Mental evolution and development: Evidence for secondary representation in children, great apes, and other animals

Recent interest in the development and evolution of theory of mind has provided a wealth of information about representational skills in both children and animals, According to J, Perrier (1991), children begin to entertain secondary representations in the 2nd year of life. This advance manifests in their passing hidden displacement tasks, engaging in pretense and means-ends reasoning, interpreting external representations, displaying mirror self-recognition and empathic behavior, and showing an early understanding of mind and imitation. New data show a cluster of mental accomplishments in great apes that is very similar to that observed in 2-year-old humans. It is suggested that it is most parsimonious to assume that this cognitive profile is of homologous origin and that great apes possess secondary representational capacity. Evidence from animals other than apes is scant. This analysis leads to a number of predictions for future research.

Memory awareness and schematization: Learning in the university context

Following the application of the remember/know paradigm to student learning by Conway et al. (1997), this study examined changes in learning and memory awareness of university students in a lecture course and a research methods course. The proposed shift from a dominance of 'remember' awareness in early learning to a dominance of 'know' awareness as learning progresses and schematization occurs was evident for the methods course but not for the lecture course. The patterns of remember and know awareness and proposed associated levels of schematization were supported by a separate measure of the quality of student learning using the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) Taxonomy. As found by previous research, the remember-to-know shift and schematization of knowledge is dependent upon type of course and level of achievement. Findings are discussed in terms of the utility of the methodology used, the theoretical implications and the applications to educational practice. Copyright (C) 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Genetic influence on the variance in P3 amplitude and latency

The P3(00) event-related potential (ERP) component is widely used as a measure of cognitive functioning and provides a sensitive electrophysiological index of the attentional and working memory demands of a task. This study investigated what proportion of the variance in the amplitude and latency of the P3, elicited in a delayed response working memory task, could be attributed to genetic factors. In 335 adolescent twin pairs and 48 siblings, the amplitude and latency of the P3 were examined at frontal, central, and parietal sites. Additive genetic factors accounted for 48% to 61% of the variance in P3 amplitude. Approximately one-third of the genetic variation at frontal sites was mediated by a common genetic factor that also influenced the genetic variation at parietal and central sites. Familial resemblance in P3 latency was due to genetic influence that accounted for 44% to 50% of the variance. Genetic covariance in P3 latency across sites was substantial, with a large part of the variance found at parietal, central, and frontal sites attributed to a common genetic factor. The findings provide further evidence that the P3 is a promising phenotype of neural activity of the brain and has the potential to be used in linkage and association analysis in the search for quantitative trait loci (QTLs) influencing cognition.

Does affective learning exist in the absence of contingency awareness?

The proposal that affective learning, the learning of likes and dislikes, can exist in the absence of contingency awareness, whereas signal learning, the learning of stimulus relationships, cannot, was investigated in a differential conditioning paradigm that was embedded in a visual masking task. Startle magnitude modulation and changes in verbal ratings served as measures of affective learning, whereas skin conductance was taken to reflect signal learning. Awareness was assessed online with an expectancy dial and in a postexperimental questionnaire. Both between-subject comparisons of verbalizers and nonverbalizers and within-subject comparisons of verbalizers before and after verbalization failed to reveal any evidence for learning, whether affective or otherwise, in the absence of knowledge of the stimulus contingencies. (C) 2001 Academic Press.