Nongenetic inheritance, linguistic competence, prenatal experience and behavior manipulation: recent contributions from behavioral neurobiology and neuropsychology to the explanation of behavior

This article gives an overview of presuppositions and explanations posed by behaviorist psychology (particularly its radical branch), cognitive–nativist sciences (i.e. psycholinguistics and a branch of cognitive psychology) and other disciplines regarding important psychological events such as anxiety, stress, fear, mood states and language. In relation to the discussion of environment versus genetics, contributions from behavioral neurobiology and neuropsychology are added, showing evidence of traits that can be multigenerationally inherited in a non-genetic way, which have an impact thought the life of organisms and on their way of interacting with the environment; ways in which behavior can be altered by recently unsuspected environmental agents or events, and the overlooked role of prenatal experiences in the explanation of behavior. The evidence calls into question presuppositions made by the academic disciplines listed above, and suggests alternative behavior reinterpretations and explanations

Contribution from neuropsychology to the study of semantic memory

Semantic memory has been studied from various fields. The first models emerged from cognitive psychology from the hand of the division proposed by Tulving between semantic and episodic memory. Over the past thirty years there have been parallel developments in the fields of psycholinguistics, cognitive psychology and cognitive neuropsychology. The present work is to review the contributions that have emerged within the neuropsychology to the study of semantic memory and to present an updated overview of the points of consensus. First, it is defined the term "semantics" conceptually within the field of neuropsychology. Then, there is a dichotomy that passes through both psychological and neuropsychological models on semantic memory: the existence of modals versus amodal representations. Third, there are  developed the main theoretical models in neuropsychology that emerged in an attempt to explain categoryspecific semantic deficits. Finally, more robust contributions and points that still generate some discussion are reviewed.

Comparación del efecto de mera exposición y el condicionamiento clásico en la formación de preferencias

El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia del condicionamiento clásico (CC) y el efecto de mera exposición (ME), en condiciones supraliminales (2000 milisegundos –ms-), sobre la formación de preferencias hacia marcas publicitarias. Se realizó un experimento con diseño intrasujeto, donde se manipuló la variable tratamiento afectivo representada por los dos procedimientos a comparar y se midió la variable dependiente –preferencia hacia las marcas- a través de una tarea de elección forzosa y un diferencial semántico. En el experimento participaron 70 hombres, estudiantes de medicina de la Universidad del Rosario con edades entre 18 y 22 años. El CC se realizó a través de un procedimiento simultáneo y en ambas condiciones la variable independiente se expuso el estímulo 8 veces con una duración de 2000 ms. Los resultados mostraron que los dos procedimientos generaron preferencias en los sujetos, pero no diferencias significativas entre la efectividad de los procedimientos.

Historical perspective of the Psychology of motivation

The psychology of motivation has a long tradition and history in psychology. In fact, we consider that, to a certain extent, understanding the history of the psychology of motivation is understanding great part of which has been psychology itself, since the main target of psychology was, and is, to try to explain behaviour, and the aim of psychology of motivation is to find out the causes of behaviour. In its long passage to the present time, there have been three perspectives that have monopolized most of the investigation: the biological, the behavioural and the cognitive. They are not excluding. Each one of them has been predominant in certain stages, although the same attention was paid to the other two. Nowadays, the biological and cognitive perspectives are those that receive greater attention from the investigators. The historical direction in the study of the psychology of motivation represents an important solution to know how the events that have given rise to the present consideration about the psychology of motivation were forged. To know the past helps us to understand the present, at the same time it allows us to hypothesise with great probability of success which will be the future in the study object.