Reconstruction from the mental image

In three experiments young children were asked to reconstruct an array of objects after they had imagined its appearance following either a rotation of the array or a change in their own position (Huttenlocher & Presson, 1973). In reconstructing arrays, subjects first positioned that object which would be most prominent to an observer following the imagined transformation. Surprisingly, this occurred even when subjects made an egocentric error by reconstructing a copy of the original array. Hence young children, although apparently egocentric, can imagine themselves in a new position with a new perspective. The mental operations which underlie imagined spatial transformations are discussed in light of the results.     

Free recall in boys of normal and poor reading levels as a function of task manipulations

Free recall of reading disabled boys, ages 9 to 11 years, was compared with that of boys showing no reading difficulty. During a baseline trial, poor readers recalled less items and tended to show less recall organization than normals. Recall and category clustering in a second trial were highest following a manipulation designed to produce semantic encoding of items and lowest when children were required to focus on items' physical features. In a condition requiring free sort prior to recall, reading disabled boys failed to organize or study as effectively as normals. Rather than lacking the ability to use semantic relations as a strategy for grouping items, the reading disabled had difficulty in spontaneously generating effective study techniques.     

The “lag effect” in dichoptic viewing

Ten subjects were asked to report both of two different consonant-vowels (CVs) presented to the same foveal area, but in different eyes (“dichoptically”). Stimuli were presented at stimulus-onset asynchronies (SOAs) ranging from 0 to 150 msec in 25-msec steps. Correct identifications were significantly depressed for the eye receiving the leading stimulus at SOAs of 25 to 75 msec. Monoptic data from three subjects indicated no significant reductions in correct identification as a function of SOA. The dichoptic results can be understood in terms of current theories of visual backward masking and are similar to the “lag effect” observed with dichotic listening to speech stimuli. Similarity of results for the two modalities suggests a similar “two-process” explanation may underlie both phenomena.     

Is there a disposition to avoid the fundamental attribution error?

Two studies investigated the possibility that personality variables might relate to the magnitude of the cognitive attributional error. In the first, participants received either a pronuclear or anti-nuclear weapons essay, and were asked to rate the writer's personal beliefs (attitude attribution). As expected, certain Myers-Briggs Type Indicator indices of cognitive processing preferences did not predict variations in attribution in the Choice condition, but did so in the Constraint condition. In the Constraint condition, subjects expressing the Intuitive Thinking preference showed no significant attributional error (i.e., no tendency to rate in line with essay content). Other subjects in this condition showed the usual attributional error. These findings were generally replicated in the second study, which used the Constraint condition only. The Self-Monitoring scale was added as a predictor; it did not relate to the attributional error. It was suggested that measures of cognitive processing style may be more relevant to attribution than the various measures of sensitivity to environmental variation.     

A novel argument for the Universality of Parsing principles

Previous work on Relative Clause attachment has overlooked a crucial grammatical distinction across both the languages and structures tested: the selective availability of Pseudo Relatives. We reconsider the literature in light of this observation and argue that, all else being equal, local attachment is found with genuine Relative Clauses and that non-local attachment emerges when their surface identical imposters, Pseudo Relatives, are available. Hence, apparent cross-linguistic variation in parsing preferences is reducible to grammatical factors. The results from two novel experiments in Italian are presented in support of these conclusions.     

Self-esteem and formality of instructions as variables influencing selective recall

The present study attempted to determine whether the selective recall phenomenon was related to self-esteem. The selective recall phenomenon is the inferior recall of interrupted tasks in a formal (ego-threatening) situation, relative to the recall of interrupted tasks in an informal (nonthreatening) situation. Two hundred eleven college students responded to a self-esteem inventory and then were given formal or informal instructions. They then worked on 16 tasks, and were interrupted on 8 but were allowed to complete 8. Finally, an unexpected free-recall test of task solutions was administered. Only subjects low in self-esteem exhibited the selective recall pattern. It was hypothesized that in a formal situation, interrupted activities were viewed as failures. It was assumed that the recall of failures was particularly threatening to low-self-esteem subjects, resulting in selective forgetting or selective storage of solutions. It was also found that all subjects recalled solutions from completed tasks more frequently than solutions from interrupted tasks. Several interpretations for the latter phenomenon were suggested, including a dual mechanism involving both motivation persistence and motivation reduction, and the incorporation of information into a self-referent schema.     

Comments on the interpretation of lateral asymmetries in the naming of words and line drawings

Young, Bion, and Ellis (Brain and Language, 11, 54-65, 1980) found no visual hemifield differences for right-handed subjects' first reports of bilaterally presented picturable nouns and line drawings, and small RVF superiorities for second reports of these stimuli. Levine and Banich (1982), however, found no visual hemifield differences for line drawings, and a substantial RVF superiority for picturable words. Two procedural factors are identified as responsible for this difference in results; namely the lack of control of order of report in Levine and Banich's (1982) study, and their use of vertically aligned words. Levine and Banich's (1982) attempt to explain findings of side of presentation X report interactions in terms of directional scanning and reporting preferences is shown to be untenable. Explanations in terms of cerebral asymmetries are more convincing, but they must be related to explicit theoretical models.     

Group vs individual equity judgments: Is there a polarization effect?

Two-hundred male undergraduates, individually and in groups of five, divided a fixed reward between two performers with unequal inputs under conditions in which they either expected or did not expect future interaction with recipients. Individuals who anticipated future interaction with recipients divided the reward equally, while groups divided the reward equitably. When interaction was not expected, individuals divided the reward equitably by discriminating between recipients, while groups made more extreme discriminations (the group polarization effect). Experiencing group discussions made individuals more confident in the fairness of their subsequent allocations. The results are discussed in terms of the social and informational influences of groups on allocation decisions.