Binaural Interaction Models and Mechanisms

1981 ◽  
pp. 283-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Steven Colburn ◽  
Peter J. Moss
Keyword(s):  
Interaction Models ◽  
Binaural Interaction

Linguistic Interactions: A Therapeutic Consideration for Adults With Aphasia

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-98
Author(s):  
Lynn E. Fox
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Interaction Models ◽  
Social Communities ◽  
Wernicke's Aphasia ◽  
Communication Challenges ◽  
Therapeutic Consideration ◽  
Patterns Of Interaction ◽  
Structural Language

Abstract Linguistic interaction models suggest that interrelationships arise between structural language components and between structural and pragmatic components when language is used in social contexts. The linguist, David Crystal (1986, 1987), has proposed that these relationships are central, not peripheral, to achieving desired clinical outcomes. For individuals with severe communication challenges, erratic or unpredictable relationships between structural and pragmatic components can result in atypical patterns of interaction between them and members of their social communities, which may create a perception of disablement. This paper presents a case study of a woman with fluent, Wernicke's aphasia that illustrates how attention to patterns of linguistic interaction may enhance AAC intervention for adults with aphasia.

Interaction Models

1977 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman L. Biggs
Keyword(s):  
Interaction Models

The Intertwined Histories of Personality and Social Psychology

2018 ◽  
pp. 10-34
Author(s):  
Thomas F. Pettigrew
Keyword(s):  
Social Psychology ◽  
World War I ◽  
Bounded Rationality ◽  
World War ◽  
Structural Differentiation ◽  
Interaction Models

Personality and social psychology histories have been closely intertwined for more than a century. Several critical differences have at times acted to separate the fields. One such divergence involved their models of humans—whether largely irrational (personality emphasis) or largely rational (social emphasis). This difference has subsided with their joint acceptance of a “bounded rationality.” More important has been their difference in focus—the microlevel of the person versus the mesolevel of the group and situation. Now, both fields largely agree on a variety of interaction models that include both the person and the situation. We trace these tensions between the two fields across eras: (a) origins through World War I (1890–1919); (b) early developments (1920–1935); (c) war influences (1936–1950); (d) structural differentiation and slow acceptance (1951–1965); (e) dual crises (1966–1985); (f) coming back together again (1986–2000); and (7) continued fusion (2001–present).

Comparison of Results of Analyses the Foundation Slab Calculated by Two FEM Programs

2014 ◽  
Vol 1065-1069 ◽  
pp. 1052-1056
Author(s):  
Radim Čajka ◽  
Jana Vaskova
Keyword(s):  
Contact Stress ◽  
Bending Moments ◽  
Foundation Slab ◽  
Interaction Models ◽  
Comparison Of Results

For decades attention has been paid to interaction of foundation structures and subsoil and development of interaction models. Currently there are several software that, can deal with the interaction of foundations and subsoil. The purpose of this paper is to compare resulting deformation of the slab, subsidence of the subsoil, bending moments and contact stress calculated by two different software based on FEM calculations. Calculated deformation of the slab is compared with deformation measured during experiment.

On the Relationship between Alonso's Theory of Movement and Wilson's Family of Spatial-Interaction Models

1981 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Ledent
Keyword(s):  
Input Data ◽  
Spatial Interaction ◽  
System Of Equations ◽  
Interaction Models ◽  
Spatial Interaction Models ◽  
Standard Family ◽  
Original Contribution ◽  
Standard Models ◽  
The Relationship

This paper compares the system of equations underlying Alonso's theory of movement with that of Wilson's standard family of spatial-interaction models. It is shown that the Alonso model is equivalent to one of Wilson's four standard models depending on the assumption at the outset about which of the total outflows and/or inflows are known. This result turns out to supersede earlier findings—inconsistent only in appearance—which were derived independently by Wilson and Ledent. In addition to this, an original contribution of this paper—obtained as a byproduct of the process leading to the aforementioned result—is to provide an exact methodology permitting one to solve the Alonso model for each possible choice of the input data.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document