Prevalence Rate and Risk Factors of Sexual Assault Among University Students in the Netherlands.

This research documents the prevalence rate and demographic risk factors for sexual assault among undergraduate and graduate students enrolled at a Dutch university. The present study used a sample of N = 2,887 students who filled in responses to a campus climate survey about students' experiences with sexual assault and diverse demographic variables. Results showed that approximately one in four students (25.3%) experience non-consensual sexual touching, and almost one in ten are raped (9.2%). Next, to examine the effects of demographic factors and their interactions on sexual assault, the dataset was divided randomly into two subsamples. Exploratory multiple regression analyses were conducted on the first subsample and confirmatory multiple regression analyses on the second. Variables that increased odds for unwanted sexual touching, rape, and any type of sexual assault were gender; being a member of a student or a study association; having a disability; and being in a relationship (in this context, "any type of sexual assault" refers to any incident that included unwanted touching, attempted rape, or rape). LGBQ+ sexual orientation was significant for any kind of sexual assault and for rape; and being a member of a sport association was significant for any kind of sexual assault and for sexual touching.

Interfering with a memory without erasing its trace.

Previous research has shown that performance of a novice skill can be easily interfered with by subsequent training of another skill. We address the open questions whether extensively trained skills show the same vulnerability to interference as novice skills and which memory mechanism regulates interference between expert skills. We developed a recurrent neural network model of V1 able to learn from feedback experienced over the course of a long-term orientation discrimination experiment. After first exposing the model to one discrimination task for 3480 consecutive trials, we assessed how its performance was affected by subsequent training in a second, similar task. Training the second task strongly interfered with the first (highly trained) discrimination skill. The magnitude of interference depended on the relative amounts of training devoted to the different tasks. We used these and other model outcomes as predictions for a perceptual learning experiment in which human participants underwent the same training protocol as our model. Specifically, over the course of three months participants underwent baseline training in one orientation discrimination task for 15 sessions before being trained for 15 sessions on a similar task and finally undergoing another 15 sessions of training on the first task (to assess interference). Across all conditions, the pattern of interference observed empirically closely matched model predictions. According to our model, behavioral interference can be explained by antagonistic changes in neuronal tuning induced by the two tasks. Remarkably, this did not stem from erasing connections due to earlier learning but rather from a reweighting of lateral inhibition.

The Attentional Blink is Related to the Microsaccade Rate Signature.

The reduced detectability of a target T2 following discrimination of a preceding target T1 in the attentional blink (AB) paradigm is classically interpreted as a consequence of reduced attention to T2 due to attentional allocation to T1. Here, we investigated whether AB was related to changes in microsaccade rate (MSR). We found a pronounced MSR signature following T1 onset, characterized by MSR suppression from 200 to 328 ms and enhancement from 380 to 568 ms. Across participants, the magnitude of the MSR suppression correlated with the AB effect such that low T2 detectability corresponded to reduced MSR. However, in the same task, T1 error trials coincided with the presence of microsaccades. We discuss this apparent paradox in terms of known neurophysiological correlates of MS whereby cortical excitability is suppressed both during the microsaccade and MSR suppression, in accordance to poor T1 performance with microsaccade occurrence and poor T2 performance with microsaccade absence. Our data suggest a novel low-level mechanism contributing to AB characterized by reduced MSR, thought to cause suppressed visual cortex excitability. This opens the question of whether attention mediates T2 performance suppression independently from MSR, and if not, how attention interacts with MSR to produce the T2 performance suppression.

Within-quadrant position and orientation specificity after extensive orientation discrimination learning is related to performance gains during late learning.

The last decade has seen the emergence of new views about the mechanisms underlying specificity (or, conversely, generalization) of visual skill learning. Here, we trained participants at orientation discrimination paradigm at a peripheral position to induce position and orientation specificity and to test its underlying mechanisms. Specifically, we aimed to test whether the within-quadrant spatial gradient of generalization is determined by cortical magnification, which would show that retinotopic plasticity contributes to learning and specificity. Additionally, we aimed to test whether late parts of the learning relate differently to specificity compared to early parts. This is relevant in the context of double training papers, which suggest that rule-based mechanisms of specificity in fast, early learning also would apply to late, slower learning. Our data showed partial but significant position and orientation specificity within quadrants. Interestingly, specificity was greatest for those participants who had continued to show threshold decreases during the last five sessions of training (late, asymptotic learning). Performance gains during early learning were less related to specificity. A trend for skill to spread over larger distances towards periphery than towards central vision suggested contributions to transfer of early visual areas showing cortical magnification of central vision. Control experiments however did not support this hypothesis. In summary, our study demonstrates significant specificity after extensive perceptual learning, and indicates that asymptotic learning recruits specific mechanisms that promote specificity, and that may not be recruited yet in early parts of the learning. The contributions of different mechanisms to early and late learning suggests that following these different learning periods, generalization relies on different principles and is subjected to different limits.

Limited transfer of visual skill in orientation discrimination to locations treated by pre-testing and subliminal exposure.

Substantial transfer of perceptual skill learning can be achieved across large distances in the visual field by a brief pre-test, training-plus-exposure, or a double-training paradigm (Xiao et al., 2008; Zhang, Xiao, et al., 2010; Zhang, Zhang, et al., 2010). Additionally, subliminal exposure has been shown to be beneficial for subsequent perceptual learning. Here, we tested the generalization of orientation discrimination learning from a fully trained location towards four other test locations, either in the same or opposite hemifield as the training location, which each were subjected to a different type of pre-conditioning. In one test location, there was brief pre-testing in the first session. Two other locations were stimulated by masked stimuli similar or identical to concurrently presented stimuli in the training location. In the fourth test location, no stimuli were presented during training. Generalization of training to test locations was measured in the session immediately following the completion of training in the training location. Moreover, to test the robustness of transfer, training was continued in all four test locations. The experiment as a whole consisted of 15 sessions of orientation discrimination learning at the training location, followed by 15 sessions of training in the test locations. We found only limited generalization from the trained to the test locations. Performance in pre-tested and stimulated test locations showed a small advantage compared to the unstimulated test location. However, this advantage disappeared within a few sessions of further training in the test locations.