When people construct algebraic equations to represent quantitative relations, they often reverse the roles of the variables (6S = P instead of 6P = S). Results from three experiments show that a major reason for such reversal errors is people's adherence to, and interpretation of, the Standard Form of algebraic models. College students constructed, selected, and interpreted algebraic models that either had the standard multiplication format (MF: ax = y), or the mathematically equivalent division format (DF: y/a = x). A large minority of participants constructed reversed MF models, whereas most participants who were instructed to use DF equations constructed correct models (Experiment 1). Most participants understood that MF and DF models of the same relation should be mathematically equivalent (Experiment 2), but they drew a conceptual distinction between these models (Experiment 3). The authors discuss the impact of notational conventions on people's interpretation and use of representational tools.

Swept-contrast visual evoked potential (VEP) techniques were used to measure the development of contrast sensitivity functions (CSFs) for achromatic and red/green isoluminant chromatic gratings. Subjects were infants of 8, 14, 20 and 32 weeks of age, and adults. Stimuli were 20 deg, 0.3-4 cyc/deg sinusoidal gratings, counterphased at 6 Hz and modulated through white. Achromatic and chromatic CSFs for all ages could be fit simultaneously with a double exponential equation of a common, lowpass shape. Both achromatic and chromatic CSFs exhibited developmental shifts in both sensitivity and spatial scale. From 8 weeks to adulthood, sensitivity increased by 0.64 log units for achromatic gratings and by 0.91 log units for chromatic gratings, yielding an 0.27 log unit larger sensitivity change for chromatic than for achromatic stimuli. Spatial scale shifts were closely similar across achromatic and chromatic CSFs, and were consistent with the factor of about four predicted on the basis of changes in foveal receptor packing density and eye size. The question of uniform vs differential loss of sensitivity for chromatic vs achromatic stimuli at fixed spatial frequencies is discussed.

No abstract

No abstract