Out in psychology:lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer perspectives

There has been a recent explosion of interest in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans Perspective Psychology amongst students and academics, and this interest is predicted to continue to rise. Recent media debates on subjects such as same–sex marriage have fuelled interest in LGBTQ perspectives. This edited collection showcases the latest thinking in LGBTQ psychology. The book has 21 chapters covering subjects such as same sex parenting, outing, young LGBTQ people, sport, learning disabilities, lesbian and gay identities etc. The book has an international focus, with contributors from UK, US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand List of Contributors. Foreword by Jerry J. Bigner. 1. Introducing Out in Psychology (Victoria Clarke and Elizabeth Peel). 2. From lesbian and gay psychology to LGBTQ psychologies: A journey into the unknown (Victoria Clarke and Elizabeth Peel) 3. What comes after discourse analysis for LGBTQ psychology(Peter Hegarty). 4. Recognising race in LGBTQ psychology: Power, privilege and complicity (Damien W. Riggs). 5. Personality, individual differences and LGB psychology (Gareth Hagger Johnson). 6. Heteronormativity and the exclusion of bisexuality in psychology (Meg Barker). 7. A minority within a minority: Experiences of gay men with intellectual disabilities.(Christopher Bennett and Adrian Coyle). 8. Closet talk: The contemporary relevance of the closet in lesbian and gay interaction (Victoria Land and Celia Kitzinger) 9. Romance, rights, recognition, responsibilities and radicalism: Same-sex couples’ accounts of civil partnership and marriage (Victoria Clarke, Carole Burgoyne and Maree Burns). 10. The experience of social power in the lives of trans people (Clair Clifford and Jim Orford). 11. What do they look like and are they among us? Bisexuality, (dis.closure and (Maria Gurevich, Jo Bower, Cynthia M. Mathieson and Bramilee Dhayanandhan). 12. Heterosexism at work: Diversity training, discrimination law and the limits of liberal individualism (Rosie Harding and Elizabeth Peel). 13. Out on the ball fields: Lesbians in sport (Vikki Krane and Kerrie J. Kauer). 14. Homophobia, rights and community: Contemporary issues in the lives of LGB people in the UK (Sonja J. Ellis). 15. Striving for holistic success: How lesbians come out on top (Faith Rostad and Bonita C. Long). 16. On Passing: The Interactional Organization of Appearance Attributions in the Psychiatric Assessment of Transsexual Patients (Susan A. Speer and Richard Green). 17. Alcohol and gay men: Consumption, promotion and policy responses (Jeffrey Adams, Timothy McCreanor and Virginia Braun). 18. Towards a clinical-psychological approach to address the hetero sexual concerns of intersexed women (Lih-Mei Liao). 19. Educational psychology practice with LGB youth in schools: Individual and institutional interventions (Jeremy J. Monsen and Sydney Bailey). 20. Que(e)rying the meaning of lesbian health: Individual(izing and community discourses (Sara MacBride-Stewart). 21. Transsexualism: Diagnostic dilemmas, transgender politics and the future of transgender care (Katherine Johnson). Index.

Developmental trajectories of part-based and configural object recognition in adolescence.

Three experiments assessed the development of children's part and configural (part-relational) processing in object recognition during adolescence. In total, 312 school children aged 7-16 years and 80 adults were tested in 3-alternative forced choice (3-AFC) tasks. They judged the correct appearance of upright and inverted presented familiar animals, artifacts, and newly learned multipart objects, which had been manipulated either in terms of individual parts or part relations. Manipulation of part relations was constrained to either metric (animals, artifacts, and multipart objects) or categorical (multipart objects only) changes. For animals and artifacts, even the youngest children were close to adult levels for the correct recognition of an individual part change. By contrast, it was not until 11-12 years of age that they achieved similar levels of performance with regard to altered metric part relations. For the newly learned multipart objects, performance was equivalent throughout the tested age range for upright presented stimuli in the case of categorical part-specific and part-relational changes. In the case of metric manipulations, the results confirmed the data pattern observed for animals and artifacts. Together, the results provide converging evidence, with studies of face recognition, for a surprisingly late consolidation of configural-metric relative to part-based object recognition.

Late development of metric part-relational processing in object recognition

Four experiments with unfamiliar objects examined the remarkably late consolidation of part-relational relative to part-based object recognition (Jüttner, Wakui, Petters, Kaur, & Davidoff, 2013). Our results indicate a particularly protracted developmental trajectory for the processing of metric part relations. Schoolchildren aged 7 to 14 years and adults were tested in 3-Alternative-Forced-Choice tasks to judge the correct appearance of upright and inverted newly learned multipart objects that had been manipulated in terms of individual parts or part relations. Experiment 1 showed that even the youngest tested children were close to adult levels of performance for recognizing categorical changes of individual parts and relative part position. By contrast, Experiment 2 demonstrated that performance for detecting metric changes of relative part position was distinctly reduced in young children compared with recognizing metric changes of individual parts, and did not approach the latter until 11 to 12 years. A similar developmental dissociation was observed in Experiment 3, which contrasted the detection of metric relative-size changes and metric part changes. Experiment 4 showed that manipulations of metric size that were perceived as part (rather than part-relational) changes eliminated this dissociation. Implications for theories of object recognition and similarities to the development of face perception are discussed. © 2014 American Psychological Association.

Developmental dissociation of analytical and holistic object recognition in adolescence

Previous research (e.g., Jüttner et al, 2013, Developmental Psychology, 49, 161-176) has shown that object recognition may develop well into late childhood and adolescence. The present study extends that research and reveals novel di erences in holistic and analytic recognition performance in 7-11 year olds compared to that seen in adults. We interpret our data within Hummel’s hybrid model of object recognition (Hummel, 2001, Visual Cognition, 8, 489-517) that proposes two parallel routes for recognition (analytic vs. holistic) modulated by attention. Using a repetition-priming paradigm, we found in Experiment 1 that children showed no holistic priming, but only analytic priming. Given that holistic priming might be thought to be more ‘primitive’, we confirmed in Experiment 2 that our surprising finding was not because children’s analytic recognition was merely a result of name repetition. Our results suggest a developmental primacy of analytic object recognition. By contrast, holistic object recognition skills appear to emerge with a much more protracted trajectory extending into late adolescence

Developmental commonalities between object and face recognition in adolescence

In the visual perception literature, the recognition of faces has often been contrasted with that of non-face objects, in terms of differences with regard to the role of parts, part relations and holistic processing. However, recent evidence from developmental studies has begun to blur this sharp distinction. We review evidence for a protracted development of object recognition that is reminiscent of the well-documented slow maturation observed for faces. The prolonged development manifests itself in a retarded processing of metric part relations as opposed to that of individual parts and offers surprising parallels to developmental accounts of face recognition, even though the interpretation of the data is less clear with regard to holistic processing. We conclude that such results might indicate functional commonalities between the mechanisms underlying the recognition of faces and non-face objects, which are modulated by different task requirements in the two stimulus domains.