Three experiments examined effects of test expectancy on memory for relatively unrelated words. In Experiment I, where preliminary recall or recognition practice was given, both recall and recognition were superior when the subjects expected and had practiced for recall. Free study led to better recall and recognition than paced presentation, but did not interact with test expectancy. Experiment II demonstrated that recall was better for subjects expecting a recall vs. a recognition test in the absence of preliminary practice. In Experiment III all subjects practiced both recall and recognition prior to presentation of the critical list. Study time also was varied. With longer study, recall was better when a recall test was expected, with no test expectancy effect on recognition. There were no appreciable expectancy effects with the short study period. Self-reports and other data suggested that the critical encoding differences produced by test expectancy manipulation were quantitative in nature.

he problems of abused and neglected children are ep-idemic in our society (U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect [ABCAN], 1995) and create issues that psychologists may be called on to address. According to ABCAN, conservative estimates indicate that almost 2,000 infants and young children, or 5 children every day, die from abuse and neglect by parents or caretakers each year. Mc-Clain's (ABCAN, 1995; McClain, Sacks, & Frohlke, 1993) research at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) suggests that abuse and neglect kill 5.4 out of every 100,000 children ages four and under.According to ABCAN, fatalities are not the entire story. There are tens of thousands of victims overwhelmed

No abstract

Previous research indicates that blood pressure may impact a variety of cognitive functions, including short-term memory, abstract reasoning, visual-spatial abilities, and attention (Boller, Vrtunski, Mack, & Kim, 1977; Elias, Robbins, Schultz, & Pierce, 1990; Franceschi, Tancredi, Smirne, Mercinelli, & Canal, 1982; Mazzucchiet al., 1986). However, studies which have assessed the cognitive functioning of hypertensive adults have offered conflicting results, particularly when hypertension levels were in the mild range (e.g., Bolleret al., 1977; Eliaset al., 1990; Elias, Wolf, D'Agostino, Cobb, & White, 1993; Farmeret al., 1987, 1990; Franceschiet al., 1982; Pérez-Stable, Coates, Halliday, Gardiner, & Hauck, 1992; Schmidtet al., 1991; Waldstein, Ryan, Manuck, Parkinson, & Bromet, 1991). A number of factors may contribute to the inconsistent findings in this area. Researchers have employed a wide range of neuropsychological instruments to assess varying domains of cognitive function. Sample sizes in some studies have been too small to ensure sufficient power. Finally, studies have employed varying methodological control over potential confounding factors such as concurrent medical conditions, alcohol abuse, psychiatric disorders, or antihypertensive medication. This study compared male veterans with blood pressures in the mildly hypertensive range (n=166) to normotensive veterans (n=176) on neuropsychological measures of verbal fluency, visual-spatial ability, verbal and visual memory, dexterity, attention, and executive functions. Results revealed that, after controlling for differences in education and income, there was no relationship between mild hypertension and combined measures of cognitive performance. The present findings suggest that mild hypertension alone has little effect on cognitive function in adults.

No abstract