Rats' exploration of stimulus P (e.g., a domestic object) is reduced following either its direct exposure or its indirect exposure and is taken to indicate recognition memory. Procedures for demonstrating indirect object recognition involve an initial presentation of object P with stimulus X (and of an object Q with stimulus Y). On test, stimulus X is presented with objects P and Q and rats' exploration of Q exceeds their exploration of P. One interpretation here is that the presentation of stimulus X on test associatively activates the memory of object P, which diminishes exploration of P relative to Q. It is possible, instead, that performance is simply the result of a novel pattern of stimulation generated by the unfamiliar combination of X and Q. The authors modified this procedure to reduce the likelihood of such a process. Their procedure involved first the presentation of PX and QY before the presentation of stimulus X alone. During the test that followed, objects P and Q were presented but stimulus X was removed. The authors found that exploration of Q remained greater than that of P despite these modifications and discuss some theoretical implications of indirect, associative processes in recognition memory.

This study explored how domestic cats perform in a horizontal string-pulling task to determine whether they understand this case of physical causality. Fifteen cats were tested on their ability to retrieve an unreachable food treat in three different set-ups: (a) a single baited string, (b) two parallel strings where only one was baited and (c) two crossed strings where only one was baited. All cats succeeded at pulling a single string to obtain a treat, but none consistently chose the correct string when two strings were parallel. When tested with two crossed strings one cat chose the wrong string consistently and all others performed at chance level. There was no evidence that cats understand the function of the strings or their physical causality.

We report that bilateral, excitoxic lesions of the perirhinal cortex attenuate rats' familiarity-based stimulus generalization. After surgery, rats were preexposed either to 2 auditory stimuli (A and B) or to only 1 auditory stimulus (B). Following preexposure, all rats received pairings of A and a footshock before assessment of generalized responding (conditioned suppression) to B. Sham rats' generalization was greater when preexposure was to both A and B than when preexposure was to B only. That pattern was abolished in lesioned rats, though no general deficiency was found in other measures of auditory processing. Our findings suggest that the perirhinal cortex is required for rats to encode familiarity as part of stimulus representations.

Analytic and holistic marking are typically researched as opposites, generating a mixed and inconclusive evidence base. Holistic marking is low on content validity but efficient. Analytic approaches are praised for transparency and detailed feedback. Capturing complex criteria interactions, when deciding marks, is claimed to be better suited to holistic approaches whilst analytic rules are thought to be limited. Both guidance and evidence in this area remain limited to date. Drawing from the known complementary strengths of these approaches, a university department enhanced its customary holistic marking practices by introducing analytic rubrics for feedback and as ancillary during marking. The customary holistic approach to deciding marks was retained in the absence of a clear rationale from the literature. Exploring the relationship between the analytic criteria and holistic marks became the focus of an exploratory study during a trial year that would use two perspectives. Following guidance from the literature, practitioners formulated analytic rules drawing on their understanding of the role of criteria, to explain output marks by allocating weightings. Secondly, data derived throughout the year consisting of holistic marks and analytic judgements (criteria) data were analyzed using machine learning techniques (random forests). This study reports on data from essay-based questions (exams) for years 2 and 3 of study (n = 3,436). Random forests provided a ranking of the variable importance of criteria relative to holistic marks, which was used to create criterion weightings (data-derived). Moreover, illustrative decision trees provide insights into non-linear roles of criteria for different levels of achievement. Criterion weightings, expected by practitioners and data-derived (from holistic marks), reveal contrasts in the ranking of top criteria within and across years. Our exploratory study confirms that holistic and analytic approaches, combined, offer promising and productive ways forward both in research and practice to gain insight into the nature of overall marks and relations with criteria. Rather than opposites, these approaches offer complementary insights to help substantiate claims made in favor of holistic marking. Our findings show that analytic may offer insights into the extent to which holistic marking really aligns with assumptions made. Limitations and further investigations are discussed.

BackgroundMental disorders and their symptoms are highly prevalent in the university student population, and the transition from secondary to tertiary education is associated with a rise in mental health problems. Existing web-based interventions for the prevention of common mental disorders in student populations often focus on just one disorder and have not been designed specifically for students. There is thus a need for transdiagnostic, student-specific preventative interventions that can be widely disseminated. This two-arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a web-based transdiagnostic mental health problem prevention programme (PLUS) across several universities in four countries.MethodStudents (N = 5550) will be recruited through a variety of channels and asked to complete a personality assessment to determine whether they are at high risk for developing common mental disorders. Students at high risk will be randomly allocated to either PLUS or a control intervention, which provides practical support around issues commonly experienced at university. Students at low risk will be allocated to the control intervention. Both intervention groups will be assessed at baseline, 4 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Depression and generalised anxiety, assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire and the Generalised Anxiety Disorder scales, will form the primary outcomes in this study. Secondary outcome measures include alcohol and drug use, eating behaviour, self-esteem, and quality of life. The cost-effectiveness of the intervention will also be evaluated.ConclusionsThis study will contribute to understanding the role of transdiagnostic indicated web-based interventions for the prevention of common mental disorders in university students. It will also be one of the first studies to investigate the cost-effectiveness of such interventions.Trial RegistrationThis trial was registered in the ISRCTN register (ISRCTN15570935) on 12th February 2016.