Laterality differences and practice effects under central backward masking conditions

Two experiments were conducted to examine laterality differences and practice effects under various central backward masking conditions. Critical stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was determined for subjects on 3 consecutive days using single letters as target stimuli (TS) and a pattern masking stimulus (MS). There was a right visual field (RVF) advantage on Day 1 but no difference between the visual fields on following days. The decline in the RVF advantage appeared to be dependent upon prior experience with laterally located letters, to be independent of initial experience with a particular set of letters, and to be more pronounced for females than for males. In addition, large improvements in performance were found, particularly between the first and second testing sessions. These practice effects were discussed in terms of the possible development of strategies for enhancing TS features or attenuating MS features.     

A view of the background of Freudian theory.

A major concern of nineteenth century scientists was to delineate the objective units or entities with which science deals. While some philosophers of science abandoned the search as futile and tried to redefine science, investigators in the biological sciences and the sciences of man attempted to discover new entities upon which to base their disciplines. A new understanding of hypnotism gave Freud the opportunity to isolate objective entities within the mind and to found a psychology on that basis.     

Subjective ratings of Cattell's 16 Personality Factors

Summary: The Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire (16PF) was administered to 69 subjects. Each subject was asked to rate himself on the 16 personality factors on the 16PF. The 16PF scores and the self-ratings were compared by canonical analysis. Three significant relationships were identified. The relationships primarily involved indices of social interaction from the 16PF and indices of internal traits from the self-ratings.     

Effects of expectancies of different reward magnitudes in transfer from noncontingent pairings to instrumental performance

In two experiments, rats received noncontingent pairings of two stimuli with food reward, one paired with small reward and the other with large reward, and received bar press training with large reward or with small reward. When the noncontingent stimuli (NS) were presented for test during subsequent rewarded bar pressing and during early extinction of bar pressing, responding for each group was faster in the presence of the NS which was paired with the same reward magnitude that group received in bar press training than to the NS which had been paired with a different reward magnitude. As extinction progressed, all groups responded more slowly in the presence of the NS which had been paired with the large reward than in the presence of the NS which had been paired with small reward. These results were interpreted as indicating that responding in the presence of an NS depends on: (i) whether the reward expectancy elicited by the NS has been conditioned to the instrumental response, and (ii) the relationship between the reward expected in the presence of the NS and that received in test.     

The Unconscious: A bridge between psychoanalysis and cognitive neuroscience,edited by Marianne Leuzinger-Bohleber,Simon Arnold,and Mark Solms,Routledge, Abingdon and New York, 2017, 219 pp.

The American Journal of Psychoanalysis -     

Justice in epistemic gaps: The ‘proof paradox’ revisited

This paper defends the heretical view that sometimes we ought to assign legal liability based on statistical evidence alone. Recent literature focuses on potential unfairness to the defending party if we rely on bare statistics. Here, I show that capitulating in response to ‘epistemic gaps’—cases where there is a group of potential harmers but an absence of individuating evidence—can amount to a serious injustice against the party who has been harmed. Drawing on prominent civil law litigation involving pharmaceutical and industrial negligence, the overall aim is to illustrate moral pitfalls stemming from the popular idea that it is never appropriate to rely on bare statistics when settling a legal dispute.