I Recognize Your Face, But I Can't Remember Your Name: A Grown up Explanation

Contemporary models of face recognition explain everyday difficulties in name retrieval by proposing that name information can only be accessed after semantic information (e.g. Bruce & Young, 1986) or by proposing an architecture which puts name retrieval at a disadvantage (e.g. Burton& Bruce,1992). Experiments reportedhere examined the time requiredto access name and semantic details by adult and child subjects. In Experiment 1 adult subjects took more time to match familiar faces to names than to other semantic details (e.g. occupation), a finding consistent with all the previous literature on name retrieval. Experiment 2, however, showed that the youngest subjects were significantly faster in matching familiar faces to names than to semantic details. Experiment 3 also showed that children were faster at accessing names than occupations when giving vocal responses to presentations of familiar faces. These findings are not predicted by rigidly sequential models of face recognition and are discussed with specific reference to the ontogenesis of models based on a more flexible connectionist architecture.     

A comparison of generalization functions and frame of reference effects in different training paradigms

Six experiments were carried out to compare go/no-go and choice paradigms for studying the effects of intradimensional discrimination training on subsequent measures of stimulus generalization in human subjects. Specifically, the purpose was to compare the two paradigms as means of investigating generalization gradient forms and frame of reference effects. In Experiment 1, the stimulus dimension was visual intensity (brightness); in Experiment 2, it was line orientation (line-angle stimuli). After learning to respond (or to respond “right”) to stimulus value (SV) 4 and not to respond (or to respond “left”) to SV2 (in Experiment 1) or SV1 (in Experiment 2), the subjects were tested for generalization (recognition) with an asymmetrical set of values ranging from SV1 to SV11. Go/no-go training produced peaked gradients, whereas choice training produced sigmoid gradients. The asymmetrical testing resulted in a gradual shift of the peak of responding (go/no-go group) or in the point of subjective indifference (PSI; choice group) toward. the central value of the test series; thus, both paradigms revealed a frame of reference effect. The results were comparable for the quantitative (intensity) and the qualitative (line-angle) stimulus dimensions. Experiment 3 compared the go/no-go procedure with a yes/no procedure in which subjects responded “right” to SV4 and “left” to all other intensities and found no differences between these procedures. Thus the difference in gradient forms in go/no as opposed to (traditional) choice paradigms depends on whether one or two target stimuli are used in training. In Experiment 4, in which visual intensity was used, the shift in the PSI following choice training varied positively with the range of asymmetrical test stimuli employed. In Experiment 5, also with visual intensity, the magnitude of the peak shift following go/no-go training varied as a function of over representing a high or a low stimulus value during generalization testing. Experiment 6, with line angles, showed that the PSI following choice training varies in a similar way. The frame of reference effects obtained in these experiments are consistent with an adaptation-level model.     

Speed analyses of stimulus equivalence.

The functional substitutability of stimuli in equivalence classes was examined through analyses of the speed of college students'' accurate responding. After training subjects to respond to 18 conditional relations, subjects'' accuracy and speed of accurate responding were compared across trial types (baseline, symmetry, transitivity, and combined transitivity and symmetry) and nodal distance (one- through five-node transitive and combined transitive and symmetric relations). Differences in accuracy across nodal distance and trial type were significant only on the first tests of equivalence, whereas differences in speed were significant even after extended testing. Response speed was inversely related to the number of nodes on which the tested relations were based. Significant differences in response speed were also found across trial types, except between transitivity and combined trials. To determine the generality of these comparisons, three groups of subjects were included: An instructed group was given an instruction that specified the interchangeability of stimuli related through training; a queried group was queried about the basis for test-trial responding: and a standard group was neither instructed nor queried. There were no significant differences among groups. These results suggest the use of response speed and response accuracy to measure the strength of matching relations.     

Parent characteristics and parent-child interactions in families of nonproblem children and ADHD children with higher and lower levels of oppositional-defiant behavior

This study examined parent-child interactions and parent characteristics in families of nonproblem children and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) children with lower (ADHD-LOD) and higher (ADHD-HOD) levels of oppositional-defiant behavior. Families of ADHD children were recruited from a parent training program. Observed and parent-reported child behavior problems were highest in the ADHD-HOD group. Observed parent behavior revealed few differences, but daily reports indicated that parents in both ADHD groups used more negative-reactive and fewer positive parenting strategies than control parents. Maternal psychological functioning differed between the ADHD and nonproblem groups, but not between the two ADHD groups. Fathers of ADHD-HOD children reported more psychological disturbance than controls. Parenting self-esteem was lowest in the ADHD-HOD group and highest in the nonproblem group. The results support the LOD and HOD distinction, but also suggest that, although certain difficulties are more common in the families of ADHD-HOD children, families of ADHD-LOD children also differ from controls on a number of dimensions.This research was supported by grants from the Medical Research Council of Canada and the British Columbia Health Research Foundation. Appreciation is extended to Josie Geller, Kim Behrenz, Susan Greaves, and Sonia Pietzsch who assisted with data collection and coding, and to the families who generously gave their time to participate in the research. Thanks also to two anonymous reviewers for their comments.     

Romantic Emotional Attachment: Additional Factors in the Development of the Sexual Orientation of Men

This retrospective study compared reports of gay and heterosexual male college students about particular behaviors and feelings during childhood and adolescence. The results were interpreted as providing general support for Bell's heterogamy principle that regardless of a person's sexual orientation, his or her romantic attachments will be to people perceived different from themselves.     

Perceived social context and risk preference: A re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem

This study examines the effects of perceived group context on subjects risk attitudes and their sensitivity to the framing of choice outcomes in a ‘life-death’ decision problem. It seeks to uncover the psychological mechanisms underlying decision-making biases by systematically manipulating the decision context in which the ‘life-death’ problem was described. The study revealed that subjects risk preferences varied as a function of the experimental manipulations. Previously observed reversals in preferences (framing effects) appeared in large-group contexts and disappeared in small-group and family contexts. When considering the fate of small groups, subjects unambiguously favored the probabilistic outcome, no matter how the ‘life-death’ decision problem was framed. The empirical data obtained from the present study suggest that human choice patterns are behaviorally distinguishable across large-group, small-group, and family social contexts.