Metacognitive Control Processes and Memory Deficits in Poor Comprehenders

1990 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cesare Cornoldi
1999 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Nation ◽  
John W. Adams ◽  
Claudine A. Bowyer-Crane ◽  
Margaret J. Snowling

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 14-15
Author(s):  
Lee H. Ensalada

Abstract Symptom validity testing (SVT), also known as forced-choice testing, is a means of assessing the validity of sensory and memory deficits, including tactile anesthesias, paresthesias, blindness, color blindness, tunnel vision, blurry vision, and deafness. The common feature among these symptoms is a claimed inability to perceive or remember a sensory signal. SVT comprises two elements: a specific ability is assessed by presenting a large number of items in a multiple-choice format, and then the examinee's performance is compared to the statistical likelihood of success based on chance alone. These tests usually present two alternatives; thus the probability of simply guessing the correct response (equivalent to having no ability at all) is 50%. Thus, scores significantly below chance performance indicate that the sensory cues must have been perceived, but the examinee chose not to report the correct answer—alternative explanations are not apparent. SVT also has the capacity to demonstrate that the examinee performed below the probabilities of chance. Scoring below a norm can be explained by fatigue, evaluation anxiety, inattention, or limited intelligence. Scoring below the probabilities of chance alone most likely indicates deliberate deceptions and is evidence of malingering because it provides strong evidence that the examinee received the sensory cues and denied the perception. Even so, malingering must be evaluated from the total clinical context.


Author(s):  
Stefan Scherbaum ◽  
Simon Frisch ◽  
Maja Dshemuchadse

Abstract. Folk wisdom tells us that additional time to make a decision helps us to refrain from the first impulse to take the bird in the hand. However, the question why the time to decide plays an important role is still unanswered. Here we distinguish two explanations, one based on a bias in value accumulation that has to be overcome with time, the other based on cognitive control processes that need time to set in. In an intertemporal decision task, we use mouse tracking to study participants’ responses to options’ values and delays which were presented sequentially. We find that the information about options’ delays does indeed lead to an immediate bias that is controlled afterwards, matching the prediction of control processes needed to counter initial impulses. Hence, by using a dynamic measure, we provide insight into the processes underlying short-term oriented choices in intertemporal decision making.


2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Lau ◽  
Casey Hoffman ◽  
Christiane Burnett ◽  
Kristin Samuelson

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morris Goldsmith ◽  
Larry L. Jacoby ◽  
Vered Halamish ◽  
Christopher N. Wahlheim

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth S. Gromisch ◽  
Frederick W. Foley ◽  
Andrew S. Castiglione ◽  
Vance Zemon ◽  
Ralph H. Benedict ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document