Remembering plurals: Unit of coding and form of coding during serial recall

Subjects were required to recall lists of six words which had been presented visually in sequence. One or two of the words might be plural nouns. A substantial number of errors occurred in which the plural form became detached from its original root. This is taken as evidence for a morpheme-based code as opposed to a unitary word code. A significantly high proportion of these errors maintained the form of the plural ( /S/, /Z/ or (ЪZ/) which is considered evidence for a primarily phonological coding of the plural morpheme. There is however a suggestion that on some occasions the plural is coded morphemically—i.e., in a way which does not distinguish between the various plural endings.     

Models of word recognition

Major hypotheses about the processes involved in word recognition are reviewed and then assessed through four experiments. The purpose of the first experiment was to examine some basic aspects of the processing of words, pseudowords, and nonwords, and beyond that, to discover basic differences in their processing that might underlie the word advantage. The second experiment was designed to assess the contribution of whole-word and letter cluster cues to the word advantage. Finally, Experiments III and IV were focused on the question of whether the word advantage can be wholly explained in terms of response bias or sophisticated guessing. Taken together, the results of these experiments were most compatible with criterion bias models. A version of the criterion bias model is suggested wherein the word advantage is attributed to interfacilitation among single letter and lexical units in memory.     

Dissociative effects of different types and amounts of nonreinforced CS exposure on avoidance extinction and the CER

Two experiments examined the effectiveness of two amounts of flooding or response-prevention on hastening avoidance response extinction and on reducing CS-produced suppression of bar-pressing for food. In Experiment 1, 20 and 30 flooding trials were both shown to be effective in hastening the extinction of a well-learned shuttlebox avoidance response. In Experiment 2, rats trained under comparable conditions to those in Experiment 1 were tested following flooding for the CER in a different apparatus. The results indicated that 30, but not 20, flooding trials were sufficient to reduce the CER. In each experiment the results of additional control groups equated with the flooded groups for nonreinforced CS exposure also revealed a dissociation between the effectiveness of this CS time control procedure in hastening avoidance response extinction and in reducing the CER. Further comparisons showed that although 30 flooding trials did reduce the CER, the same total duration of nonreinforced CS Exposure in the form of avoidance extinction trials did not. Thus the context in which CS exposure occurs may affect the dynamics of extinction of the CER. The experiments are discussed in the broader context of dissociation of various indices of fear in humans.     

A general scheme for the analytic decomposition of objective test scores: Illustrative demonstrations using the Rod-and-Frame test and the Müller-Lyer illusion

Objective tests of personality typically include a number of items or trials; the total score on the test is the sum of the subject's “correct” responses across all such trials. Normally, the trials are varied systematically across various facets of the test design, so that the total score represents a composite measure of accuracy averaged across these test facets. However, since only one score is computed for each subject, some potentially important kinds of individual differences—namely all those associated with each particular variation in the test design—are treated solely as measurement unreliability. Such a psychometric stance may serve to obscure more differentiated types of individual differences, with the result that composite scores from trials based on one type of experimental design may not be highly related to such scores from trials using a somewhat different design. The present paper presents a general procedure for scoring objective tests more analytically. To illustrate this general rationale, and to demonstrate its potential utility, data have been reanalyzed from two previous studies, one using the Rod-and-Frame test, the other the Müller-Lyer illusion. In both cases, the traditional global accuracy score did not correlate significantly with other theoretically related variables, while a number of component scores were quite highly related.     

What is right with “deep” dyslexic patients?

Two aphasic adults with a specific acquired dyslexia were given tests requiring the processing of written words and sentences. Despite the general severity of the patients' deficits, some aspects of such processing appear to be relatively well preserved. The patients have particular difficulty reading aloud function words and abstract words; yet in word/nonword discrimination tests, both patients showed normal recognition of function words and one showed normal performance with abstract words. The patients do have a deficit in comprehension of visually presented words and sentences; yet their performance on comprehension tests was considerable and, moreover, showed meaningful relationships with their ability to read aloud.     

Lateralization for reading musical chords: Disentangling symbolic, analytic, and phonological aspects of reading

It has been repeatedly shown that the left hemisphere (right visual field) is superior to the right hemisphere (LVF) in reading English, a bias possibly due to any or all of three confounded factors: (1) the symbolic nature of the coding system; (2) the analytic requirements of the decoding process; and (3) the phonological associations of the elements. Recent work on reading Japanese ideograms (Kanji) disentangles (1) from (2) and (3), but leaves the latter two confounded. We further disentangle (2) and (3) by examining visual field preference for reading musical chords, representatives of an analytic, nonphonological symbol system. The strong RVF advantage is interpreted as indicating that the left hemisphere is dominant for reading an analytic symbol system that is not phonologically based. We conclude that the left-hemisphere advantage traditionally found for reading phonological symbols is due to their analytic nature in addition to any effect due to their linguistic association.     

Observer orientation and actor-observer differences in attributions for failure

In a series of two experiments, male undergraduates either operated or watched another person operate a model racecar set. Instructions varied observers' expectancies about future involvement with the task. The drivers' causal attributions for their performance were compared with those of neutral observers as well as those of involved observers who anticipated running on the track. Predictions, derived from the Jones and Nisbett framework of actor/observer differences, were that actors should make more external than internal attributions and that neutral or “passive” observers should do the opposite. Moreover, the involved or “active” observer groups were expected to display attributional patterns similar to those of the actors. These predictions were confirmed. Results are discussed in terms of information and information-processing differences between groups.     

Numerical taxonomy of aphasia

Two hundred consecutively seen aphasics, 142 of them with infarcts, were examined by tests of fluency, comprehension, repetition, naming, and information content. The language scores were subjected to a minimum variance clustering algorithm separately for the total and for the infarct groups. The latter generated 10 clusters on a dendrogram. Attribute analysis of each cluster provided a clinically meaningful profile of language performance for these groups. The degree of correlation of most computer generated clusters with clinically recognized groups was high, and the homogeneity of some of the clusters is striking. An exception appears to be “conduction aphasia,” which is bimodally distributed. One of these clusters, with high fluency and low comprehension scores, was renamed “afferent conduction” aphasia, and the other, with lower fluency and higher comprehension, was renamed “efferent conduction” aphasia. The Principal Components Analysis was used to evaluate the discriminatory value of language characteristics, and the Nearest Neighbor Network Analysis was used to evaluate the significance of clustering. The dendrogram for all aphasics showed a less specific and less homogenous six clusters.