Elementary psychology for eighth graders?

1956 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 194-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph B. Patti
1968 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 412-412
Author(s):  
Wilbert McKeachie

MedienJournal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-40
Author(s):  
Jane Müller ◽  
Mareike Thumel ◽  
Katrin Potzel ◽  
Rudolf Kammerl

This paper takes up the approach of individual Digital Sovereignty and develops a first systematization of the concept. It defines it as all the abilities and opportunities a person possesses to realize his/her own plans and decisions in dealing with or depending on digital media in a competent, self-determined and secure manner and against the background of individual, technical, legal and social conditions. The significance of individual Digital Sovereignty for adolescents is illustrated by the results of an exploratory study in which we conducted group discussions with 106 eighth-graders of different school types. Results show that most adolescents have only a vague notion about their own data traces and the use they are put to. Only a small number of seven pupils – the whizzes – stood out due to their extraordinary understanding and deep reflections on digital media.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isna Istikhanif Farida ◽  
A. M. Setiawan ◽  
Muntholib Muntholib

Perception ◽  
10.1068/p3066 ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 675-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beena Khurana ◽  
Katsumi Watanabe ◽  
Romi Nijhawan

Objects flashed in alignment with moving objects appear to lag behind [Nijhawan, 1994 Nature (London) 370 256–257], Could this ‘flash-lag’ effect be due to attentional delays in bringing flashed items to perceptual awareness [Titchener, 1908/1973 Lectures on the Elementary Psychology of Feeling and Attention first published 1908 (New York: Macmillan); reprinted 1973 (New York: Arno Press)]? We overtly manipulated attentional allocation in three experiments to address the following questions: Is the flash-lag effect affected when attention is (a) focused on a single event in the presence of multiple events, (b) distributed over multiple events, and (c) diverted from the flashed object? To address the first two questions, five rings, moving along a circular path, were presented while observers attentively tracked one or multiple rings under four conditions: the ring in which the disk was flashed was (i) known or (ii) unknown (randomly selected from the set of five); location of the flashed disk was (i) known or (ii) unknown (randomly selected from ten locations), The third question was investigated by using two moving objects in a cost – benefit cueing paradigm, An arrow cued, with 70% or 80% validity, the position of the flashed object, Observers performed two tasks: (a) reacted as quickly as possible to flash onset; (b) reported the flash-lag effect, We obtained a significant and unaltered flash-lag effect under all the attentional conditions we employed, Furthermore, though reaction times were significantly shorter for validly cued flashes, the flash-lag effect remained uninfluenced by cue validity, indicating that quicker responses to validly cued locations may be due to the shortening of post-perceptual delays in motor responses rather than the perceptual facilitation, We conclude that the computations that give rise to the flash-lag effect are independent of attentional deployment.


1954 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 336-338
Author(s):  
WILLIAM ROSENGARTEN
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document