Humans can monitor actions and compensate for errors. Analysis of the human event-related brain potentials (ERPs) accompanying errors provides evidence for a neural process whose activity is specifically associated with monitoring and compensating for erroneous behavior. This error-related activity is enhanced when subjects strive for accurate performance but is diminished when response speed is emphasized at the expense of accuracy. The activity is also related to attempts to compensate for the erroneous behavior.

Two experiments are reported in which 5s were presented two strings of letters simultaneously, with one string displayed visually above the other. In Exp. I, 5s responded "yes" if both strings were words, otherwise responding "no." In Exp. II, 5s responded "same" if the two strings were either both words or both nonwords, otherwise responding "different." "Yes" responses and "same" responses were faster for pairs of commonly associated words than for pairs of unassociated words. "Same" responses were slowest for pairs of nonwords. "No" responses were faster when the top string in the display was a nonword, whereas "different" responses were faster when the top string was a word. The results of both experiments support a retrieval model involving a dependence between separate successive decisions about whether each of the two strings is a word. Possible mechanisms that underlie this dependence are discussed.

A new theoretical framework, executive-process interactive control (EPIC), is introduced for characterizing human performance of concurrent perceptual-motor and cognitive tasks. On the basis of EPIC, computational models may be formulated to simulate multiple-task performance under a variety of circumstances. These models account well for reaction-time data from representative situations such as the psychological refractory-period procedure. EPIC's goodness of fit supports several key conclusions: (a) At a cognitive level, people can apply distinct sets of production rules simultaneously for executing the procedures of multiple tasks; (b) people's capacity to process information at "peripheral" perceptual-motor levels is limited; (c) to cope with such limits and to satisfy task priorities, flexible scheduling strategies are used; and (d) these strategies are mediated by executive cognitive processes that coordinate concurrent tasks adaptively.

A stochastic optimized-submovement model is proposed for Pitts' law, the classic logarithmic tradeoff between the duration and spatial precision of rapid aimed movements. According to the model, an aimed movement toward a specified target region involves a primary submovement and an optional secondary corrective submovement. The submovements are assumed to be programmed such that they minimize average total movement time while maintaining a high frequency of target hits. The programming process achieves this minimization by optimally adjusting the average magnitudes and durations of noisy neuromotor force pulses used to generate the submovements. Numerous results from the literature on human motor performance may be explained in these terms. Two new experiments on rapid wrist rotations yield additional support for the stochastic optimizedsubmovement model. Experiment 1 revealed that the mean durations of primary submovements and of secondary submovements, not just average total movement times, conform to a square-root approximation of Pitts' law derived from the model. Also, the spatial endpoints of primary submovements have standard deviations that increase linearly with average primary-submovement velocity, and the average primary-submovement velocity influences the relative frequencies of secondary submovements, as predicted by the model. During Experiment 2, these results were replicated and extended under conditions in which subjects made movements without concurrent visual feedback. This replication suggests that submovement optimization may be a pervasive property of movement production. The present conceptual framework provides insights into principles of motor performance, and it links the study of physical action to research on sensation, perception, and cognition, where psychologists have been concerned for some time about the degree to which mental processes incorporate rational and normative rules. An enduring issue in the study of the human mind concerns of mathematical probability theory and statistical decision thethe rationality and optimality of the mental processes that guide ory (e.g.,

During the past two decades, mindfulness meditation has gone from being a fringe topic of scientific investigation to being an occasional replacement for psychotherapy, tool of corporate well-being, widely implemented educational practice, and "key to building more resilient soldiers." Yet the mindfulness movement and empirical evidence supporting it have not gone without criticism. Misinformation and poor methodology associated with past studies of mindfulness may lead public consumers to be harmed, misled, and disappointed. Addressing such concerns, the present article discusses the difficulties of defining mindfulness, delineates the proper scope of research into mindfulness practices, and explicates crucial methodological issues for interpreting results from investigations of mindfulness. For doing so, the authors draw on their diverse areas of expertise to review the present state of mindfulness research, comprehensively summarizing what we do and do not know, while providing a prescriptive agenda for contemplative science, with a particular focus on assessment, mindfulness training, possible adverse effects, and intersection with brain imaging. Our goals are to inform interested scientists, the news media, and the public, to minimize harm, curb poor research practices, and staunch the flow of misinformation about the benefits, costs, and future prospects of mindfulness meditation.

No abstract

Further simulations of human multiple-task performance have been conducted with computational models that are based on the executive-process interactive control (EPIC) architecture introduced by D. E. Meyer and D. E. Kieras (1997a). These models account well for patterns of reaction times and psychological refractory-period phenomena (delays of overt responses after short stimulus onset asynchronies) observed in a variety of laboratory paradigms and realistic situations. This supports the claim of the present theoretical framework that multiple-task performance relies on adaptive executive control, which enables substantial amounts of temporal overlap among stimulus identification, response selection, and movement-production processes for concurrent tasks. Such overlap is achieved through optimized task scheduling by flexible executive processes that satisfy prevailing instructions about task priorities and allocate limited-capacity perceptual–motor resources efficiently.

No abstract