Disentangling the relationships between motor control and cognitive control in young children with symptoms of ADHD.

Children with ADHD experience difficulties with motor and cognitive control. However, the relationships between these symptoms are poorly understood. As a step toward improving treatment, this study investigated associations between specific aspects of motor control and cognitive control in children with varying levels of hyperactive-impulsive symptoms. A heterogeneous sample of 255 children of 4 to 10 years of age (median = 6.50, MAD = 1.36) completed a battery of tests probing motor generation, visuomotor fluency, visuomotor flexibility, cognitive inhibition, verbal and visuospatial working memory, and cognitive flexibility. Their caregivers were interviewed regarding their hyperactive-impulsive symptoms. 25.9% of the main sample met diagnostic criteria for ADHD. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine whether specific aspects of motor control were associated with specific aspects of cognitive control, and whether any associations were moderated by hyperactive-impulsive symptoms. Additionally, cognitive modeling (the drift diffusion model approximated with EZ-DM) was used to understand performance on a cognitive inhibition task. Visuomotor fluency was significantly associated with cognitive inhibition. Visuomotor flexibility was significantly associated with cognitive flexibility. There were no significant moderation effects. Cognitive modeling was inconclusive. In conclusion, the ability to fluently perform visually guided continuous movement is linked with the ability to inhibit the effects of distracting information. The ability to spontaneously use visual information to flexibly alter motor responses is related to the ability to cognitively shift from one frame of mind to another. These relationships appear to be quantitatively and qualitatively similar across the childhood hyperactive-impulsive continuum as rated by parents.

Temporal Structure in Sensorimotor Variability: A Stable Trait, But What For?

Human performance shows substantial endogenous variability over time, and this variability is a robust marker of individual differences. Of growing interest to psychologists is the realisation that variability is not fully random, but often exhibits temporal dependencies. However, their measurement and interpretation come with several controversies. Furthermore, their potential benefit for studying individual differences in healthy and clinical populations remains unclear. Here, we gather new and archival datasets featuring 11 sensorimotor and cognitive tasks across 526 participants, to examine individual differences in temporal structures. We first investigate intra-individual repeatability of the most common measures of temporal structures - to test their potential for capturing stable individual differences. Secondly, we examine inter-individual differences in these measures using: (1) task performance assessed from the same data, (2) meta-cognitive ratings of on-taskness from thought probes occasionally presented throughout the task, and (3) self-assessed attention-deficit related traits. Across all datasets, autocorrelation at lag 1 and Power Spectra Density slope showed high intra-individual repeatability across sessions and correlated with task performance. The Detrended Fluctuation Analysis slope showed the same pattern, but less reliably. The long-term component (d) of the ARFIMA(1,d,1) model showed poor repeatability and no correlation to performance. Overall, these measures failed to show external validity when correlated with either mean subjective attentional state or self-assessed traits between participants. Thus, some measures of serial dependencies may be stable individual traits, but their usefulness in capturing individual differences in other constructs typically associated with variability in performance seems limited. We conclude with comprehensive recommendations for researchers. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42113-022-00162-1.

Smart-speaker technology and intellectual disabilities: agency and wellbeing.

PURPOSE: Mainstream intelligent personal assistants (IPAs, e.g., Amazon Echo and Google Home) offer an unprecedented opportunity to enhance agency and wellbeing among vulnerable groups across health and social care. However, unintended consequences and barriers to use are possible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods semi-randomized controlled trial among individuals with intellectual disability (ID), providing IPAs to an intervention group (N = 22), but not a control group (N = 22). Semi-structured interviews on device use and daily life were conducted with individuals with ID. Observation surveys were also collected from support staff. Key themes were identified using thematic analysis. We also collected quantitative agency and wellbeing data. A separate group of 40 individuals who had already received IPAs were additionally assessed, as well as their support staff. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: (1) social value, (2) entertainment, (3) perceived agency, (4) challenges, perseverance, training/support needs. Opinions regarding IPAs were overwhelmingly positive. Most individuals qualitatively reported improved sense of agency and IPAs enabled many individuals to access features associated with wellbeing, but there was no significant change in the quantitative measure. Some individuals experienced challenges related to pronouncing and remembering IPA phrases; however, perseverance was common. CONCLUSIONS: This study increases our understanding of the ways smart speakers can be used to enhance life quality among individuals with ID, and the nature of barriers faced. In conclusion, IPAs are cost-effective complementary support for vulnerable populations, but additional training is required to realize all potential benefits.Implications for rehabilitationIndividuals with intellectual disability (ID) in supported living are able to use mainstream smart-speakers to access features associated with supporting wellbeing and social communication.They also reported that smart speakers made them feel better able to do things for themselves.A number of individuals with ID and their support staff identified a need for training and support to get the most out of smart speakers in future.

Test-retest reliability for common tasks in vision science.

Research in perception and attention has typically sought to evaluate cognitive mechanisms according to the average response to a manipulation. Recently, there has been a shift toward appreciating the value of individual differences and the insight gained by exploring the impacts of between-participant variation on human cognition. However, a recent study suggests that many robust, well-established cognitive control tasks suffer from surprisingly low levels of test-retest reliability (Hedge, Powell, & Sumner, 2018b). We tested a large sample of undergraduate students (n = 160) in two sessions (separated by 1-3 weeks) on four commonly used tasks in vision science. We implemented measures that spanned a range of perceptual and attentional processes, including motion coherence (MoCo), useful field of view (UFOV), multiple-object tracking (MOT), and visual working memory (VWM). Intraclass correlations ranged from good to poor, suggesting that some task measures are more suitable for assessing individual differences than others. VWM capacity (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.77), MoCo threshold (ICC = 0.60), UFOV middle accuracy (ICC = 0.60), and UFOV outer accuracy (ICC = 0.74) showed good-to-excellent reliability. Other measures, namely the maximum number of items tracked in MOT (ICC = 0.41) and UFOV number accuracy (ICC = 0.48), showed moderate reliability; the MOT threshold (ICC = 0.36) and UFOV inner accuracy (ICC = 0.30) showed poor reliability. In this paper, we present these results alongside a summary of reliabilities estimated previously for other vision science tasks. We then offer useful recommendations for evaluating test-retest reliability when considering a task for use in evaluating individual differences.

Strategy and processing speed eclipse individual differences in control ability in conflict tasks.

Response control or inhibition is one of the cornerstones of modern cognitive psychology, featuring prominently in theories of executive functioning and impulsive behavior. However, repeated failures to observe correlations between commonly applied tasks have led some theorists to question whether common response conflict processes even exist. A challenge to answering this question is that behavior is multifaceted, with both conflict and nonconflict processes (e.g., strategy, processing speed) contributing to individual differences. Here, we use a cognitive model to dissociate these processes; the diffusion model for conflict tasks (Ulrich et al., 2015). In a meta-analysis of fits to seven empirical datasets containing combinations of the flanker, Simon, color-word Stroop, and spatial Stroop tasks, we observed weak (r < .05) zero-order correlations between tasks in parameters reflecting conflict processing, seemingly challenging a general control construct. However, our meta-analysis showed consistent positive correlations in parameters representing processing speed and strategy. We then use model simulations to evaluate whether correlations in behavioral costs are diagnostic of the presence or absence of common mechanisms of conflict processing. We use the model to impose known correlations for conflict mechanisms across tasks, and we compare the simulated behavior to simulations when there is no conflict correlation across tasks. We find that correlations in strategy and processing speed can produce behavioral correlations equal to, or larger than, those produced by correlated conflict mechanisms. We conclude that correlations between conflict tasks are only weakly informative about common conflict mechanisms if researchers do not control for strategy and processing speed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed.

Rouder and Haaf (2021) propose that studying qualitative individual differences would be a useful tool for researchers. I agree with their central message. I use this commentary to highlight examples from the literature where similar questions have been asked, and how researchers have addressed them with existing tools. I also observe that while the hierarchical Bayesian framework is a useful tool for studying individual differences, it does not relieve us of the requirement to evaluate the forms of reliability that are critical to our research questions.

Smart speaker devices can improve speech intelligibility in adults with intellectual disability.

BACKGROUND: Successful communication is vital to quality of life. One group commonly facing speech and communication difficulties is individuals with intellectual disability (ID). A novel route to encourage clear speech is offered by mainstream smart speakers (e.g., Amazon Alexa and Google Home). Smart speakers offer four factors important for learning: reward immediacy, spaced practice, autonomy/intrinsic motivation and reduced social barriers. Yet the potential of smart speakers to improve speech intelligibility has not been explored before. AIMS: To determine whether providing individuals with intellectual disabilities with smart speaker devices improved ratings of speech intelligibility for (1) phrases related to device use and (2) unrelated words via a semi-randomized controlled trial. METHODS & PROCEDURES: In a semi-randomized controlled trial, an intervention group of adults with ID (N = 21) received smart speakers, while a control group (N = 22) did not. Before and after about 12 weeks, participants were recorded saying smart speaker-related phrases and unrelated words. Naïve participants then rated the intelligibility of the speech recordings. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The group that received smart speakers made significantly larger intelligibility gains than the control group. Although the effect size was modest, this difference was found for both smart speaker-related phrases and unrelated words. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: While the mechanism of action remains to be determined, the presence of smart speakers in the home had a demonstrable impact on ratings of speech intelligibility, and could provide cost-effective inclusive support for speech and communication improvement, improving the quality of life of vulnerable populations. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject Speech intelligibility is a key obstacle for social relationships and quality of life across several vulnerable populations (children with speech difficulties, older adults with dementia, individuals with ID). Anecdotal reports suggest mainstream smart speakers (e.g., Amazon Alexa, Google Home), could improve speech intelligibility. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We used a semi-randomized controlled trial to show that using a smart speaker for about 12 weeks could improve ratings of speech intelligibility in adults with ID for both smart speaker-related phrases and unrelated words. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? These initial findings suggest that smart speaker technology could be a novel, and inclusive, route to improving speech intelligibility in vulnerable populations.

Avoidance of tobacco health warnings? An eye-tracking approach.

AIMS: Among three eye-tracking studies, we examined how cigarette pack features affected visual attention and self-reported avoidance of and reactance to warnings. DESIGN: Study 1: smoking status × warning immediacy (short-term versus long-term health consequences) × warning location (top versus bottom of pack). Study 2: smoking status × warning framing (gain-framed versus loss-framed) × warning format (text-only versus pictorial). Study 3: smoking status × warning severity (highly severe versus moderately severe consequences of smoking). SETTING: University of Bristol, UK, eye-tracking laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Study 1: non-smokers (n = 25), weekly smokers (n = 25) and daily smokers (n = 25). Study 2: non-smokers (n = 37), smokers contemplating quitting (n = 37) and smokers not contemplating quitting (n = 43). Study 3: non-smokers (n = 27), weekly smokers (n = 26) and daily smokers (n = 26). MEASUREMENTS: For all studies: visual attention, measured as the ratio of the number of fixations to the warning versus the branding, self-reported predicted avoidance of and reactance to warnings and for study 3, effect of warning on quitting motivation. FINDINGS: Study 1: greater self-reported avoidance [mean difference (MD) = 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.94, 1.35, P < 0.001, ηp2  = 0.64] and visual attention (MD = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.09, 1.68, P = 0.03, ηp2  = 0.06) to long-term warnings, but not for reactance (MD = 0.14, 95% CI = -0.04, 0.32, P = 0.12, ηp2  = 0.03). Increased visual attention to warnings on the upper versus lower half of the pack (MD = 1.8; 95% CI = 0.33, 3.26, P = 0.02, ηp2  = 0.08). Study 2: higher self-reported avoidance of (MD = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.59,0.80, P < 0.001, ηp2  = 0.61) and reactance to (MD = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.27, 0.47, P < 0.001, ηp2  = 0.34) loss-framed warnings but little evidence of a difference for visual attention (MD = 0.52; 95% CI = -0.54, 1.58, P = 0.30, ηp2  = 0.01). Greater visual attention, avoidance and reactance to pictorial versus text-only warnings (all Ps < 0.001, ηp2  > 0.25). Study 3: greater self-reported avoidance of (MD = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.25, 0.48, P < 0.001, ηp2  = 0.33) and reactance to (MD = 0.14; 95% CI = 0.05, 0.23, P = 0.003, ηp2  = 0.11) highly severe warnings but findings were inconclusive as to whether there was a difference in visual attention (MD = -0.55; 95% CI = -1.5, 0.41, P = 0.24, ηp2  = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective and objective (eye-tracking) measures of avoidance of health warnings on cigarette packs produce different results, suggesting these measure different constructs. Visual avoidance of warnings indicates low-level disengagement with warnings, while self-reported predicted avoidance reflects higher-level engagement with warnings.

Self-reported impulsivity does not predict response caution.

The broad construct of impulsivity is one that spans both personality and cognitive ability. Despite a common overarching construct, previous research has found no relationship between self-report measures of impulsivity and people's ability to inhibit pre-potent responses. Here, we use evidence accumulation models of choice reaction time tasks to extract a measure of "response caution" (boundary separation) and examine whether this correlates with self-reported impulsivity as measured by the UPPS-P questionnaire. Response caution reflects whether an individual makes decisions based on more (favouring accuracy) or less (favouring speed) evidence. We reasoned that this strategic dimension of behaviour is conceptually closer to the tendencies that self-report impulsivity measures probe than what is traditional measured by inhibition tasks. In a meta-analysis of five datasets (total N = 296), encompassing 19 correlations per subscale, we observe no evidence that response caution correlates with self-reported impulsivity. Average correlations between response caution and UPPS-P subscales ranged from rho = -0.02 to -0.04. While the construct of response caution has demonstrated value in understanding individual differences in cognition, brain functioning and aging; the factors underlying what has been called "impulsive information processing" appear to be distinct from the concept of impulsivity derived from self-report.

Visually-induced dizziness is associated with sensitivity and avoidance across all senses.

BACKGROUND: Persistent postural perceptual dizziness (PPPD) is a common chronic condition presenting in neurology and neuro-otology clinics. Symptoms lie on a spectrum in the general population. The cause is unknown and thought to involve interactions between visual and vestibular systems, but symptoms also correlate with anxiety and migraine. OBJECTIVE: To test whether PDDD symptoms are associated with reported differences in other senses (touch, hearing, smell and taste); to investigate possible mediation via anxiety or migraine; to discover the proportion of variance accountable to these non-vestibular factors. METHODS: We measured self-report multisensory sensitivity, anxiety, visual difficulties, visual discomfort and migraine in patients with PPPD (N = 29) and a large general population cohort (N > 1100). We used structural equation modelling to examine relationships between the factors using a step-wise approach. RESULTS: We found increased self-reported over-sensitivity in sensory domains beyond vision and balance in both patients with PPPD and non-clinical participants with more PPPD symptoms. SEM analysis revealed that anxiety partly, but not wholly, mediated this relationship. Adding visual difficulties and visual discomfort to the model allowed it to explain 50% of PPPD symptom variance. Most of the path coefficients and mediation effects in our model were unchanged between participants with and without migraine. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the idea that PPPD is a complex neurological condition that includes broad perceptual factors, and may suggest that some brains are predisposed to generalised cross-modal sensory-overload. This may give rise to vulnerability to severe PPPD should a vestibular insult occur.

Inability to improve performance with control shows limited access to inner states.

Any repeatedly performed action is characterized by endogenous variability, affecting both speed and accuracy-for a large part presumably caused by fluctuations in underlying brain and body states. The current research questions concerned (a) whether such states are accessible to us and (b) whether we can act upon this information to reduce variability. For example, when playing a game of darts, there is an implicit assumption that people can wait to throw until they are in the right perceptual-attentional state. If this is true, taking away the ability to self-pace the game should worsen performance. We first tested precisely this assumption asking participants to play darts in a self-paced and a fixed-paced condition. There was no benefit of self-pacing, showing that participants were unable to use such control to improve their performance and reduce their variability. Next, we replicated these findings in 2 computer-based tasks, in which participants performed a rapid action-selection and a visual detection task in 1 self-paced and 3 forced-paced conditions. Over 4 different empirical tests, we show that the self-paced condition did not lead to improved performance or reduced variability, nor to reduced temporal dependencies in the reaction time (RT) series. Overall, it seems that, if people have any access to their fluctuating performance-relevant inner states, this access is limited and not relevant for upcoming performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Slow and steady? Strategic adjustments in response caution are moderately reliable and correlate across tasks.

Speed-accuracy trade-offs are often considered a confound in speeded choice tasks, but individual differences in strategy have been linked to personality and brain structure. We ask whether strategic adjustments in response caution are reliable, and whether they correlate across tasks and with impulsivity traits. In Study 1, participants performed Eriksen flanker and Stroop tasks in two sessions four weeks apart. We manipulated response caution by emphasising speed or accuracy. We fit the diffusion model for conflict tasks and correlated the change in boundary (accuracy - speed) across session and task. We observed moderate test-retest reliability, and medium to large correlations across tasks. We replicated this between-task correlation in Study 2 using flanker and perceptual decision tasks. We found no consistent correlations with impulsivity. Though moderate reliability poses a challenge for researchers interested in stable traits, consistent correlation between tasks indicates there are meaningful individual differences in the speed-accuracy trade-off.

A Novel Framework to Measure Executive Function in Down Syndrome With Applications for Early Clinical Diagnosis of Dementia.

Executive function (EF) decline is a consistent early sign of Alzheimer's disease (AD) among adults with Down syndrome (DS), which means that baseline measures of EF for individuals with DS are vital to allow detection of meaningful decline. We developed a framework to extract measures of three core components of EF (memory updating, inhibitory, and temporal components) within one task. Increases in memory load, inhibitory load, and temporal demands led to significant increases in reaction times and significant decreases in accuracy among 18 adults with DS and 18 typically developing matched individuals; thus, the expected effects of all three manipulations were detected. Good test-retest reliability indicated that this framework has the potential to provide a simple, baseline EF measure for individuals with DS.

Face processing in autism spectrum disorder re-evaluated through diffusion models.

OBJECTIVE: Research using cognitive or perceptual tasks in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often relies on mean reaction time (RT) and accuracy derived from alternative-forced choice paradigms. However, these measures can confound differences in task-related processing efficiency with caution (i.e., preference for speed or accuracy). We examined whether computational models of decision-making allow these components to be isolated. METHOD: Using data from two face-processing tasks (face recognition and egocentric eye-gaze discrimination), we explored whether adolescents with ASD and wide-ranging intellectual ability differed from an age and IQ matched comparison group on model parameters that are thought to represent processing efficiency, caution, and perceptual encoding/motor output speed. RESULTS: We found evidence that autistic adolescents had lower processing efficiency and caution but did not differ from nonautistic adolescents in the time devoted to perceptual encoding/motor output. These results were more consistent across tasks when we only analyzed participants with IQ above 85. Cross-task correlations suggested that processing efficiency and caution parameters were relatively stable across individuals and tasks. Furthermore, logistic classification with model parameters improved discrimination between individuals with and without ASD relative to classification using mean RT and accuracy. Finally, previous research has found that ADHD symptoms are associated with lower processing efficiency, and we observed a similar relationship in our sample, but only for autistic adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these results suggest that models of decision-making could provide both better discriminability between autistic and nonautistic individuals on cognitive tasks and also a more specific understanding of the underlying mechanisms driving these differences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The mapping between transformed reaction time costs and models of processing in aging and cognition.

Older adults tend to have slower response times (RTs) than younger adults on cognitive tasks. This makes the examination of domain-specific deficits in aging difficult, as differences between conditions in raw RTs (RT costs) typically increase with slower average RTs. Here, we examine the mapping between 2 established approaches to dealing with this confound in the literature. The first is to use transformed RT costs, with the z-score and proportional transforms both being commonly used. The second is to use mathematical models of choice RT behavior, such as the drift-diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978). We simulated data for younger and older adults from the drift-diffusion model under 4 scenarios: (a) a domain specific deficit, (b) general slowing, (c) strategic slowing, and (d) a slowing of nondecision processes. In each scenario we varied the size of the difference between younger and older adults in the model parameters, and examined corresponding effect sizes and Type I error rates in the raw and transformed RT costs. The z-score transformation provided better control of Type I error rates than the raw or proportional costs, though did not fully control for differences in the general slowing and strategic slowing scenarios. We recommend that RT analyses are ideally supplemented by analyses of error rates where possible, as these may help to identify the presence of confounds. To facilitate this, it would be beneficial to include conditions that elicit below ceiling accuracy in tasks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Low and variable correlation between reaction time costs and accuracy costs explained by accumulation models: Meta-analysis and simulations.

The underpinning assumption of much research on cognitive individual differences (or group differences) is that task performance indexes cognitive ability in that domain. In many tasks performance is measured by differences (costs) between conditions, which are widely assumed to index a psychological process of interest rather than extraneous factors such as speed-accuracy trade-offs (e.g., Stroop, implicit association task, lexical decision, antisaccade, Simon, Navon, flanker, and task switching). Relatedly, reaction time (RT) costs or error costs are interpreted similarly and used interchangeably in the literature. All of this assumes a strong correlation between RT-costs and error-costs from the same psychological effect. We conducted a meta-analysis to test this, with 114 effects across a range of well-known tasks. Counterintuitively, we found a general pattern of weak, and often no, association between RT and error costs (mean r = .17, range -.45 to .78). This general problem is accounted for by the theoretical framework of evidence accumulation models, which capture individual differences in (at least) 2 distinct ways. Differences affecting accumulation rate produce positive correlation. But this is cancelled out if individuals also differ in response threshold, which produces negative correlations. In the models, subtractions between conditions do not isolate processing costs from caution. To demonstrate the explanatory power of synthesizing the traditional subtraction method within a broader decision model framework, we confirm 2 predictions with new data. Thus, using error costs or RT costs is more than a pragmatic choice; the decision carries theoretical consequence that can be understood through the accumulation model framework. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences.

Individual differences in cognitive paradigms are increasingly employed to relate cognition to brain structure, chemistry, and function. However, such efforts are often unfruitful, even with the most well established tasks. Here we offer an explanation for failures in the application of robust cognitive paradigms to the study of individual differences. Experimental effects become well established - and thus those tasks become popular - when between-subject variability is low. However, low between-subject variability causes low reliability for individual differences, destroying replicable correlations with other factors and potentially undermining published conclusions drawn from correlational relationships. Though these statistical issues have a long history in psychology, they are widely overlooked in cognitive psychology and neuroscience today. In three studies, we assessed test-retest reliability of seven classic tasks: Eriksen Flanker, Stroop, stop-signal, go/no-go, Posner cueing, Navon, and Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Code (SNARC). Reliabilities ranged from 0 to .82, being surprisingly low for most tasks given their common use. As we predicted, this emerged from low variance between individuals rather than high measurement variance. In other words, the very reason such tasks produce robust and easily replicable experimental effects - low between-participant variability - makes their use as correlational tools problematic. We demonstrate that taking such reliability estimates into account has the potential to qualitatively change theoretical conclusions. The implications of our findings are that well-established approaches in experimental psychology and neuropsychology may not directly translate to the study of individual differences in brain structure, chemistry, and function, and alternative metrics may be required.

Impairment of manual but not saccadic response inhibition following acute alcohol intoxication.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol impairs response inhibition; however, it remains contested whether such impairments affect a general inhibition system, or whether affected inhibition systems are embedded in, and specific to, each response modality. Further, alcohol-induced impairments have not been disambiguated between proactive and reactive inhibition mechanisms, and nor have the contributions of action-updating impairments to behavioural 'inhibition' deficits been investigated. METHODS: Forty Participants (25 female) completed both a manual and a saccadic stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) task before and after a 0.8g/kg dose of alcohol and, on a separate day, before and after a placebo. Blocks in which participants were required to ignore the signal to stop or make an additional 'dual' response were included to obtain measures of proactive inhibition as well as updating of attention and action. RESULTS: Alcohol increased manual but not saccadic SSRT. Proactive inhibition was weakly reduced by alcohol, but increases in the reaction times used to baseline this contrast prevent clear conclusions regarding response caution. Finally, alcohol also increased secondary dual response times of the dual task uniformly as a function of the delay between tasks, indicating an effect of alcohol on action-updating or execution. CONCLUSIONS: The modality-specific effects of alcohol favour the theory that response inhibition systems are embedded within response modalities, rather than there existing a general inhibition system. Concerning alcohol, saccadic control appears relatively more immune to disruption than manual control, even though alcohol affects saccadic latency and velocity. Within the manual domain, alcohol affects multiple types of action updating, not just inhibition.

Spatial Learning and Wayfinding in an Immersive Environment: The Digital Fulldome.

Previous work has examined whether immersive technologies can benefit learning in virtual environments, but the potential benefits of technology in this context are confounded by individual differences such as spatial ability. We assessed spatial knowledge acquisition in male and female participants using a technology not previously examined empirically: the digital fulldome. Our primary aim was to examine whether performance on a test of survey knowledge was better in a fulldome (N = 28, 12 males) relative to a large, flat screen display (N = 27, 13 males). Regression analysis showed that, compared to a flat screen display, males showed higher levels of performance on a test of survey knowledge after learning in the fulldome, but no benefit occurred for females. Furthermore, performance correlated with spatial visualization ability in male participants, but not in female participants. Thus, the digital fulldome is a potentially useful learning aid, capable of accommodating multiple users, but individual differences and use of strategy need to be considered.