Connectionism as metaphor: Towards an integrated, unified conception of self-system and individual difference

Comments on an article by Kashima et al. (see record 2007-10111-001). In their target article Kashima and colleagues try to show how a connectionist model conceptualization of the self is best suited to capture the self's temporal and socio-culturally contextualized nature. They propose a new model and to support this model, the authors conduct computer simulations of psychological phenomena whose importance for the self has long been clear, even if not formally modeled, such as imitation, and learning of sequence and narrative. As explicated when we advocated connectionist models as a metaphor for self in Mischel and Morf (2003), we fully endorse the utility of such a metaphor, as these models have some of the processing characteristics necessary for capturing key aspects and functions of a dynamic cognitive-affective self-system. As elaborated in that chapter, we see as their principal strength that connectionist models can take account of multiple simultaneous processes without invoking a single central control. All outputs reflect a distributed pattern of activation across a large number of simple processing units, the nature of which depends on (and changes with) the connection weights between the links and the satisfaction of mutual constraints across these links (Rummelhart & McClelland, 1986). This allows a simple account for why certain input features will at times predominate, while others take over on other occasions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved)

Conception Rate Using the Select-Synch Protocol in Combination with a Lower Dose Progesterone-Releasing Intravaginal Insert (1.38 g) in Swiss Dairy Cows

Background: Synchronization programs have become standard in the dairy industry. In Switzerland, these programs are used but newly. The objective of this study was A) to estimate the pregnancy rate after a Select-Synch protocol in- cluding a low dosage of progesterone in CIDR (1.38 g). As a second step B) this pregnancy rate should be compared to cows from another Swiss study that used a Select-Synch protocol with the 1.9 g insert (Rudolph et al., 2011). Methods: A) 196 cows were included in the study. Cows received a CIDR 1.38 g and 2.5 ml of buserelin i.m. on d 0. On d 7, the CIDR insert was removed and 5 ml of dinoprost was administered i.m. On d 0 a milk sample for progesterone analysis was taken. Pregnancy was determined at or more than 35 days after artificial insemination. B) The 1.38 g group and the 1.9 g group were compared as to cow and farm factors, number of preceding AI’s, gynecological and uterine pretreat- ment and treatment itself. A forward selection procedure was used (test result considered significant if p-value  0.05). Results: A) The pregnancy rate, using the Select-Synch protocol with the CIDR 1.38 g was 44.4%. B) The CIDR 1.9 g Select-Synch group revealed a pregnancy rate of 50.4% (Rudolph et al., 2011). Significant differences between the groups were not found. Conclusion: The 1.38 g CIDR-Select-Synch protocol may be recommended for multiparous dairy cows. The pregnancy rate compared to the 1.9 g CIDR-Select-Synch protocol was 8% lower, but this difference was not significant.