Decoding effects of cognitive complexity,tolerance of ambiguity,and verbal–nonverbal inconsistency1

The effects of inconsistency between the verbal and nonverbal components of a message were investigated. Subjects were 72 females who rated the attitudes of encoding confederates who communicated either consistent or inconsistent messages. Verbal and nonverbal components were varied as either positive or negative and each of the four possible combinations served as an experimental condition. The nonverbal cues of amount of eye contact, postural orientation, forward–backward lean, and head nodding were found to influence the judgment of the total message. Verbal and nonverbal components were found to have interactive rather than additive effects. Inconsistent nonverbal cues had a stronger effect when accompanying a positive verbal message than when accompanying a negative verbal component. The effects of decoders' levels of cognitive complexity and tolerance of ambiguity were also assessed. Evidence suggests that both complexity and ambiguity tolerance have effects on the utilization of inconsistent nonverbal cues. Low complexity/low tolerance subjects were less influenced by nonverbal cues in the positive verbal–negative nonverbal condition. These subjects were also found to differentiate less between supplied rating dimensions than other groups.     

Hemisphere dominance, cognitive complexity, and nonverbal sensitivity

It was inferred from data of 115 male undergraduates that hemispheric specialization was involved in how accurately individuals decode nonverbal cues. Results were opposing for eye-dominance and eye-movement groups (left-eyed superiority and left-movers' inferiority). There was no correlation between these two measures, which seem differentially sensitive. Cognitive complexity did not correlate with these measures.     

Effects of model-based and memory-based processing on speed and accuracy of grammar string generation

Learners are able to use 2 different types of knowledge to perform a skill. One type is a conscious mental model, and the other is based on memories of instances. The authors conducted 3 experiments that manipulated training conditions designed to affect the availability of 1 or both types of knowledge about an artificial grammar. Participants were tested for both speed and accuracy of their ability to generate letter sequences. Results indicate that model-based training leads to slow accurate responding. Memory-based training leads to fast, less accurate responding and highest achievement when perfect accuracy was not required. Evidence supports participants' preference for using the memory-based mode when exposed to both types of training. Finally, the accuracy contributed by model-based training declined over a retention interval.