Next Issue
Volume 2, September
Previous Issue
Volume 2, March

Table of Contents

Psych, Volume 2, Issue 2 (June 2020) – 2 articles

  • Issues are regarded as officially published after their release is announced to the table of contents alert mailing list.
  • You may sign up for e-mail alerts to receive table of contents of newly released issues.
  • PDF is the official format for papers published in both, html and pdf forms. To view the papers in pdf format, click on the "PDF Full-text" link, and use the free Adobe Readerexternal link to open them.
Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
Open AccessArticle
Self-Body Recognition through a Mirror: Easing Spatial-Consistency Requirements for Rubber Hand Illusion
Psych 2020, 2(2), 114-127; https://doi.org/10.3390/psych2020011 - 21 Jun 2020
Viewed by 240
Abstract
Considering that humans recognize mirror images as copies of the real world despite misinterpreting optical reflections, spatial disagreement may be accepted in rubber hand illusion (RHI) settings when a mirror is used to show a fake hand. The present study performed two experiments [...] Read more.
Considering that humans recognize mirror images as copies of the real world despite misinterpreting optical reflections, spatial disagreement may be accepted in rubber hand illusion (RHI) settings when a mirror is used to show a fake hand. The present study performed two experiments to reveal how self-body recognition of a fake hand via a mirror affects RHI. First, we tested whether illusory ownership of a fake hand seen in a mirror could be induced in our experimental environment (screening experiment). Subjective evaluations using an RHI questionnaire demonstrated that embodiment of the rubber hand was evoked in the presence or absence of a mirror. We then examined whether using a mirror image for RHI allows disagreement in orientation (45 ) between the rubber and actual hands (main experiment). The participants experienced RHI even when the actual and rubber hands were incongruent in terms of orientation. These findings suggest that using a mirror masks subtle spatial incongruency or degrades the contribution of visual cues for spatial recognition and facilitates multisensory integration for bodily illusions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Post-GWAS Era in Psychiatric Research: Future Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Do the Mega and Titan Tests Yield Accurate Results? An Investigation into Two Experimental Intelligence Tests
Psych 2020, 2(2), 97-113; https://doi.org/10.3390/psych2020010 - 29 Apr 2020
Viewed by 739
Abstract
The Mega and Titan Tests were designed by Ronald K. Hoeflin to make fine distinctions in the intellectual stratosphere. The Mega Test purported to measure above-average adult IQ up to and including scores with a rarity of one in a million of the [...] Read more.
The Mega and Titan Tests were designed by Ronald K. Hoeflin to make fine distinctions in the intellectual stratosphere. The Mega Test purported to measure above-average adult IQ up to and including scores with a rarity of one in a million of the general population. The Titan Test was billed as being even more difficult than the Mega Test. In this article, these claims are subjected to scrutiny. Both tests are renormed using the normal curve of distribution. It is found that the Mega Test has a higher ceiling and a lower floor than the Titan Test. While the Mega Test may thus seem preferable as a psychometric instrument, it is somewhat marred by a number of easy items in its verbal section. Although official scores reported to test-takers are too high, it is likely that the Mega Test does stretch to the one in a million level. The Titan Test does not. Testees who had previously taken standard intelligence tests achieved average scores of 135–145 IQ on those. Since the mean of all scores on the Mega and Titan Tests was found to be IQ 137 and IQ 138, respectively, testees had considerable scope to find their true level without ceiling effects. Both are unusual and non-standard tests which require a great deal of effort to complete. Nevertheless, they deserve consideration as they represent an inventive experimental method of measuring the very highest levels of human intelligence and have been taken by enough subjects to allow norming. Full article
Previous Issue
Next Issue
Back to TopTop