口吃者加工汉语歧义短语的神经过程

韵律边界是口语韵律特征的有机组成部分, 在语言理解中发挥着重要作用。口吃作为一种言语节律性障碍, 主要表现为音节经常性的重复、拖长或停顿等。本研究采用ERP, 考察口吃者完成词汇判断和结构判断两种任务时, 加工歧义短语(动宾/偏正歧义结构)内部韵律边界的认知过程。结果发现口吃者和言语流畅者在加工汉语歧义短语过程中, 所诱发的反映韵律切分的脑电成分CPS (closure positive shift)不存在显著差异。在0~300 ms, 不论中线还是两侧, 口吃者和言语流畅者加工两类短语时, 动宾短语韵律边界诱发正效应的头皮分布范围小于偏正短语。在300~600 ms, 中线上, 口吃和言语流畅者在完成两种任务时, 两类短语的韵律边界均稳定诱发了正效应; 在两侧, 结构判断任务中两类短语的韵律边界都诱发了正效应, 但词汇判断任务中只有偏正短语稳定诱发该效应。综上, 口吃者和言语流畅者一样对口语韵律边界敏感, 并且他们加工歧义短语内部韵律边界时, 诱发的脑电效应受到实验任务和短语结构类型的影响。     

TOWARD A THEOLOGY OF BOUNDARY

Awareness of boundary, both physical and mental, is seen as the beginning of perception. In any account of the world, therefore, boundary must be a ubiquitous component. In sharp contrast, accounts of God within the Christian tradition commonly have proceeded by the affirmation that God is above and beyond boundary as infinite, timeless, and simple. To overcome this “problem of transcendence,” of how such a God can relate to such a world, an eight‐term grammar of boundary is developed to demonstrate how God as Trinity can properly be held to be without boundary yet constitute the ground of a bounded world. This leads to a way of granting theological significance to the origin and development of life. Life is seen to exist in dynamic, intentional relationships between context (“outside”) and intext (“inside”) across permeable boundaries through which an exchange of resources and information takes place for the sake of self‐continuation. Comprehending life's distinctive utilization of boundary in terms of the grammar developed here enables life to be seen not only as a vestige of the Trinity but also, precisely because of this, as a sign and parable of redemption.     

Investigating the category boundaries of emotional facial expressions: Effects of individual participant and model and the stability over time

Emotional facial expressions are perceived categorically. Little is known about individual differences in the position of the category boundary, nor whether the category boundaries differ across stimulus continua. Similarly, little is known about whether individuals’ category boundaries are stable over time. We investigated these topics in a series of experiments designed to locate category boundaries using converging evidence from identification and discrimination tasks. We compared both across individuals and within individuals across two sessions that spanned a week. Results show differences between individuals in the location of category boundaries, and suggest that these differences are stable over time. We also found differences in boundary location when we compared images depicting different models.     

Impact of Ethical Information Resources on Independently Licensed Counselors

A random sample of 430 independently licensed counselors evaluated 4 ethical information interventions in the context of 16 boundary‐crossing scenarios. Results indicated that counselors have serious reservations about any form of boundary crossing. They reported mostly reviewing various codes of ethics, reviewing state laws and rules, consulting with others, working from gut instincts, and reflecting on personal experience when confronted with boundary‐crossing issues. Participants clearly preferred streamlined ethical information interventions.     

Guest Editorial: Conceptualizing Justice and Counter-Expertise

ABSTRACT

Systemic injustices exclude counter-experts from telling their stories and influencing the collective imagination. Four papers and some discussant essays illustrate the ways in which counter-experts cross boundaries to contest knowledge claims, legal institutions, and forms of data in order to resist various forms of injustice. Literature on counter-expertise, socio-technical imaginaries, and epistemic injustice highlights how marginalized groups are prevented from participating in the process of collective imagining. A definition of counter-expertise and a new typology of counter-expertise demonstrate how marginalized groups navigate boundaries to pursue epistemic justice. The four papers in the special issue exemplify the ways in which counter-experts navigate identity politics. To combat epistemic injustice within our field, STS scholars can be more inclusive with teaching, mentoring, reviewing and other forms of scholarly gatekeeping.