Detection of symmetry as a function of angular orientation

Subjects decided as quickly as possible whether dot patterns were or were not symmetrical about a line. Their decision times were shorter when the line was verticle and increased as the angle between the line and the verticle increased. This orientation function was essentially the same whether or not the subjects knew in advance what the orientation of the line would be. When the subjects tilted their heads, the function shifted in the direction of the head tilt, indicating that it was tied more closely to retinal than to gravitational coordinates. These data can be interpreted to mean that people mentally rotate patterns to a vertical orientation before judging their symmetry. This in turn suggests that the "template" for detecting symmetry may itself be embedded symmetrically in the brain.

Refractoriness in same--different judgments

Subjects judged as “same” or “different” pairs of visual stimuli, each either an X or an O, whose onsets were separated by intervals of 50, 100, 150 or 200 ms. When the interstimulus interval (ISI) was held constant within a block of 40 trials (Experiment I), decision time was independent of ISI. But when ISI was varied unpredictably from trial to trial (Experiments II and III), decision times increased the shorter the ISI. This effect was more marked for “same” than for “different” decisions. These results fail to support a single-channel interpretation, but suggest that variations in decision time depend on the subject's expectancy as to when the second stimulus will follow the first.

Motion perception: a color-contingent aftereffect

When observers who watched repeated alternations of a red contracting spiral and green expanding spiral were later shown stationary spirals, red and a green the red stationary spiral appeared to be expanding and the green stationary spiral appeared to be contracting. These color-contingent motion after effects complement reports of motion-contingent color aftereffects and suggest that both may reflect adaptation of detectors specific to color and motion.

Effects of instructions and drug administration on temporal resolution of paired flashes

Sixteen male alcoholics were shown pairs of light flashes separated by intervals ranging from 0 to 100 msec., and judged whether there were one or two flashes. Two-flash fusion theshold (TFT) was raised by administration of promazine hydrochloride, a tranquilizing drug, and was higher for strict than for lenient instructions. Signal detection analysis showed that the drug reduced sensitivity but did not affect criterion, while instructions altered criterion placement without changing sensitivity.

Discriminability and central intermittency in same-different judgements

Four sets of paired visual stimuli (OO, XX, XO, or OX) were judged by 48 subjects to be either “same” or “different.” Decision latencies of the same and different judgement were studied as a function of the inter-stimulus interval (ISI). In Experiments I and II, in which stimulus durations were 70 millisec., decision latencies showed marked increases when the ISI was reduced to 100 millisec., but in Experiments III and IV, in which the stimulus durations were only 40 millisec., comparable increases did not occur until the ISI was reduced to 50 millisec. These increases were more marked for “same” than for “different” judgements, although overall decision latencies were generally shorter for “same” judgements. The effects of varying ISIs and stimulus durations are interpreted in terms of masking; they fail to support an hypothesis of central intermittency.

Some difficulties with difficulty: note on Horst's "Mattrix Factoring and Test Theory"

As a solution to the problem of “difficulty factors” in item analysis, Horst has proposed a technique for removing a binary simplex (difficulty) component from an item score matrix before calculating the covariance matrix. This technique is shown to fail in its objectives. It is based upon the false premise that the effects of difficulty variations and of variations in factor content combine additively in an item score matrix. The status of difficulty variations in item analysis is discussed.