Reputation
1,464
Next privilege 1,500 Rep.
Approve tag wiki edits
Badges
6 12
Newest
 Good Answer
Impact
~7k people reached

May
29
awarded  Critic
May
22
comment Predicting the landing site of a saccade while the saccade is still in progress
@skleene Interesting. I've seen eye-tracking demos with gaze contingent manipulations like a gray box at gaze position, which creates the entertainingly frustrating experience of being able to see the scene in one's peripheral vision but blocking out whatever the participant tries to fixate. But that may not be what you're looking for.
May
21
comment Predicting the landing site of a saccade while the saccade is still in progress
There is a lot of work on predicting fixation patterns during reading, scene perception/exploration, and naturalistic tasks (making a sandwich, navigating around obstacles, etc.). As far as I know, these predictions are typically made based on the structure of the text/scene/task, not during each saccade. Is there a reason you want to make the prediction specifically during a saccade?
May
20
answered What is the linguistic equivalent of functional fixedness?
May
20
answered Is there any recent work on modeling how we rapidly acquire new knowledge?
Apr
8
comment What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
Would it be useful to start a meta discussion about whether this site should allow questions about teaching psychology, cognitive science, etc., and how such questions should be formulated?
Apr
8
comment What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
@ArtemKaznatcheev I agree that the combination of cognitive-psychology and neurobiology covers nearly the same territory as cognitive-neuroscience, but my sense is that "cognitive neuroscience" is a widely used term in the field and that it means something more than the sum of cognitive psychology and neurobiology, so it warrants its own tag.
Apr
7
comment What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
Part of my motivation in asking this question was that I thought questions about teaching Cognitive Science could become an active topic for this site. Such questions would naturally be a little more open-ended than the typical SE question, but maybe we'd have multiple good answers (currently a rare occurrence). In any case, although it seems like there was some interest in my question (and perhaps there would be for other teaching questions), there doesn't seem to be much interest in answering it, so perhaps this is the wrong place for it.
Apr
7
revised What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
added 115 characters in body
Apr
7
comment What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
JoshGitlin - Thanks for converting my question to a Community Wiki question, I should've asked it there in the first place. @ChuckSherrington - I thought this question would be ok to ask because there's been at least one question about textbooks before and I followed the suggestions from this meta discussion and tried to frame the question in a focused and constructive way.
Apr
6
awarded  Student
Apr
6
asked What is a good textbook for an undergrad Cognitive Neuroscience course?
Apr
1
awarded  Nice Answer
Mar
2
comment What are the effects of social rejection on the brain?
You could try doing a forward search for articles that cite Eisenberger et al., 2003. Looks like there's over 1400!
Feb
7
answered Is there sub-conscious error correction in interpreting heard language?
Feb
7
answered Do humans mentally discretize numbers?
Feb
6
awarded  Yearling
Jan
4
answered Are there already models for planning and goal-directed behaviour?
Nov
13
answered A psychological theory that explains why people remember only the outcome?
Nov
6
comment Should always selecting the same response on the IOWA Gambling Test result in a good value?
I'm not sure I understand your question. The key aspect of the task is the relative values of the payoffs, not the absolute values. So (typically) the optimal strategy is to always choose the good deck, whether that gets you $4 or $40 or $4000 is an essentially arbitrary design decision. Depending on how you set up your study, you may want to use big numbers (make it more exciting?) or small numbers (actually pay participants their winnings?), the key piece is still the relative value of the "good" vs. "bad" decks.