Neuromarketing as a scale validation tool: Understanding individual differences based on the style of processing scale in affective judgements

This paper revisits a well-cited and widely applied consumer scale, Style of Processing (SOP) (Childers et al., Journal of Consumer Research, 1985, 12 , 125), that has been used to investigate individual differences in processing visual versus verbal information in marketing. The scale has advanced knowledge in fields related to marketing communications, product development, psychology, advertising, education and learning theories, shedding light on our understanding of consumer psychology related to persuasion, comprehension, memory, and other consumer cognitive processes involving information. In a research dialog that took place in 2008, a need for further SOP validation was suggested using a neuromarketing approach. We took this call forward and conducted an event-related-potential (ERP) experimental research study using electroencephalogram (EEG) to validate the SOP scale, focusing on differential affective processing between verbalizers and visualizers. We not only demonstrate how neuromarketing tools can be utilized to provide evidence for scale validity, providing advantages over self-reported measures; but more importantly, address issues related to understanding differential fluency effects that exist between visualizers and verbalizers. Behavioral data revealed varying reaction times to emotional stimuli of a pictorial nature. We further identify two ERP components in our data, early left anterior negativity (ELAN) and late negative slow wave (LNSW), that differentiate individual processing fluency in affective versus evaluative-based judgements. Findings confirmed the construct validity of the SOP scale and enhance our understanding of individual differences in emotional processing of pictorial information.     

Follow-up of a full-scale network assembly

The authors conducted two full-scale network assemblies for the family network of a suicidal adolescent. Findings from the clinical follow-up and telephone interviews with 21 of 65 participants revealed benefits for the index family and the network members who participated in the meetings. A ripple effect in which the participants' own personal networks improved was also demonstrated. Benefits included resolution of a suicidal crisis, better understanding of depression and family stress, more adaptive responses to depression and suicidal risk, and improved personal relationships. No casualties from this intervention were discovered. This report is intended to stimulate future, more systematic outcome studies.     

When is early visual cortex activated during visual mental imagery?

Although many neuroimaging studies of visual mental imagery have revealed activation in early visual cortex (Areas 17 or 18), many others have not. The authors review this literature and compare how well 3 models explain the disparate results. Each study was coded 1 or 0, indicating whether activation in early visual cortex was observed, and sets of variables associated with each model were fit to the observed results using logistic regression analysis. Three variables predicted all of the systematic differences in the probability of activation across studies. Two of these variables were identified with a perceptual anticipation theory, and the other was identified with a methodological factors theory. Thus, the variability in the literature is not random.     

Traditional vs. nontraditional women and men's perceptions of the personalities and physiques of ideal women and men

Traditional and nontraditional women and men's perceptions of ideal people, in terms of both traits and physiques, were assessed using 80 male and 80 female Caucasian undergraduates as study participants. The data indicated that traditional women and men perceived the ideal male as mesomorphic and as having more instrumental than expressive traits. Nontraditional women and men also favored a mesomorphic physique for the ideal male, but they differed from traditionals in that they saw this mesomorphic male as being androgynous in regard to traits. Concerning the ideal female, traditional and nontraditional women and men preferred an androgynous physique, but they differed in their perceptions of the ideal personality for a woman. Traditional women and men perceived their ideal women as having more expressive than instrumental traits, whereas nontraditional women and men saw their ideal women as being androgynous in regard to traits. The results are discussed within the framework of Bem's gender schema and enculturated lens theories.     

Resolving Compensation Disputes with Three-party Job Evaluation

Des conflits naissent dans les organisations a propos du montant de la retribution versee aux titulaires de certains postes. Aux Etats-Unis par exem-ple, le probleme de la contribution-retribution a provoque recemment plusieurs conflits autour des postes traditionnellement reserves aux femmes. Mediation et arbitrage sont les procedures habituellement retenues, mais une evaluation du travail regroupant trois partenaires est une solution originate dont les retombees favorables sur l'organisation depassent la resolution d'un conflit particulier.
Un groupe tripartite a exploite pour 1'evaluation du travail des dimensions pourvues d'echelles precises. Des equipes de deux personnes representant les parties adverses ont evalue des postes convenablement retribues a partir des dimensions sus-mentionnees. Les donnees ont été statistiquement synthetisees. Des equipes de deux personnes ont ensuite evalue tous les postes defendus par le syndicat implique dans le conflit. Cet eventail de postes incluait ceux qui etaient en litige.
Une tierce partie neutre devait conseiller les adversaires dans l'application d'une methode d'evaluation du travail qui resolvait le conflit, depistait les postes susceptibles de poser probleme a l'avenir et fournissait un moyen pour retribuer equitablement les nouveaux postes.     

Constraints and Preferences in Inductive Learning: An Experimental Study of Human and Machine Performance

The paper examines constraints and preferences employed by people in learning decision rules from preclassified examples. Results from four experiments with human subjects were analyzed and compared with artificial intelligence (AI) inductive learning programs. The results showed the people's rule inductions tended to emphasize category validity (probability of some property, given a category) more than cue validity (probability that an entity is a member of a category given that it has some property) to a greater extent than did the AI programs. Although the relative proportions of different rule types (e.g., conjunctive vs. disjunctive) changed across experiments, a single process model provided a good account of the data from each study. These observations are used to argue for describing constraints in terms of processes embodied in models rather than in terms of products or outputs. Thus AI induction programs become candidate psychological process models and results from inductive learning experiments can suggest new algorithms. More generally, the results show that human inductive generalizations tend toward greater specificity than would be expected if conceptual simplicity were the key constraint on inductions. This bias toward specificity may be due to the fact that this criterion both maximizes inferences that may be drawn from category membership and protects rule induction systems from developing over-generalizations.     

The Force of Habit

Habits figure in action-explanations because of their distinctive force. But what is the force of habit, and how does it motivate us? In this paper, I argue that the force of habit is the feeling of familiarity one has with the familiar course of action, where this feeling reveals a distinctive reason for acting in the usual way. I do this by considering and rejecting a popular account of habit's force in terms of habit's apparent automaticity, by arguing that one can do something out of habit and from deliberation, before going on to defend The Familiarity View.     

Why Maximize Expected Choice-Worthiness?1

This paper argues in favor of a particular account of decision-making under normative uncertainty: that, when it is possible to do so, one should maximize expected choice-worthiness. Though this position has been often suggested in the literature and is often taken to be the ‘default’ view, it has so far received little in the way of positive argument in its favor. After dealing with some preliminaries and giving the basic motivation for taking normative uncertainty into account in our decision-making, we consider and provide new arguments against two rival accounts that have been offered—the accounts that we call ‘My Favorite Theory’ and ‘My Favorite Option’. We then give a novel argument for comparativism—the view that, under normative uncertainty, one should take into account both probabilities of different theories and magnitudes of choice-worthiness. Finally, we further argue in favor of maximizing expected choice-worthiness and consider and respond to five objections.