"Good is up" is not always better: a memory advantage for words in metaphor-incompatible locations.

Four experiments examined whether memory for positive and negative words depended on word location and vertical hand movements. Cognitive processing is known to be facilitated when valenced stimuli are presented in locations that are congruent with the GOOD is UP conceptual metaphor, relative to when they are presented in incongruent locations. In both free recall and recognition tasks, we find a memory advantage for words that had been studied in metaphor incongruent locations (positive down, negative up). This incongruity advantage depends on the location of words during encoding, but no evidence was found to suggest that other spatial associations, such as the vertical position of the hand at encoding or word location during retrieval, affect memory. The results indicate that metaphors, like schemas, categories, and stereotypes, can influence cognition in complex ways, producing variable outcomes across different tasks.

A comparison of the fourth-generation fluoroquinolones gatifloxacin 0.3% and moxifloxacin 0.5% in terms of ocular tolerability.

PURPOSE: To compare the ocular tolerability of the commercially available ophthalmic solutions of the fourth-generation fluoroquinolones, gatifloxacin 0.3% (Zymar, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) with benzalkonium chloride (BAK) and moxifloxacin 0.5% (Vigamox) without BAK. METHODS: A baseline evaluation was conducted on 30 healthy volunteers for conjunctival hyperemia, conjunctival vascularity, pupil size, and anterior chamber (AC) cell and flare. Pupils were measured under scotopic conditions with a Colvard pupillometer. Conjunctival hyperemia and vascularity, and AC reaction were measured on a Likert-like scale of 0-3. Subjects then received drops in both eyes from masked bottles of gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.3% with BAK (in one eye determined randomly) and moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.5% without BAK (in the contralateral eye) in a double-masked fashion. Subjects graded pain and ocular irritation in each eye on a scale of 1-10 after 5 min with their eyes closed. The examination was then repeated. RESULTS: The average age of this study population was 34.4 years. The groups of eyes receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% demonstrated an increase in mean conjunctival hyperemia (0.21 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 1.52 [range: 0-3] at 5 min.) that was significantly greater (p = 0.0005) compared with that of the group receiving gatifloxacin 0.3% (0.22 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 0.45 [range: 0-2] at 5 min). The group receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% showed an increase in conjunctival vascularity (0.55 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 1.61 [range: 0.5-3] at 5 min.) that was significantly greater (p = 0.0005) compared with that of the group receiving gatifloxacin 0.3% (0.52 [range: 0-1] at baseline to 0.68 [range: 0-2] at 5 min.). Significantly less pain (1.2 vs. 3.2, p = 0.001) and irritation (0.64 vs. 3.42, p = 0.001) occurred with gatifloxacin 0.3% than with moxifloxacin 0.5%. Pupil size was significantly reduced (5.65 mm-5.05 mm) in eyes receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% (p = 0.004) and no significant change occurred in pupil size (5.60 mm-5.65 mm) in eyes that received gatifloxacin 0.3% (p = 0.878). No AC reaction was noted with either medication. CONCLUSIONS: The group of eyes receiving gatifloxacin 0.3% with BAK demonstrated greater ocular tolerability in comparison to the group receiving moxifloxacin 0.5% without BAK. Moxifloxacin-induced pupillary miosis may be due to prostaglandin release in the anterior chamber. A limitation of this study is the relatively young age of the study population.