Monocular occlusion impairs stereoscopic acuity,but total visual deprivation does not

Wallach and Karsh (1963) reported that 24 h of monocular occlusion leads to a significant deterioration of stereoscopic depth estimates and attributed this phenomenon to “disuse.” We designed an apparatus for testing stereoscopic accuracy which eliminated all cues to depth save binocular disparity. With it, we tested the relative effect of 8 h of monocular—;as opposed to binocular—;occlusion on subsequent stereoscopic performance. Monocular patching led to significant increases in mean standard deviation and in mean absolute error as compared to baseline testing. Binocular patching led to no such impairment. Thus, truedisuse (such as occurs during binocular deprivation) did not impair stereopsis, whereas monocular occlusion, which may involve temporarymisuse of the stereoscopic system, did.     

The effects of emotion on younger and older adults’ monitoring of learning

Age-related differences in memory monitoring appear when people learn emotional words. Namely, younger adults’ judgments of learning (JOLs) are higher for positive than neutral words, whereas older adults’ JOLs do not discriminate between positive versus neutral words. In two experiments, we evaluated whether this age-related difference extends to learning positive versus neutral pictures. We also evaluated the contribution of two dimensions of emotion that may impact younger and older adults’ JOLs: valence and arousal. Younger and older adults studied pictures that were positive or neutral and either high or low in arousal. Participants made immediate JOLs and completed memory tests. In both experiments, the magnitude of older adults’ JOLs was influenced by emotion, and both younger and older adults demonstrated an emotional salience effect on JOLs. As important, the magnitude of participants’ JOLs was influenced by valence, and not arousal. Emotional salience effects were also evident on participants’ free recall, and older adults recalled as many pictures as did younger adults. Taken together, these data suggest that older adults do not have a monitoring deficit when learning positive (vs. neutral) pictures and that emotional salience effects on younger and older adults’ JOLs are produced more by valence than by arousal.     

Recognition memory measures yield disproportionate effects of aging on learning face-name associations

No previous research has tested whether the specific age-related deficit in learning face-name associations that has been identified using recall tasks also occurs for recognition memory measures. Young and older participants saw pictures of unfamiliar people with a name and an occupation for each person, and were tested on a matching (in Experiment 1) or multiple-choice (in Experiment 2) recognition memory test. For both recognition measures, the pattern of effects was the same as that obtained using a recall measure: More face-occupation associations were remembered than face-name associations, young adults remembered more associated information than older adults overall, and older adults had disproportionately poorer memory for face-name associations. Findings implicate age-related difficulty in forming and retrieving the association between the face and the name as the primary cause of obtained deficits in previous name learning studies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved).     

Mom,you're only remembering the bad behavior! the utility of distributed lag models in single-subject research

The present study examined if prior events/behaviors accounted for variance in parental perceptions of child behavior beyond that accounted for by those events/behaviors occurring simultaneously with the assessment of the parental perception. By utilizing a time-series analysis, this study investigated the relative effects of positive and negative child behaviors, interparental behavior, and intrapersonal behavior/events occurring simultaneously or at an earlier point in time on a mother's daily satisfaction with her clinic-referred child. Using a single-subject methodology with replication, nine mothers served as subjects. Data were collected across 30 days for participants, and subsequently, each mother's data were analyzed by multiple regression techniques. The results indicate the usefulness of distributed lag models for single-case designs in the absence of autocorrelation. Analyses indicate that for some mothers what happens on prior days with her child is as important or more important in determining her satisfaction with the child than what happens on the current day. In particular, mothers tend to carry over previous days' negative child behaviors into the present day's satisfaction rating. Previous days' positive and negative spouse behaviors and daily activities did not consistently contribute to regression equations predicting mothers' daily satisfaction ratings with their children.This research was supported in part by the University of Georgia's Institute for Behavioral Research.Data for this study were collected as part of a project designed to examine correlates of maternal satisfaction with their children. The primary results of the project have been reported by Furey and Forehand (in press). While the method in this study is basically similar to the Furey and Forehand (in press) method, the questions posed in the two studies differed.     

Contributions of beliefs and processing fluency to the effect of relatedness on judgments of learning

Discovering how people judge their memories has been a major issue for metacognitive research for over 4 decades; many factors have been discovered that affect people’s judgments, but exactly how those effects are mediated is poorly understood. For instance, the effect of word pair relatedness on judgments of learning (JOLs) has been repeatedly demonstrated, yet the underlying basis of this substantial effect is currently unknown. Thus, in three experiments, we assessed the contribution of beliefs and processing fluency. In Experiment 1, participants studied related and unrelated word pairs and made either prestudy JOLs or immediate JOLs. Participants gave higher estimates for related than for unrelated pairs, suggesting that participants’ beliefs at least partially drive the relatedness effect on JOLs. Next, we evaluated the contribution of processing fluency to the relatedness effect either (1) by disrupting fluency by presenting half the pairs in an aLtErNaTiNg format (Experiment 2) or (2) by measuring how fluently participants processed pairs at study and statistically estimating the degree to which conceptual fluency mediated the effects of relatedness on JOLs (Experiment 3). Results from both experiments indicated that fluency contributes minimally to the relatedness effect. Taken together, these results indicate that people’s beliefs about how relatedness influences memory are responsible for mediating the relationship between relatedness and JOLs. In general, empirically establishing what mediates the effects of other factors on people’s judgments remains a major agenda for advancing theory of metacognitive monitoring.     

Monitoring memory errors: The influence of the veracity of retrieved information on the accuracy of judgements of learning

The current study examined the degree to which predictions of memory performance made immediately or at a delay are sensitive to confidently held memory illusions. Participants studied unrelated pairs of words and made judgements of learning (JOLs) for each item, either immediately or after a delay. Half of the unrelated pairs (deceptive items; e.g., nurse–dollar) had a semantically related competitor (e.g., doctor) that was easily accessible when given a test cue (e.g., nurse–do_ _ _r) and half had no semantically related competitor (control items; e.g., subject–dollar). Following the study phase, participants were administered a cued recall test. Results from Experiment 1 showed that memory performance was less accurate for deceptive compared with control items. In addition, delaying judgement improved the relative accuracy of JOLs for control items but not for deceptive items. Subsequent experiments explored the degree to which the relative accuracy of delayed JOLs for deceptive items improved as a result of a warning to ensure that retrieved memories were accurate (Experiment 2) and corrective feedback regarding the veracity of information retrieved prior to making a JOL (Experiment 3). In all, these data suggest that delayed JOLs may be largely insensitive to memory errors unless participants are provided with feedback regarding memory accuracy.     

Monitoring memory errors: the influence of the veracity of retrieved information on the accuracy of judgements of learning

The current study examined the degree to which predictions of memory performance made immediately or at a delay are sensitive to confidently held memory illusions. Participants studied unrelated pairs of words and made judgements of learning (JOLs) for each item, either immediately or after a delay. Half of the unrelated pairs (deceptive items; e.g., nurse-dollar) had a semantically related competitor (e.g., doctor) that was easily accessible when given a test cue (e.g., nurse-do_ _ _r) and half had no semantically related competitor (control items; e.g., subject-dollar). Following the study phase, participants were administered a cued recall test. Results from Experiment 1 showed that memory performance was less accurate for deceptive compared with control items. In addition, delaying judgement improved the relative accuracy of JOLs for control items but not for deceptive items. Subsequent experiments explored the degree to which the relative accuracy of delayed JOLs for deceptive items improved as a result of a warning to ensure that retrieved memories were accurate (Experiment 2) and corrective feedback regarding the veracity of information retrieved prior to making a JOL (Experiment 3). In all, these data suggest that delayed JOLs may be largely insensitive to memory errors unless participants are provided with feedback regarding memory accuracy.     

Measuring memory monitoring with judgements of retention (JORs)

Most prior research has examined predictions of future memory performance by eliciting judgements of learning (JOLs). In six experiments, we explored monitoring with an alternative prospective measure. Specifically, participants made judgements of retention (JORs) predicting how long (in min) they would be able to remember information. Results revealed that participants provided relatively short predictions of how long they would remember information. Further, participants' JORs were sensitive to recall performance as well as manipulations that influenced memory performance indicating that they were able to effectively monitor learning using JORs. JORs influenced study decisions as well, with participants selecting more items for restudy following JORs than following JOLs or no monitoring judgement. However, restudy selection did not vary between a JOR and a JOL condition framed in terms of forgetting. Thus, we suggest that, much like forget-framed JOLs, JORs may bring different information-such as memory failure-to mind. In all, the inferential mechanisms underlying metacognitive monitoring with JOLs extends to monitoring when measured with JORs. Assessing monitoring with JORs provides information not available with JOLs (i.e., memory duration estimates) and a different basis for study decisions from remember-framed JOLs.