Illuminating the prefrontal neural correlates of action sequence disassembling in response–response binding

Execution of two independent actions in quick succession results in transient binding of these two actions. Subsequent repetition of any of these actions automatically retrieves the other. This process is probably fundamental for developing complex action sequences. However, rigid bindings between two actions are not always adaptive. Sometimes, it is necessary to repeat only one of the two previously executed actions. In such situations, stored action sequences must be disassembled, for the sake of flexibility. Exact mechanisms that allow for such an active unbinding of actions remain largely unknown, but it stands to reason, that some form of prefrontal executive control is necessary. Building on prior neuronal research that explored other forms of binding (e.g. between distractors and responses and abstract representations and responses), we explored middle and superior frontal correlates of -response binding in a sequential classification task with functional near-infrared spectroscopy. We found that anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activity varied as a function of response–repetition condition. Activity in the right anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex correlated with changes in reaction times due to response–response binding. Our results indicate that the right anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex dismantles bindings between consecutive actions, whenever such bindings interfere with current action goals.

The level of representation of irrelevant stimuli—Distractor–response binding within and between the senses

Binding theories assume that features of stimuli and executed responses can be integrated together in one event file (Hommel, Visual Cognition, 5, 183–216, 1998; Hommel, Cognitive Sciences, 8, 494–500, 2004). Every reencounter with one or more of the stored features leads to an automatic retrieval of the previously constructed event file and hence of the response—even the repetition of a task-irrelevant distractor stimulus can retrieve a previously encoded response. This so-called distractor–response binding effect is typically investigated using a sequential prime-probe design that allows the orthogonal variation of response relation (response repetition vs. resporrevertnse change) and distractor relation (distractor repetition vs. distractor change), while probe response times and error rates are measured as dependent variable. Previous research has shown that task-relevant stimuli can be represented at different levels (e.g., perceptual and conceptual; see Henson et al., Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 376–384, 2014), yet it is not clear at which level of representation distractor stimuli are processed. In the present study, we focused on the level of representation of response-irrelevant distractor stimuli. To this end, a crossmodal distractor–response binding paradigm was used that enables the differentiation between the perceptual and conceptual representation of the distractor by allowing the systematic repetition and change of conceptual distractor features independent of perceptual repetitions. The results suggest that the repetition of perceptual distractor features is indispensable for the initiation of the retrieval process while the sole repetition of conceptual distractor features is not sufficient to start the retrieval process.

Pembelajaran Bahasa Arab dan Dinamika Wacana Bahasa: Studi Komparasi Teori Al-Sulūkiyyah dan Al-ʽAqliyyah antara Teks dan Konteks

Learning is an aid given by educators to enable the process of acquisition of knowledge and knowledge, mastery of skills and character, as well as the formation of students' attitudes and self-confidence. Where as Arabic is a discipline that consists of various aspects of the main skills in it. The main skill aspects include listening skills (Mahārah al-Istimā '), speaking skills (Mahārah al-Kalām), reading skills (Mahārah al-qirāʼah), and writing skills (Mahārah al-Kitābah). From these definitions it can be concluded that learning Arabic is an activity of transfer of knowledge carried out by educators towards students about Arabic with all its aspects in a particular learning environment. Today there are many expert opinions related to Arabic learning theory. There are theories that seem mutually supportive of one another, there is also the opposite, contradictory. But that is the essence of theory, nothing is eternal, if there is a new theory that proves the error of the old theory then the old one will immediately be abandoned. Theory of Behaviorism (al-sulūkiyyah) and the theory of Mentalism (al-ʽaqliyyah) are theories that contradict each other or differ in perspectives in viewing language learning processes. Behaviorism theory pioneered by Skinner holds that language learning is a matter of stimulus, response, repetition, and reward. The language learning process can take place well if the response is repeated correctly. In contrast to the theory of mentalism pioneered by Noam Chomsky. This theory holds that language learning is not only a matter of stimulus, response, repetition, and reward alone. But it needs to involve a process of reason. For Chomsky, giving external stimuli and responses is impossible to determine language behavior, which is capable of taking responsibility for language behavior is only the innate ability of individual language learners.

Ayrık Denemelerle Öğretim Yapılırken Kullanılan Hata Düzeltmesi Türleri

Öz Gelişimsel yetersizliği olan çocuklara farklı becerilerin öğretiminde yaygın olarak kullanılan ayrık denemelerle öğretim, ipuçlarını kullanarak doğru tepkileri artırmayı amaçlayan, doğru tepkilerin pekiştirilmesini ve yanlış tepkilerin düzeltilmesini içeren etkili bir uygulamadır. Ayrık denemelerle öğretimin temel bileşenlerinden biri, hataları düzelterek ileride bu hataların sergilenmesini azaltmayı amaçlayan hata düzeltmesidir. Hata düzeltmesi, öğretim sırasında çocuğun hata yapmasının hemen ardından, uygulamacının farklı şekillerde çocuğun hatasını düzeltmesidir. Ayrık denemelerle öğretimde hata düzeltmesi, farklı şekillerde gerçekleştirilebilmektedir. Bunlardan bazıları; sözel geribildirim ya da hata ifadesi, kısa süreli mola, doğru tepki için model olma, tek tepki tekrarı/aktif öğrenci tepkisi, çok tepki tekrarı/tekrarlanan tepki, bağımsızlaşana kadar tekrar sunma, deneme tekrarı ve türlerin bir arada kullanımıdır. Derleme biçiminde hazırlanan bu makalenin amacı uygulamacılara, ayrık denemelerle öğretim hakkında kısa bir bilgilendirme yapmak ve bir bileşen olarak hata düzeltmesinin ne olduğunu ve neden önemli olduğunu açıklamaktır. Ayrıca ayrık denemelerle öğretim yaparken sıklıkla kullanılan hata düzeltmesi türlerini tanıtmak, hata düzeltmesi türlerini akış şemaları yoluyla kavramsallaştırmak, hata düzeltmesi türlerinin nasıl kullanılacağını örneklerle anlatmak ve bu hata düzeltmesi türlerini kullanarak gerçekleştirilen araştırmalar konusunda bilgilendirme yapmaktır. Abstract Discrete trial training is an effective intervention commonly used in teaching different skills to children with developmental disabilities. It aims to increase the correct responses using prompts, reinforcements, and error correction strategies. One of the main components of the discrete trial training is error correction, which aims to reduce errors in the future by correcting errors. In error correction, the instructor corrects the child’s error using different strategies immediately after the child makes a mistake during training. There are several types of error correction strategies commonly used in discrete trial training; (a) vocal feedback or error statement, (b) a brief time-out, (c) a model for the correct response, (d) single response repetition/active student response, (e) multi-response repetition/repeated response, (f) re-present until independent, (g) remove and re-present, and (h) the combination of the strategies. The purpose of this study is to provide a brief overview of discrete trial training, to explain the error correction procedures and their importance, to introduce the types of error correction strategies used in discrete trial training, to conceptualize error correction strategies through flowcharts, to explain how to use error correction strategies, and to inform about the error correction literature.