total sample, however, was reported to be substantially and significantly different from the general population on four factors. No significant difference was reported among the three groups in their need for social approval as measured by the Marlowe-Crowne SDS.     

Oculomotor adaptation to wedge prisms with no part of the body seen

When S looks at a visual target through prisms, adaptive shifts in reaching behavior occur even though he sees no part of his body through the prisms. These shifts are caused by a change in the judgment of the direction of gaze (oculomotor change), which in turn is caused by two secondary prismatic effects: (a) asymmetry of the visual display and (b) apparent rotation about a vertical axis of a panel or wall facing S. The “asymmetry” factor contributes 22% of the total oculomotor change, and the “rotation” effect contributes the remaining 78%. Oculomotor change is not facilitated by eye-movement activity. The adaptive oculomotor change induces a non-adaptive proprioception change about one-tenth as large as the oculomotor change. These findings are capable of accounting for the previously unexplained results reported by Wooster in 1923, and also for the current controversy about the role of reafferent stimulation in sensorymotor adaptation.     

Binocular fusion: A test of the suppression theory

Binocular fusion may be due to interocular inhibitory suppression, an hypothesis difficult to evaluate by phenomenal inspection. A test probe method (reaction time to a light pulse) was used to measure visual sensitivity during binocular rivalry and fusion. The absence of inhibitory effects during fusion fails to support the suppression theory of fusion.     

Oculomotor adaptation to wedge prisms with no part of the body seen

When S looks at a visual target through prisms, adaptive shifts in reaching behavior occur even though he sees no part of his body through the prisms. These shifts are caused by a change in the judgment of the direction of gaze (oculomotor change), which in turn is caused by two secondary prismatic effects: (a) asymmetry of the visual display and (b) apparent rotation about a vertical axis of a panel or wall facing S. The “asymmetry” factor contributes 22% of the total oculomotor change, and the “rotation” effect contributes the remaining 78%. Oculomotor change is not facilitated by eye-movzment activity. The adaptive oculomotor change induces a non-adaptive proprioception change about one-tenth as large as the oculomotor change. These findings are capable of accounting for the previously unexplained results reported by Wooster in 1923, and also for the current controversy about the role of reafferent stimulation in sensorymotor adaptation.