Competitive Memory Training (COMET) for Panic and Applied Relaxation (AR) Are Equally Effective in the Treatment of Panic in Panic-Disordered Patients

While various psychological interventions, among them Applied Relaxation (AR), are effective in treating patients with panic disorder, there is still room for improvement. Competitive Memory Training (COMET) is a transdiagnostic intervention, slightly different variants of which have proven to be successful in several psychopathological conditions in different patient populations. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of COMET for panic disorder with AR in a group of panic-disordered patients (with or without agoraphobia) in a routine clinical setting. A total of 143 panic-disordered patients were randomized over two (group) treatment conditions: seven sessions of AR, or seven sessions of COMET. Measurements were made at pre- and post intervention. Both treatments resulted in significant amelioration of panic and phobic symptoms; this beneficial effect was relatively large for the primary outcome measure. However, there were no significant differences between the two treatments for any of the outcome measures. COMET and AR appear to be equally effective in treating panic in panic-disordered patients.     

Metaphors in Nanomedicine: The Case of Targeted Drug Delivery

The promises of nanotechnology have been framed by a variety of metaphors, that not only channel the attention of the public, orient the questions asked by researchers, and convey epistemic choices closely linked to ethical preferences. In particular, the image of the ‘therapeutic missile’ commonly used to present targeted drug delivery devices emphasizes precision, control, surveillance and efficiency. Such values are highly praised in the current context of crisis of pharmaceutical innovation where military metaphors foster a general mobilization of resources from multiple fields of cutting-edge research. The missile metaphor, reminiscent of Paul Ehrlich’s ‘magic bullet’, has framed the problem in simple terms: how to deliver the right dose in the right place at the right moment? Chemists, physicists and engineers who design multi-functional devices operating in vitro can think in such terms, as long as the devices are not actually operating through the messy environment of the body. A close look at what has been done and what remains to be done suggests that the metaphor of the “therapeutic missile” is neither sufficient, nor even necessary. Recent developments in nanomedicine suggest that therapeutic efficacy cannot be obtained without negotiating with the biological milieu and taking advantage of what it affords. An ‘oikological’ approach seems more appropriate, more heuristic and more promising than the popular missile. It is based on the view of organism as an oikos that has to be carefully managed. The dispositions of nanocapsules have to be coupled with the affordances of the environment. As it requires dealing with nanoparticles as relational entities (defined by their potential for interactions) rather than as stable substances (defined by intrinsic properties) this metaphor eventually might well change research priorities in nanotechnology in general.     

Feelings of error in reasoning—in search of a phenomenon

Recent research shows that in reasoning tasks, subjects usually produce an initial intuitive answer, accompanied by a metacognitive experience, which has been called feeling of rightness. This paper is aimed at exploring the complimentary experience of feeling of error (FOE), that is, the spontaneous, subtle sensation of cognitive uneasiness arising from conflict detection during thinking. We investigate FOE in two studies with the “bat-and-ball” (B&B) reasoning task, in its standard and isomorphic control versions. Study 1 is a generation study, in which participants are asked to generate their own response. Study 2 is an evaluation study, in which participants are asked to choose between two conflicting answers (normative vs. intuitive). In each study, the FOE is measured by the FOE questionnaire. Results show that the FOE is significantly present in the standard B&B task when participants give a wrong answer, that our questionnaire can measure it, and furthermore, that it is diagnostic of genuine error.     

Matters of Interest: The Objects of Research in Science and Technoscience

This discussion paper proposes that a meaningful distinction between science and technoscience can be found at the level of the objects of research. Both notions intermingle in the attitudes, intentions, programs and projects of researchers and research institutions—that is, on the side of the subjects of research. But the difference between science and technoscience becomes more explicit when research results are presented in particular settings and when the objects of research are exhibited for the specific interest they hold. When an experiment is presented as scientific evidence which confirms or disconfirms a hypothesis, this agrees with traditional conceptions of science. When organic molecules are presented for their capacity to serve individually as electric wires that carry surprisingly large currents, this would be a hallmark of technoscience. Accordingly, we propose research on the ontology of research objects. The focus on the character and significance of research objects makes this a specifically philosophical project.     

Retracing My Steps: A 10-YEAR Journey To Walking-Based Transdisciplinary Research

Engaging in a chronological retrospection of my professional and personal transdisciplinary practice of walking-based research over the past decade, and embedding some elements of arts-based writing into the article itself, I articulate the influence of walking art, transect walks by urban researchers, and especially of Sarah Pink’s sensory ethnography on his own use of walking-based method-elements for sustainability research. I discuss how these approaches bear relevance to urban sustainability research and suggest a queer-ecological direction for walking-based transdisciplinary research.     

Apperception in primed problem solving

Mental representation is a central theoretical concept in modern cognitive psychology. However, its investigation has been predominantly based on inapt perceptualist concepts, which presume that information contents in them, i.e., mental contents, solely arise from stimulus. This is in spite of the evidence that much in human thought does not have any sensory equivalence. Consequently, we make a difference between perception and apperception, as e.g., Kant and Wundt did, and argue in favor of a detailed analysis of this mental process that is responsible for the construction of representations. We present here five primed problem solving experiments. The basic idea was to demonstrate that depending on priming information people represent perceptually identical stimuli very differently, i.e., they ascribe different uses and meanings to objects and they integrate them differently to compose distinct solutions. In this vein, we demonstrate that people regularly rely on information, which is not or cannot be perceived in principle. On the ground of our empirical findings, we resurrect the issue on why the difference between perception and apperception is theoretically adequate and introduce some central concepts for the theoretical analysis of apperception such as "seeing as" and functional binding.     

Increasing accurate preference assessment implementation through pyramidal training

Preference assessments directly evaluate items that may serve as reinforcers, and their implementation is an important skill for individuals who work with children. This study examined the effectiveness of pyramidal training on teachers' implementation of preference assessments. During Experiment 1, 3 special education teachers taught 6 trainees to conduct paired-choice, multiple-stimulus without replacement, and free-operant preference assessments. All trainees acquired skills necessary to implement preference assessments with 90% or greater accuracy during the training sessions and demonstrated generalization of skills to their classrooms or clinic. During Experiment 2, 5 teachers who served as trainees in Experiment 1 trained 18 preschool teachers. All preschool teachers met the mastery criterion following training. Training teachers to implement preference assessments may increase teachers' acceptance and use of behavior-analytic procedures in school settings.     

Judgments about moral responsibility and determinism in patients with behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia: still compatibilists

Do laypeople think that moral responsibility is compatible with determinism? Recently, philosophers and psychologists trying to answer this question have found contradictory results: while some experiments reveal people to have compatibilist intuitions, others suggest that people could in fact be incompatibilist. To account for this contradictory answers, Nichols and Knobe (2007) have advanced a ‘performance error model’ according to which people are genuine incompatibilist that are sometimes biased to give compatibilist answers by emotional reactions. To test for this hypothesis, we investigated intuitions about determinism and moral responsibility in patients suffering from behavioural frontotemporal dementia. Patients suffering from bvFTD have impoverished emotional reaction. Thus, the ‘performance error model’ should predict that bvFTD patients will give less compatibilist answers. However, we found that bvFTD patients give answers quite similar to subjects in control group and were mostly compatibilist. Thus, we conclude that the ‘performance error model’ should be abandoned in favour of other available model that best fit our data.