Vital anti-mathematicism and the ontology of the emerging life sciences: from Mandeville to Diderot

Synthese - Intellectual history still quite commonly distinguishes between the episode we know as the Scientific Revolution, and its successor era, the Enlightenment, in terms of the calculatory...     

Explaining Jury Verdicts: Is Leniency Bias for Real?

Laboratory research suggests juries that begin deliberation with a strong majority (i.e., 2/3 or more) usually end up choosing the verdict favored by this majority, whereas those without a strong majority generally acquit or hang. We tested the robustness of these findings in the field by examining trial and deliberation correlates of jury verdicts using data from 79 criminal jury trials held in Indiana. As expected, several trial characteristics and the first-vote preference distribution were related to jury verdicts. However, there was no evidence of leniency bias—75% of those juries without a 2/3 majority on the first deliberation vote ended up convicting. Contributions of the study, limitations, and alternative explanations for the observed severity bias are discussed.     

The effects of local prevalence and explicit expectations on search termination times

In visual search tasks, the relative proportions of target-present and -absent trials have important effects on behavior. Miss error rates rise as target prevalence decreases (Wolfe, Horowitz, & Kenner, Nature 435, 439-440, 2005). At the same time, search termination times on target-absent trials become shorter (Wolfe & Van Wert, Current Biology 20, 121-124, 2010). These effects must depend on some implicit or explicit knowledge of the current prevalence. What is the nature of that knowledge? In Experiment 1, we conducted visual search tasks at three levels of prevalence (6%, 50%, and 94%) and analyzed performance as a function of "local prevalence," the prevalence over the last n trials. The results replicated the usual effects of overall prevalence but revealed only weak or absent effects of local prevalence. In Experiment 2, the overall prevalence in a block of trials was 20%, 50%, or 80%. However, a 100%-valid cue informed observers of the prevalence on the next trial. These explicit cues had a modest effect on target-absent RTs, but explicit expectation could not explain the full prevalence effect. We conclude that observers predict prevalence on the basis of an assessment of a relatively long prior history. Each trial contributes a small amount to that assessment, and this can be modulated but not overruled by explicit instruction.     

Diversity and General Student Scholarship Recipient Essays: 2010 National Society of Genetic Counselors Membership Committee

In an effort to increase the diversity of the membership of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC), the Membership Committee provided two $500 scholarships to genetic counseling students planning to attend the NSGC AEC meeting in Dallas, Texas in October 2010. Requirements for applicants of both scholarships included enrollment in the fall of 2010, good standing at an accredited genetic counseling training program, and NSGC membership or plans to join in 2011. Students who are from communities underrepresented in the NSGC, including, but not limited to, those of minority cultural/ethnic backgrounds and those with disabilities were eligible to apply for the “Diversity” scholarship. Students from all backgrounds who have an interest in diversity issues were eligible to apply for the “General” scholarship. Applicants wrote essays 1000 words or less answering the following questions: How has your identity as a member of a group underrepresented in the genetic counseling profession affected your pursuit of this career? What do you feel is lacking in genetic counseling to address the issues of underrepresented groups? What strategies do you recommend for addressing these issues and/or increasing diversity? Why do you think diversity is an important issue for the field of genetic counseling? What strategies do you recommend to attract and retain students, especially those from underrepresented populations, into the field of genetic counseling? How do you envision contributing to these strategies? The essays by the award recipients elucidated interesting perspectives and ideas for increasing diversity in the genetic counseling profession.     

Kanizsa-type subjective contours do not guide attentional deployment in visual search but line termination contours do

We used visual search to explore whether attention could be guided by Kanizsa-type subjective contours and by subjective contours induced by line ends. Unlike in previous experiments, we compared search performance with subjective contours against performance with real, luminance contours, and we had observers search for orientations or shapes produced by subjective contours, rather than searching for the presence of the contours themselves. Visual search for one orientation or shape among distractors of another orientation or shape was efficient when the items were defined by luminance contours. Search was much less efficient among items defined by Kanizsa-type subjective contours. Search remained efficient when the items were defined by subjective contours induced by line ends. The difference between Kanizsa-type subjective contour and subjective contours induced by line ends is consistent with physiological evidence suggesting that the brain mechanisms underlying the perception of these two kinds of subjective contours may be different.     

Looking at scenes while searching for numbers: dividing attention multiplies space

Observers tend to remember seeing a greater expanse of a scene than was shown (boundary extension [BE]). Is undivided visual attention necessary for BE? In Experiment 1, 108 observers viewed photographs with superimposed numerals (2s and 5s). Each appeared for 750 msec, followed by a masked interval and a test picture (same, closer up, or wider angled). Test pictures were rated as the same, closer, or wider angled on a 5-point scale. Visual attention was manipulated with a search task: The observers reported the number of 5s (zero, one, or two). The observers performed search only, picture rating only, or both (giving search priority). Search accuracy was unaffected by condition. BE occurred in both conditions but was greater with divided attention. The results were replicated using incidental BE tests (Experiments 2 and 3). We propose that anticipatory representation of layout occurs automatically during scene perception, with focal attention serving to constrain the boundary error.