Search

This work engages with Karen Barad's philosophy and theory of agential realism through research practices of critical autoethnography and arts-based methods. The work explores how knowledge, memory, language, and experience remain alive within practitioners and inform who we become and how we inherit the stories involved in being educators and therapists. This paper presents two entangled research processes involving engagement with material artefacts related to the author's professional identity development and practice as an arts therapist in Aotearoa, New Zealand. Through Barad's theory of diffraction, engagement with and reassembling research artefacts supports a consideration of what can happen when we map and remember stories from different times and spaces in our lives. Elucidating and exploring the contours of memories and experiences can be helpful practices to engage in as narrative is the most potent mechanism for memory and teaching, and as therapists and educators, we are living through and practicing from the tangle of these narratives.

Students frequently utilize digital devices and applications to assist studying. Past research has yielded mixed results on their effectiveness, and scant research has compared portable technologies with each other or focused on smartphones specifically. We compared college students' learning of vocabulary on paper, laptop, and smartphone. Students were randomly assigned to one platform for reviewing vocabulary flashcards, and then they completed a memory quiz and answered questions regarding perceptions of these technologies. Results showed equivalency in students' learning across platforms, with the only exception being that students spent longer reviewing paper flashcards. Self-reported cognitive load and satisfaction were equal across platforms. Quantitative and qualitative data also suggested that, though students quickly label both laptops and smartphones as helpful for education, they see more educational value in laptops. This research suggests that smartphones present new ways of learning, but care must be taken with how smartphones are utilized in educational settings.

In this study, we carry out a qualitative and quantitative analysis of abbreviations in 300 randomly collected research paper titles published in the most prestigious European and US-based Astrophysics journals written in English. Our main results show that the process of shortening words and groups of words is one of the most characteristic and recurrent features in Astrophysics research paper titling construction. In spite of the convenience of abbreviations as a mechanism for word-formation, some of them may pose certain difficulties of understanding and/or misinterpretation because of their specificity, ambiguity, or overlapping. To overcome these difficulties, we propose a series of options which with no doubt would lead to a better interaction among the different branches of Astrophysics in particular and of science in general and would definitely improve how research is currently performed and communicated.

Predicting and modeling human behavior and finding trends within human decision-making processes is a major problem of social science. Rock Paper Scissors (RPS) is the fundamental strategic question in many game theory problems and real-world competitions. Finding the right approach to beat a particular human opponent is challenging. Here we use an AI (artificial intelligence) algorithm based on Markov Models of one fixed memory length (abbreviated as "single AI") to compete against humans in an iterated RPS game. We model and predict human competition behavior by combining many Markov Models with different fixed memory lengths (abbreviated as "multi-AI"), and develop an architecture of multi-AI with changeable parameters to adapt to different competition strategies. We introduce a parameter called "focus length" (a positive number such as 5 or 10) to control the speed and sensitivity for our multi-AI to adapt to the opponent's strategy change. The focus length is the number of previous rounds that the multi-AI should look at when determining which Single-AI has the best performance and should choose to play for the next game. We experimented with 52 different people, each playing 300 rounds continuously against one specific multi-AI model, and demonstrated that our strategy could win against more than 95% of human opponents.

The present study compared the effectiveness of paper and digital flashcards. College students learned vocabulary from paper, computer, or tablet flashcards that were self-created or ready-made. Students then completed a memory recall test and answered questions on cognitive load, perceived control, satisfaction, and several individual difference variables. Results showed that students learned equally well from paper and tablet but less well from computer flashcards. They were less satisfied with, and felt less in control of, computer-based flashcards. Students also felt more satisfied with paper than either digital card set. Despite these differences, cognitive load was equivalent across platforms. In addition, students recalled more words and reported expelling more effort on ready-made over self-created flashcards. The individual difference variables did not relate to recall or satisfaction. Overall, students' satisfaction, as well as perceived difficulty and level of control over the cards, meaningfully related to performance. This research suggests that paper and digital flashcards are equally viable options for students but platform matters. Mobile technologies like tablets might be especially advantageous. Furthermore, perceptions matter. Students may be inclined towards different cards based on their perceptions of difficulty level and the like, and thus flashcards should be available in a multitude of formats.

Object personification is the attribution of human characteristics to non-human agents. In online forums, autistic individuals commonly report experiencing this phenomenon. Given that approximately half of all autistic individuals experience difficulties identifying their own emotions, the suggestion that object personification may be a feature of autism seems almost paradoxical. Why would a person experience sympathy for objects, when they struggle to understand and verbalise the emotions of other people as well as their own? An online survey was used to assess tendency for personification in 87 autistic and 263 non-autistic adults. Together, our results indicate that object personification occurs commonly among autistic individuals, and perhaps more often (and later in life) than in the general population. Given that in many cases, autistic people report their personification experiences as distressing, it is important to consider the reasons for the increased personification and identify structures for support.

The widespread use of mobile devices and laptops has replaced traditional paper-based learning and the question of how the brain efficiency of digital tablet-based learning differs from that of paper-based learning remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in brain efficiency for learning between paper-based and digital tablet-based learning by measuring activity in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Thirty-two subjects were randomly assigned to the paper-based learning or the digital tablet-based learning group. Subjects in each group performed a memory task that required memorizing a three-minute novel (encoding phase) on a paper or digital tablet, followed by a test in which they answered four multiple-choice questions based on the novel's content. To compare both groups, behavioral performance on the test (retrieval phase) and activity in the PFC were measured. As a result, no significant difference in behavioral performance between both groups was observed (p > 0.05). However, the paper-based learning group showed significantly lower activity in the PFC in the encoding phase than the digital tablet-based learning group (p < 0.05) but not in the retrieval phase. The current study demonstrated that brain efficiency in encoding is higher in subjects with paper-based learning than those with digital tablet-based learning. This finding has important implications for education, particularly in terms of the pros and cons of electronic document-based learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Motor skills are required for activities of daily living. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied in association with motor skill learning has been investigated as a tool for enhancing training effects in health and disease. Here, we review the published literature investigating whether tDCS can facilitate the acquisition, retention or adaptation of motor skills. Work in multiple laboratories is underway to develop a mechanistic understanding of tDCS effects on different forms of learning and to optimize stimulation protocols. Efforts are required to improve reproducibility and standardization. Overall, reproducibility remains to be fully tested, effect sizes with present techniques vary over a wide range, and the basis of observed inter-individual variability in tDCS effects is incompletely understood. It is recommended that future studies explicitly state in the Methods the exploratory (hypothesis-generating) or hypothesis-driven (confirmatory) nature of the experimental designs. General research practices could be improved with prospective pre-registration of hypothesis-based investigations, more emphasis on the detailed description of methods (including all pertinent details to enable future modeling of induced current and experimental replication), and use of post-publication open data repositories. A checklist is proposed for reporting tDCS investigations in a way that can improve efforts to assess reproducibility., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

In this commentary, the authors discuss the implications of A. S. Green, E. Rafaeli, N. Bolger, P. E. Shrout, and H. T. Reis's (2006) diary studies with respect to memory. Researchers must take 2 issues into account when determining whether paper-and-pencil or handheld electronic diaries gather more trustworthy data. The first issue is a matter of prospective memory, and the second is a matter of reconstructive memory. The authors review the research on these issues and conclude that regardless of the type of diary researchers use, several factors can conspire to produce prompt--but inaccurate--data.

Background: The trends in medical publishing are towards electronic versions and the use of the English language. The objective of this study was to compare general practitioners' ability to retain information when reading on paper versus on screen, and in their mother tongue versus in the English., Material and Methods: Randomized controlled trial of 114 Scandinavian general practitioners. They read a review article for 10 minutes either on paper/in English, on screen/in English, on paper/in their mother tongue, or on screen/in their mother tongue. Afterwards they completed a questionnaire with six open questions from the article. The main outcome measure was sum score on a scale from 0 (no correct answers) to 13 (all questions answered correctly)., Results: We found no difference between readers of paper and screen versions (median (interquartile range) 4 (2-6) vs. 4 (2-5), p = 0.97). Those who read their mother tongue scored significantly higher than those who read English (4 (3-6) vs. 3 (2-4), p = 0.01)., Interpretation: The medium (paper vs. screen) does not influence the ability of general practitioners to retain medical information. Doctors best retain medical information when reading it in their mother tongue.

The photocopy of a Passover Haggadah, a modest edition glossed in the Arabic of Iraqi Jews (written, as is customary, in Hebrew letters) leads to the contemplation of the recent and current status of the language and wades gently into the question of the hyphen. A few examples from literature, life, and especially life literature, are offered to illustrate the tongue's afterlife. The conclusion reveals partiality for continuity over rupture and finds in the language continued expressions of identity and memory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many past and ongoing conflicts in the world are associated with memories. The role of emphatic memories is however often neglected in conflict solving. Therefore, this narrative review gives a short introduction to the phenomenon of emphatic memories and implications for counteracting dysfunctional effects of emphatic memories. Summary: Memory has two connotations. One is remembering and knowing (I can remember when I got married) and on the other is reminding and emphasizing memories (I remind my partner of our wedding day). Memories are less a report on the past but result of current emotions and motives. Emphatic memories serve for self-portrayal and distinction from others, self-exculpation, accusation of others, justification of claims. They are regularly reproachful, have an aggressive character, and are distorted and pseudologic. This is also true on a societal level, as memories are used for defining social groups, and by this for political purposes, in order to juxtapose one group against the other. If memories are revoked, they are regularly accompanied with the very emotions, which were associated with the past event. Corresponding behavior is motivated. Many people suffer from memories and associated emotions and dysfunctional behavior, as is well described in the context of post-traumatic stress disorders. Also, social groups can as a whole suffer from negative emotions because of memories, which may go back up to thousand years. To ensure that memories do not adversely affect individuals and social groups, they should best be forgotten, or at least rescripted, in a way that they are disentangled from negative emotions and motives. An important psychological process in this regard is wisdom and forgiveness, which must not be confused with understanding, justification, tolerating, or reconciliation. Wisdom and forgiveness allow persons to close the books, act self-determined, find freedom from external events, and end suffering because of the past. It is a rational and emotional act. Key Messages: Emphatic memories can cause that individuals and groups do not find peace and persistently provoke new conflicts. Internal and interactional peace can be found if memories are let alone and fade away. Forgiveness and wisdom describe avenues to let dysfunctional memories go. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retrospective confidence refers to the phenomenological experience of the level of certainty that retrieved information is, in fact, correct. Retrospective confidence judgments are examined across a range of sub-disciplines in psychology from perception to memory research, and in education and legal applications. This paper focuses on retrospective confidence judgments directed at memory. Typically, retrospective confidence judgments are explained by direct-access models. Direct-access models postulate that people have direct access to the strength of the retrieved memory. In contrast, inferential models posit that people use accessible heuristic cues to determine their retrospective confidence judgments. This paper outlines existing models from both the direct-access approach and the inferential approach. I then present the outcomes of studies that support the need to include inferential models in any explanation of retrospective confidence judgments. These heuristics include cue and encoding fluency, retrieval fluency, retrieval of related information, vividness of the retrieval, and self-consistency. I then present an integrative model to account for how retrospective confidence judgments are made.

This essay proposes the genealogical study of remembering and forgetting as recursive rhetorical capacities that enable discourse to place itself in an ever-changing present. "Mnesis" is a meta-concept for the arrangements of remembering and forgetting that enable rhetoric to function. Most of the essay defines the materiality of "mnesis", first noting the limitations of studying recursivity within dominant approaches remembering and forgetting in rhetorical studies, then describing "mnesis" as the performative necessity to fold the past into the present so as to provide "now" with a sense of place. After setting a foundation, the essay closes with a sketch of how to produce a genealogy of recursion. (Contains 106 notes.)

In less than three decades, the concept "cerebellar neurocognition" has evolved from a mere afterthought to an entirely new and multifaceted area of neuroscientific research. A close interplay between three main strands of contemporary neuroscience induced a substantial modification of the traditional view of the cerebellum as a mere coordinator of autonomic and somatic motor functions. Indeed, the wealth of current evidence derived from detailed neuroanatomical investigations, functional neuroimaging studies with healthy subjects and patients and in-depth neuropsychological assessment of patients with cerebellar disorders shows that the cerebellum has a cardinal role to play in affective regulation, cognitive processing, and linguistic function. Although considerable progress has been made in models of cerebellar function, controversy remains regarding the exact role of the "linguistic cerebellum" in a broad variety of nonmotor language processes. This consensus paper brings together a range of different viewpoints and opinions regarding the contribution of the cerebellum to language function. Recent developments and insights in the nonmotor modulatory role of the cerebellum in language and some related disorders will be discussed. The role of the cerebellum in speech and language perception, in motor speech planning including apraxia of speech, in verbal working memory, in phonological and semantic verbal fluency, in syntax processing, in the dynamics of language production, in reading and in writing will be addressed. In addition, the functional topography of the linguistic cerebellum and the contribution of the deep nuclei to linguistic function will be briefly discussed. As such, a framework for debate and discussion will be offered in this consensus paper.

The effect of response complexity on simple RT, first reported by Henry and Rogers (H&R), is a robust phenomenon for complexity measured by the number of chunks in a multiple-chunk response. However, there are problems with the memory drum theory H&R used to account for this result, and no fully satisfactory alternative explanation has been developed after 50 years of effort. Thus, research related to the H&R article is likely to continue. The major theme of this article concerns contradictions surrounding the simple RT paradigm, both regarding the memory drum theory and with respect to replicating the empirical result. (Contains 3 notes.)

The Memory Orientation Screening Test (MOST(®)) is a 29-point scale for identifying and following mild and major neurocognitive disorders in older patients. Previous research demonstrated validity in separating patients with normal vs. impaired cognition and high correlations with tests of memory and attention. This study compares the original paper-based MOST(®) with a computerized (iPad app) version, the MOST(®)-96120, to determine the equivalence of formats. A total of 98 consecutive older patients were administered identical versions of the MOST and MOST-96120 in a random order, separated by 1 hour of interspersed testing, in a 3-hour neuropsychological evaluation. MOST and MOST-96120 scores were compared with each other, with global cognitive ratings, and with standardized tests of memory and attention. Both versions had equivalent means and standard deviations, very high inter-test correlation (r = .92, p < .001), and equal correlations with outcome measures. Both versions separated patients into normal vs. mild NCD vs. major NCD categories with equal accuracy. ANOVA showed no significant difference between versions or presentation order. Both versions correlated very highly with cognitive level and neuropsychological endpoints, confirming previous research. The MOST-96120 is a computerized neuropsychological assessment device that demonstrates equivalence with its paper-based original, allowing for confident reliance on the findings of previous research.