Donate | Join/Renew | Print Page | Contact Us | Report Abuse | Sign In
Share |


Amsterdam, The Netherlands
10-12 May 2018

#psamsterdam18


Call for Abstracts

Call for Symposia
Program
Registration


Keynotes
Special Events
Mobile App

Accommodation
Travel
Explore Amsterdam

Exhibitors
Press and Media

Scientific Committee
About International Meetings
Future Meetings
Past Meetings

Symposia

 

Tackling the Confidence Crisis with Statistical Scrutiny, Verifiable Credibility, and Radical Transparency
Chair: Balazs Aczel, ELTE Eotvos Lorand University
If ever was a time that psychology needed self-reflection, then it is surely now. Methodological, statistical and publication traditions, which long ruled in the realm of psychological research, lost much from their once solid grounding. In this symposium, six speakers will add new thoughts to this discussion with special focus on: issues with the p-curve procedure, how to use Bayes factors, counting researcher degrees of freedom, assessing effect size overestimation and how to achieve full transparency of empirical research.

The P Curve Is Not What You Think It Is
Richard Morey, Cardiff University

Principles for Teaching and Using Bayes Factors

Zoltan Dienes, University of Sussex

Assessing the Properties of Psychological Research from Collections of Results
Balazs Aczel, ELTE Eotvos Lorand University

Researcher Degrees of Freedom
Jelte Wicherts, Tilburg University

The Case for Radical Transparency in Statistical Reporting
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, University of Amsterdam

Taking Research Credibility to the Next Level, an Initiative for Verifiable Credibility
Zoltan Kekecs, Lund University


Shaping Attention Selection

Chair: Jan Theeuwes, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Even though traditionally attentional control has been considered to be the result of the interaction between voluntary (top-down) and automatic (bottom-up) control, recently a new theoretical framework has emerged in which this division is no longer that clear-cut. Indeed, it has been recognized that the history of attentional deployments can elicit lingering selection biases, which are unrelated to top-down goals or the physical salience of items. This symposium will bring researchers together that have investigated these lingering selection biases specifically in the areas of associative (reward) learning, emotional processing and statistical display properties.

Plasticity of the Human Attention System: The Impact of Reward and Statistical Learning on Priority Maps of Space
Leonardo Chelazzi, University of Verona, Italy

Self-Biased Attention: The Relationship Between Ownership and Value in Attentional Prioritization
Rebecca Todd, University of British Columbia, Canada

Effects of Risk and Reward on Attentional and Oculomotor Selection
Mike E. Le Pelley, UNSW Sydney, Australia

Reward and Prior Selection Can Bias Visual Selective Attention
Anna Schuboe, Philipps-University Marburg, Germany

How Attention and Reward Determine the Learning of Stimulus-Response Associations
Pieter R. Roelfsema, Netherlands Institute for Neurosciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Lingering Biases of Attentional Selection
Jan Theeuwes, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam


Proactive Control: Mechanisms and Deficits

Chairs: Eyal Kalanthroff, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, and Marius Usher, Tel-Aviv University
Cognitive control is understood as a mechanism of top–down bias to the bottom–up associations linking stimuli to automatic responses. An important challenge facing this approach is to account for the marked variability in cognitive control with task contingencies and between individuals. Recently, the Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) framework was proposed by Braver to directly address this challenge. According to DMC, much of this variability can be explained in terms of the balance between two types of processes: a proactive process (deployed in advance of the stimulus) and a reactive process (deployed after the stimulus). We start with a presentation by Braver who will outline the flexibility of cognitive control (DMC framework) and present recent evidence. Following, Usher and Davelaar will present a Stroop model, in which variability in proactive control modulates behavioral aspects of taskconflict. Verguts will present a novel model of proactive and reactive control based on neural oscillations. Kalanthroff will examine effects of anxiety and emotional distractors on pro-active control and Chevalier will present results on the development of proactive control and the ability to deploy it flexibly in children.

Todd Braver, Washington University in St. Louis
Marius Usher, Tel-Aviv University
Eddy Davelaar, Birkbeck College
Tom Verguts, Ghent University
Eyal Kalanthroff, The Hebrew University if Jerusalem, Israel
Nicolas Chevalier, University of Edinburgh


What Limits the Capacity of Working Memory? An ‘Adversarial’ Working Memory Symposium

Chair: Robert Logie, University of Edinburgh
The widespread use and longevity of the concept of working memory has led to a plethora of approaches, definitions, and theories. Each group of like-minded researchers tends to explore research questions and empirical findings that are most relevant for their own assumptions, rather than to seek disconfirmatory evidence. The focus may be on cognitive architecture, neuroanatomical correlates of performance on tasks assumed to require working memory, the development of computational models that simulate behavioural data, the role of limited capacity attention and long-term memory, the ability to switch between task requirements, or why working memory capacity varies across individuals. The approaches are, if anything, even more diverse than when different models of working memory were addressed in a range of chapters in 'Models of Working Memory', edited by Miyake and Shah (1999). Nearly 20 years on from that important book, this symposium will bring together leading international working memory researchers who represent some of the current diversity in the field, each asked to address a common question that is the focus of much of the contemporary debate, 'What Limits the Capacity of Working Memory?'.

Robert Logie, University of Edinburgh
Nelson Cowan, University of Missouri-Columbia
Ed Awh, University of Chicago
Pierre Barrouillet, University of Geneva
Valerie Camos, University of Fribourg
Klaus Oberauer, University of Zurich
Randy Engle, Georgia Institute of Technology


Evidence and Scientific Knowledge in a "Post-Truth" World

Chair: Stephan Lewandowsky, University of Bristol
Never before has humanity had access to as much knowledge, and enjoyed the benefits of so many scientific insights. Paradoxically, this abundance of knowledge and scientific flourishing coexist with what has been called an era of "post-truth" public discourse. Wholesale dismissal of expertise and scientific knowledge has become a feature of public debate, and many people distrust institutions and scientific evidence. Are we heading towards a dystopian future in which it is not medical knowledge but an opinion market on Twitter that determines whether a new strain of avian flu is contagious to humans? Knowledge and expertise appear to be in crisis. What are the features and causes of this crisis? How can people's misconceptions be corrected? What can be done to prevent the rapid spread of "fake news"? How can we encourage people to make medical decisions that are scientifically sound? This symposium seeks answers to those questions.

Philipp Schmid, University of Erfurt
Vittorio Merola, University of Exeter
Geoff Walton, Manchester Metropolitan University
Sander van der Linden, Cambridge University
Annette Taylor, University of San Diego


Learning Words from Experience: The Emergence of Lexical Quality

Chairs: Jennifer M Rodd, University College London, and Kate Nation, University of Oxford
Lexical quality is the extent to which a word’s mental representation contains accurate and comprehensive information about its spelling, sound and meaning. High quality lexical representations not only afford efficient word recognition (i.e., knowing which word was present), but also ensure that appropriate stored lexical knowledge becomes available to support higher-level comprehension processes. Lexical knowledge is not an ‘all or nothing’ factor in which words are either known or unknown: even for highly familiar words there is significant variation (both within and across individuals) in lexical quality, and this variation affects the ease with which word meanings are processed. This symposium brings together researchers who provide novel theoretical frameworks to explain how variations in lexical quality arise from differences in linguistic experience. We present a range of mechanistic accounts that explain how important new information continues to be integrated into the lexicon throughout the lifespan to support skilled language comprehension.

Kate Nation, University of Oxford

Joanne SH Taylor, Aston University

Padraic Monaghan, University of Lancaster

Charles A. Perfetti, University of Pittsburgh

Jennifer M. Rodd, University College London

Zhenguang G. Cai, University of East Anglia




  2424 American Lane • Madison, WI 53704-3102 USA
Phone: +1 608-441-1070 • Fax: +1 608-443-2474 • Email: info@psychonomic.org

Use of Articles
Legal Notice