Spatial constraints on attention to speech in the blind

When sighted persons try to identify one of two speech utterances coming from different directions, they display both a frontal position advantage, i.e., better recognition of inputs from the front than of those from the rear, and a right-side advantage, better recognition of inputs from the right than of those from the left. The present study demonstrates a dissociation of the two effects in blind subjects (N = 10) who showed no frontal position advantage together with a right-side advantage superior to that of control sighted subjects (N = 16). There was no systematic difference between congenitally blind subjects and noncongenitals. The absence of frontal position advantage in the blind is consistent with the notion that this effect originates in the habit of sighted listeners to orient toward the source of heard speech. The occurrence of at least normal right-side advantage in the blind does not support recent suggestions of reduced lateralization of language functions in such subjects.     

Speech-mediated retention in dyslexics

Dyslexics (6 to 9 yr. old) and a control group of 12 normal readers (second-graders) were tested on a memory task with rhyming and non-rhyming items. The most important finding is that both groups were penalized by rhyme, indicating speech coding. It was observed that the dyslexics were not less penalized by rhyme than were controls. The present results are compared with those of other recent studies.     

Task determinants of ear differences in melody processing

In Experiment 1 nonmusicians were presented with dichotic melodies, which differed either on all pitches or by a single note, followed by a set of four binaural melodies. They were asked to recognize among the alternatives only one member of the dichotic pair in the “single-focus” task, and both dichotic melodies in the “double-focus” task. These different attention requirements led to a LEA in the first task which contrasted with the REA observed in the other task when melodies differed by all pitches. A possible confounding (fusion of the common pitches) prevents comparison of the tasks for melodies differing by a single pitch. The role of the extent of melody differences was further investigated in a second experiment by changing melodies on one, two, or three notes. No effect of material was observed on ear asymmetries. Task demands appeared as the most critical determinant of ear differences and are discussed in terms of their particular influence on the adoption of an analytic or holistic processing mode. Male subjects were found to be more responsive than females to analytic processing suggestions.     

Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phones arise spontaneously?

It was found that illiterate adults could neither delete nor add a phone at the beginning of a non-word; but these tasks were rather easily performed by people with similar environment and childhood experiences, who learned to read rudimentarily as adults. Awareness of speech as a sequence of phones is thus not attained spontaneously in the course of general cognitive growth, but demands some specific training, which, for most persons, is probably provided by learning to read in the alphabetic system.     

Listening to speech while retaining music: What happens to the right-ear advantage?

On each trial, subjects were played a dichotic pair of syllables differing in the consonant (/ba/, /da/, /ga/) or in the vowel (/ba/, /b?/, /bi/). The pair of syllables was preceded by a melody, or a sentence, and followed by the same or a different melody, or sentence. Subjects either had to retain the first piece of additional material or were free to ignore it. The different combinations of phonemic contrast, additional material, and instruction concerning the additional material were used in different sessions. In each case, the main task of the subjects was to respond to the presence or the absence of the target /ba/ on the ear previously indicated. There was no effect of context on relative ear accuracy, but the right-ear advantage observed for consonants in response latency when subjects retained a sentence gave way to a small nonsignificant left-ear advantage when subjects retained a melody. Right-ear advantage in response latencies was also observed for vowels in the verbal context, but the contextual effect, although in the same direction as for consonants, was very slight. The implications of contextual effects for a theory of the determinants of the auditory laterality effects are discussed.     

Environmental and Psychological Factors that Influence the Creative Excellence of Brazilian and Portuguese Women

There is increasing recognition of the importance of creativity for social development. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there were differences among Brazilian and Portuguese women recognized for their creative excellence in relation to the psychological and environmental factors that might impact their achievements. The sample was composed of 33 women; 18 who were socially recognized for excellence in creativity in different areas (nine Brazilian, nine Portuguese) were compared to 15 who were not recognized (nine Brazilian, six Portuguese). The instruments used were the Biographical Questionnaire of Creative Women, a semi‐structured interview guide, and the Creative Production Analysis Guide. Non‐parametric tests indicated significant differences in environmental factors and personal cognitive characteristics between the creative and non‐creative women when compared within each country. However, no significant differences among Brazilian and Portuguese creative women were found, thus indicating that they present similar psychological profiles.     

The mental representation of living and nonliving things: differential weighting and interactivity of sensorial and non-sensorial features

Warrington and colleagues (Warrington & McCarthy, 1983, 1987; Warrington & Shallice, 1984) claimed that sensorial and functional-associative (FA) features are differentially important in determining the meaning of living things (LT) and nonliving things (NLT). The first aim of the present study was to evaluate this hypothesis through two different access tasks: feature generation (Experiment 1) and cued recall (Experiment 2). The results of both experiments provided consistent empirical support for Warrington and colleagues' assumption. The second aim of the present study was to test a new differential interactivity hypothesis that combines Warrington and colleagueS' assumption with the notion of a higher number of intercorrelations and hence of a stronger connectivity between sensorial and non-sensorial features for LTs than for NLTs. This hypothesis was motivated by previoUs reports of an uncrossed interaction between domain (LTs vs NLTs) and attribute type (sensorial vs FA) in, for example, a feature verification task (Laws, Humber, Ramsey, & McCarthy, 1995): while FA attributes are verified faster than sensorial attributes for NLTs, no difference is observed for LTs. We replicated and generalised this finding using several feature verification tasks on both written words and pictures (Experiment 3), including in conditions aimed at minimising the intervention of priming biases and strategic or mnemonic processes (Experiment 4). The whole set of results suggests that both privileged relations between features and categories, and the differential importance of intercorrelations between features as a function of category, modulate access to semantic features.     

The mental representation of living and nonliving things: Differential weighting and interactivity of sensorial and non-sensorial features

Warrington and colleagues (Warrington & McCarthy, 1983, 1987; Warrington & Shallice, 1984) claimed that sensorial and functional-associative (FA) features are differentially important in determining the meaning of living things (LT) and nonliving things (NLT). The first aim of the present study was to evaluate this hypothesis through two different access tasks: feature generation (Experiment 1) and cued recall (Experiment 2). The results of both experiments provided consistent empirical support for Warrington and colleagues' assumption. The second aim of the present study was to test a new differential interactivity hypothesis that combines Warrington and colleagues' assumption with the notion of a higher number of intercorrelations and hence of a stronger connectivity between sensorial and non-sensorial features for LTs than for NLTs. This hypothesis was motivated by previous reports of an uncrossed interaction between domain (LTs vs NLTs) and attribute type (sensorial vs FA) in, for example, a feature verification task (Laws, Humber, Ramsey, & McCarthy, 1995): while FA attributes are verified faster than sensorial attributes for NLTs, no difference is observed for LTs. We replicated and generalised this finding using several feature verification tasks on both written words and pictures (Experiment 3), including in conditions aimed at minimising the intervention of priming biases and strategic or mnemonic processes (Experiment 4). The whole set of results suggests that both privileged relations between features and categories, and the differential importance of intercorrelations between features as a function of category, modulate access to semantic features.