DE eng

Search in the Catalogues and Directories

Hits 1 – 20 of 20

1
Domain-aware ontology matching ...
Quesada Real, Francisco José. - : The University of Edinburgh, 2021
BASE
Show details
2
Domain-aware ontology matching
Quesada Real, Francisco José. - : The University of Edinburgh, 2021
BASE
Show details
3
A common neural hub resolves syntactic and non-syntactic conflict through cooperation with task-specific networks.
Hsu, Nina S; Jaeggi, Susanne M; Novick, Jared M. - : eScholarship, University of California, 2017
BASE
Show details
4
Language Science Meets Cognitive Science: Categorization and Adaptation ...
Heffner, Christopher Cullen. - : Digital Repository at the University of Maryland, 2017
BASE
Show details
5
Nonmusical Correlates of Musical Ability
BASE
Show details
6
Language Science Meets Cognitive Science: Categorization and Adaptation
BASE
Show details
7
Language modularity
BASE
Show details
8
Further Exploring Processing Differences Between Geometric Shapes and Shape Words
In: Electronic Theses and Dissertations (2016)
BASE
Show details
9
Linguistic explanation and domain specialization: a case study in bound variable anaphora
BASE
Show details
10
Attention and executive control during lexical processing in aphasia
BASE
Show details
11
Using a Delayed Match-to-Samples Task to Investigate the Isolated Processing of Geometric Shapes and Their Corresponding Shape Words
In: Georgia Southern University Research Symposium (2015)
BASE
Show details
12
Resisting Everything Except Temptation: Evidence and an Explanation for Domain-Specific Impulsivity
In: Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations (2012)
Abstract: Why do people act self-controlled in some situations but not others? More specifically, why does it appear that an individual can be self-controlled in one domain (e.g., work) but impulsive in another (e.g., food)? This investigation tests a model that incorporates and explains both domain-specific and domain-general differences in impulsive behavior. Specifically, the model predicts that within-individual variation across domains is explained by subjective domain-specific appraisals of temptation and perceived harm, whereas domain-general impulsivity is explained by domain-general self-control strategies (e.g., pre-commitment) and resources (e.g., working memory). In Chapter 1, four studies test this model in adults. Studies 1 and 2 present the development and validation of a self-report questionnaire assessing impulsive behavior in six domains: work, interpersonal relationships, drugs, food, exercise, and finances. In Study 3, domain-specific appraisals of temptation and perceived harm are shown to explain within-individual variance in impulsive behavior, whereas domain-general self-control explains variance in domain-general impulsive behavior between individuals. Study 4 confirms that individuals in special interest groups (e.g., procrastinators) who are especially tempted in the target domain (e.g., work) are not likely to be more tempted in unrelated domains (e.g., food). Chapter 2 explores domain-specificity through the temporal discounting paradigm. Whereas self-report measures of impulsivity are sensitive to social desirability biases, choices in temporal discounting (sooner-smaller vs. later-larger rewards) are not as transparent. As predicted, temporal discounting is domain-specific, and domain-specificity in temptation partially explains domain-specificity in temporal discounting. Chapter 3 presents the development and validation of a domain-specific measure for children, motivated by the idea that some of the domains relevant for adults may not be relevant for children given that the average child presumably is either not attracted to certain temptations, does not perceive them as harmful, or does not frequently encounter them. For children, interpersonal and schoolwork impulsivity are shown to be correlated but distinct behavioral tendencies, demonstrating differentiated relationships with dimensions of childhood temperament, Big Five personality factors, and school outcomes. Collectively, these findings highlight the utility of a domain-specific approach, namely in terms of understanding psychological processes, improved prediction, and targeted interventions.
Keyword: domain-specific; domain-specificity; impulsivity; Psychology; self-control; temptation
URL: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/590
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1748&context=edissertations
BASE
Hide details
13
Comparison of Instrumentalists and Vocalists on a Lexical Tone Perception Task
Kirkham, Joseph. - 2011
BASE
Show details
14
The Contribution of Domain Specificity in the Highly Modular Mind
In: Robert J. Stainton (2010)
BASE
Show details
15
How Does the Mind Do Literary Work?
S. Versace; G. Thoms. - 2009
BASE
Show details
16
Theory of mind broad and narrow: Reasoning about social exchange engages ToM areas, precautionary reasoning does not
In: Ermer, Elsa; Guerin, Scoft A.; Cosmides, Leda; Tooby, John; & Miller, Michael B.(2006). Theory of mind broad and narrow: Reasoning about social exchange engages ToM areas, precautionary reasoning does not. SOCIAL NEUROSCIENCE, 1, 196 - 219. UC Santa Barbara: Retrieved from: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6c53x1nx (2006)
BASE
Show details
17
Sex differences in lexical size across semantic categories
Laws, K.R.. - 2004
BASE
Show details
18
The Case for Modularity: Sin or Salvation?
In: Evolution and Cognition ; https://jeannicod.ccsd.cnrs.fr/ijn_00000135 ; Evolution and Cognition, 2001, 7 (1), pp.46-55 (2001)
BASE
Show details
19
Grammatical knowledge vs. syntactic processing in the human brain
In: http://cuny2012.commons.gc.cuny.edu/files/2012/03/cuny2012_98.pdf
BASE
Show details
20
How Does the Mind Work? Insights from Biology
In: http://www.psych.nyu.edu/gary/marcusArticles/Marcus 2009 topics.pdf
BASE
Show details

Catalogues
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bibliographies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Linked Open Data catalogues
0
Online resources
0
0
0
0
Open access documents
20
0
0
0
0
© 2013 - 2024 Lin|gu|is|tik | Imprint | Privacy Policy | Datenschutzeinstellungen ändern