Mode distinctions in knowing: The view from perception. Comments on Rönnberg (1990)

Information available for perception has been shown to be specific, to have validity extending over time, and to be meaningful. Thus, cognition cannot be distinguished as that which exclusively provides adaptive coherence of action and reliance on constraints. Transitions between perception and memory/cognition, as two qualitatively distinct modes of knowing, must instead be expected to occur for purposes of ensuring optimal utilization of information relative to its temporal validity and usefulness.     

A test of the reinforcing properties of stimuli correlated with nonreinforcement

The information hypothesis of conditioned reinforcement predicts that a stimulus that “reduces uncertainty” about the outcome of a trial will acquire reinforcing properties, even when the stimulus reliably predicts nonreinforcement. Four pigeons' key pecks produced one of two 5-sec stimuli with 0.50 probability according to a discriminated variable-interval schedule. One stimulus was followed by reinforcement; a second stimulus was followed by blackout. To the same extent, therefore, both stimuli reduced uncertainty about the possibility that food would arrive at the termination of the schedule interval. When a second key in the chamber was lighted, each peck on it could produce the stimulus preceding reinforcement, the stimulus preceding nonreinforcement, a novel stimulus, or no stimulus, across separate conditions. The stimulus preceding food maintained responding at substantial levels on the second, stimulus-producing, key. Such responding was not maintained by other stimuli. These data, replicated when the stimuli were reversed on the variable-interval schedule, do not support the prediction that uncertainty-reducing stimuli are necessarily conditioned reinforcers.     

The blocking of reinforcement control

Two experiments were conducted to extend the blocking effect to the reinforcement of a response. A delayed reinforcement contingency was presented to subjects with or without a previously pretrained response available during the delay interval. The interpolated response had no scheduled effect on delivery of the reinforcer, but its availability reduced strengthening of the initial response, which completely extinguished for some subjects. The results were interpreted as support for blocking as a fundamental principle of behavior, and as evidence against the principle of reinforcement being stated solely in terms of temporal proximity between response and reinforcer.     

Testing the reinforcing properties of S-: a replication of Lieberman''s procedure

A critical issue in testing theories of observing is whether the stimulus associated with extinction (the S-) reinforces observing responses. In previous experiments, subjects have been trained to make observing responses that produce both the S- and the stimulus correlated with reinforcement (the S+). Then, either the S+ or the S- has been withheld. Conflicting results have been attributed to differences among species. In the present experiments, pecking one key by master pigeons was reinforced with grain on a variable-ratio extinction schedule. Yoked pigeons received the grain on a variable-interval, extinction schedule controlled by the variable-ratio performances of the master birds. For both groups, concurrent pecking on a second key was reinforced on a variable-interval schedule with displays of discriminative stimuli. Subsequently, either the S+ or the S- was eliminated from the procedure. Omission of S+ produced a large decrease, as predicted by traditional conditioned reinforcement accounts of observing. By itself, S- did not maintain observing. A smaller and less reliable decrease, comparable to that obtained by Lieberman (1972) with rhesus monkeys, occurred when S- was eliminated. This replication with pigeons of Lieberman's results indicates that they are not species-specific, and the fact that observing was not maintained by S- alone suggests that the decrease obtained when S- was omitted is not attributable to the reinforcing power of S-.     

Human observing: Maintained by stimuli correlated with reinforcement but not extinction

College students received points exchangeable for money (reinforcement) on a variable-time 60-second schedule that alternated randomly with an extinction component. Subjects were informed that responding would not influence either the rate or distribution of reinforcement. Instead, presses on either of two levers (“observing responses”) produced stimuli. In each of four experiments, stimuli positively correlated with reinforcement and/or stimuli uncorrelated with reinforcement were each chosen over stimuli correlated with extinction. These results are consistent with prior results from pigeons in supporting the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis of observing and in not supporting the uncertainty-reduction hypothesis.     

项目难度与被试能力分布最优匹配的模拟研究

该文运用蒙特卡罗方法对被测试能力分布与测验项目难度分布的匹配问题进行模拟分析,分析表明当能力分布为正态分布正偏态分布和负偏态分布时分别与测验项目难度分布与为正态分布,正偏态分布和负偏态分布匹配,比别的匹配有更高测验期望信息值,测验最大信息测验 系数,并且测验信息曲线最大值的能力点与能力分布的众数愈相一致,测验项目参数估计值性真实值的相关也更高。     

信息加工认知心理学的发展和面临的挑战

本文认为当代信息加工认知心理学发展的特点是：（１）与高新科学技术结合．在基础理论的研究方面有较大的突破;（２）将自然认知与社会认知的研究结合起来,促使信息加工的研究能更接近人类实际的认知过程：（３）将基础理论研究与应用研究相结合,不断扩大认知心理学的研究领域和应用范围．为了迎接面临的挑战和适应社会发展的需要,信息加工认知心理学应更充分地体现时代精神,坚持走实验研究和现象学研究相结合、定量研究与定性研究相结合、微观研究与宏观研究相结合,以及文理互补、多科渗透的发展道路。     

迎接21世纪生命科学的新时代：———基因组与蛋白组计划时代

当全世界人类基因组计划在近年取得迅速和突出的进展,即将来临床的２１世纪将带领人类基因组计,划进入一个基基因组时代、蛋白组计划、生物信息学的新时代,所有这些将构成２１世纪生命科学研究的核心前沿和主流。同亲,生物信息学的成果将高度地拓展生命科学新的研究领域和加速其研究的里程。多种多样数以千万计的生命模式（如生物大分子结构功能的模式）的数字化,将是加快生命科学信息化步入一个崭新的水平和时代的必由之路。     

The morality of scientific openness

The ideal of scientific openness — i.e. the idea that scientific information should be freely accessible to interested parties — is strongly supported throughout the scientific community. At the same time, however, this ideal does not appear to be absolute in the everyday practice of science. In order to get the credit for new scientific advances, scientists often keep information to themselves. Also, it is common practice to withhold information obtained in commissioned research when the scientist has agreed with his or her employer to do so. The secrecy may be intended for ever, as in the military area, but also temporarily until a patent application has been made. The paper explores to what extent such secrecy is undesirable, as seems to be suggested by the ideal of scientific openness. Should this ideal be interpreted as having certain exceptions which make the above-mentioned practices acceptable? Are there, on closer inspection, good arguments for the ideal of scientific openness, and for officially upholding it? Possible versions of the ideal of scientific openness are explored and the issue is found to be rather complex, allowing for wide variations depending on the acting parties, beneficiaries, types of information and moral requirements involved. We conclude that the arguments usually given in favour of this ideal are weaker than what seems to be generally believed, and that, on closer inspection, they leave plenty of room for exceptions to it. These exceptions only partly cover the actual practice of withholding scientific information, and there may still be good reason to advocate, teach and enforce the ideal of scientific openness within the scientific community.