Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Verbal overshadowing is a phenomenon where giving a verbal description of sensory input impairs formation of memories of that input. This was first reported by Schooler and Engstler-Schooler (1990) where it was shown that the effects can be observed across multiple domains of cognition which are known to rely on non-verbal knowledge and perceptual expertise.
Diagnostic overshadowing is the attribution of a person's symptoms to a psychiatric problem when such symptoms actually suggest a comorbid condition. [1] Diagnostic overshadowing occurs when a healthcare professional assumes that a patient's complaint is due to their disability or coexisting mental health condition rather than fully exploring the cause of the patient's symptoms.
For example, an agent (such as a mouse in the figure) is exposed to a light (the first conditioned stimulus, CS1), together with food (the unconditioned stimulus, US). After repeated pairings of CS1 and US, the agent salivates when the light comes on (conditioned response, CR).
This page was last edited on 1 November 2024, at 09:26 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.
A study by Wickham & Swift [8] looks at the role that articulatory suppression can have on verbal overshadowing and face identification. Verbal overshadowing is the phenomenon that verbally describing a face between presentation and test can impair identification of the face (Schooler & Engstler-Schooler, 1990).
For example, a witness who gives a verbal description of a face is likely to have subsequent impaired recognition for that face. [71] However, Perfect et al. (2002) predicted that the verbal overshadowing effect would also be seen in voice recognition; that is that verbally describing a voice should also impair subsequent recognition of that voice.
For example, alongside publication bias and sample size effects, the decline effect in ocean acidification effects on fish behavior [9] was largely driven by outstanding effect sizes reported by two particular investigators from the same laboratory who are currently under investigation for potential scientific misconduct and data fabrication.
Recent work compared the effects of localised treatments within nucleus accumbens on latent inhibition, based on past experience with the cue or ‘acquired salience’, and cue competition through overshadowing, based on relative intensity of the cue or ‘intrinsic salience’.