text:
Which album?
4alicee872rh6
beyondtehdarksun
bobx46
BunchOfAtoms
Discordant666
Handala
Kathaar
latariel
Majohadica
mc saber
mo3athBaioud
pojechany
voylaf
Xhall
Nightwish - Biography
Band info | Discography | Timeline | Bio and logos | Videos | Trivia | Edit biography | Add logos
It's July, 1996. A hidden campfire looms on the island in the middle of Lake Pyhäjärvi, Kitee. Then at midnight, something happens that has far-reaching consequences. Tuomas has an idea of a solo project that would play atmospheric "mood music". The idea quickly crystallises: the sound would include acoustic guitars, flutes, strings, piano - and female vocals. Guitarist Erno "Emppu" Vuorinen and vocalist Tarja Turunen soon join the project.
Holopainen's embryonic idea takes form in just a few months, and the first Nightwish demo is completed in early 1997. Outsiders' opinions are reservedly positive, and the seeds sown during the summer start sprouting during the freezing winter of Karelia. New dimensions soon appear in the band's music: Vuorinen changes from acoustic to electric guitar, and Jukka Nevalainen joins as the drummer. A few weeks of furious practise culminate in a studio demo recorded in April, featuring seven songs by the new line-up. The songs attract the attention of Spinefarm Records, and the band is offered a deal. During the summer, Nightwish record four more songs, and their debut album Angels Fall First is released in November. The album rises to number 31 on the Finnish charts, while the single The Carpenter, has already made it to top ten. Wrapping up a year of surprisingly hectic action, Nightwish play their debut gig on New Year's eve. Over 400 people show up at Huvikeskus, Kitee, and the band is jumpy as hell, but the concert surpasses all expectations.
After their debut live appearance, Nightwish play only a few select gigs, as compulsory military service and studies prevent any heavy-duty touring. On just their second gig, they hit the stage of Lepakko, Helsinki, and everybody is extremely nervous: Turunen bursts into tears on stage and Tuomas nearly passes out from sheer excitement. Still, the band pass their trial by fire with flying colours and without any emotional or physical scars. During the summer, Nightwish recruit a permanent bassist, Sami Vänskä. The summer is spent writing new material, and the band enter the studio in early August. Oceanborn, an album significantly more powerful and professional than their debut, is released on December 7. Mixed by Mikko Karmila, who will later become their trusted ally, Oceanborn rises to number five on the Finnish charts. The success surprises everyone, although the single Sacrament Of Wilderness had already conquered the pole position of the singles charts.
Oceanborn is released internationally during the spring, boosted by the new single Sleeping Sun that sells more than 15,000 copies in a few weeks in Germany alone. When the guys get out of the army, Nightwish are truly able to hit the live circuit, and as Nightwish is booked for almost all major Finnish festival, the summer sees some furious gigging. The lively festival season ends on a happy note, as both Oceanborn and the single Sacrament Of Wilderness are certified Gold. Shortly afterwards, Nightwish embark on their first European tour, supporting Rage for four weeks during November and December.
The new millennium begins with busy activity, as Nightwish start recording their third album during the first weeks of January. The band also take part in the Eurovision Song Contest, overwhelmingly winning the public vote, but the jury responsible for the final choice does not want Nightwish to represent Finland. Wishmaster is released in mid-May, and the band celebrate the occasion with a concert at the Kitee Icehall. The album rises to number one on the Finnish charts and stays there for three weeks, earning a Gold Record. Wishmaster is released internationally during early summer, and the CD becomes the Album Of The Month in several magazines, particularly in Germany. Boosted by the success of Wishmaster, Nightwish set out on their first world tour, and the summer months see the band perform to crazed audiences in places like Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Panama, and Mexico. In the autumn, Nightwish headline their first European tour, and in late November, they fly to North America for the first time to play two concerts in Montreal. To cap off a hectic year, Nightwish play a concert in Tampere that's recorded and shot for DVD. During the gig at Pakkahuone, the guys are also presented with some valuable memories, as the domestic sales of Wishmaster have earned them a Platinum Record.
There's no rest for Nightwish, as the band immediately hit the studio after a Finnish tour early in the year. The EP Over The Hills And Far Away is released in June and stays on the charts for nearly a year. The concert recorded at Pakkahuone comes out in April, titled From Wishes to Eternity. Nightwish play their last concert of the year in Nivala already in mid-September - and it could have well been their swan song, as Vänskä's interest in the band is waning, Turunen spends less and less time with the other musicians, and numerous problems have kept piling up. After finishing the tour, Holopainen states that the story of Nightwish is most likely at its end. While hiking in the wilds of Lapland in the autumn, the mastermind changes his mind, however: Nightwish will continue their career - but only after major tweaks have been made. Ewo Pohjola from Spinefarm Records becomes the band's manager, King Foo Entertainment starts booking the gigs, and Vänskä is replaced by bass player and vocalist Marco Hietala. To mark the beginning of the new era, the band's own online merchandise store Nightwish-Shop is opened in November in connection with the band's home page.
Nightwish quickly gain momentum again, as they start recording Century Child in January. The single Ever Dream comes out in early May and earns them a Finnish Gold Record in two days. After three weeks, Century Child does even better, selling Gold in just two hours. In Germany, the album rises to number five on the official charts. A South American tour in July turns out to be a triumph with many sold-out gigs, and the successful gigs continue in South Korea, Russia, and all over Europe. At the end of the year Nightwish take a break, but the musicians still keep themselves busy with other projects, like Sethian, For My Pain, Timo Rautiainen & Trio Niskalaukaus, Altarian, and Tarot.
Nightwish kick off the year with high-profile appearances in Germany at König-Pilsener Arena, Oberhausen and at Zenith, Munich. In the end, the band manage to squeeze in only a few Finnish gigs but appear on such European festivals as Bloodstock (UK), Lowlands (NL), and M'era Luna (GER). Across the pond, they play places like New York, Atlanta, and Mexico City. A documentary DVD End Of Innocence is released in the beginning of October, and during the final months of the year, the band start recording their fifth album.
Early 2004 flies by fast in the studio, and in early June, Once is released; an hour-long musical masterpiece that introduces new flavours to the band's trademark sound. The British genius Pip Williams has created some majestic orchestral and choral arrangements, and the Native American musician John Two-Hawks appears on the track "Creek Mary's Blood". Once tops the charts in Finland as well as in Germany, Norway, Hungary, and Greece, and becomes the most successful album of the summer in Europe. The first single release Nemo is followed by Wish I Had An Angel, Kuolema Tekee Taiteilijan, and The Siren. The Once World Tour kicks off from Kitee Ice Hall in late May and takes Nightwish on a long journey through USA, South America, and Europe.
As the Once World Tour criss-crosses through Europe in February, Holopainen and Hietala take a short break and fly to Finland, where they are presented with no less than five awards in the prestigious Emma Gala. The European leg of the tour ends on a grand scale, as the band play in Stuttgart, Germany, for over 10.000 people. During a busy summer, Nightwish appear alongside such luminaries as Iron Maiden and Mötley Crüe. Early autumn offers the band no respite, as they continue to sell out places such as Hammersmith Apollo, London and play an arena gig with the Scorpions at a São Paulo arena. In September, a greatest hits album called Highest Hopes: The Best Of Nightwish is released. The Once World Tour culminates in a sold-out gig at Hartwall Arena, Helsinki, where almost 12.000 fans fill the arena. The final gig of the tour is recorded for the forthcoming release End Of An Era. All in all, the Once World Tour comprised of over 130 concerts, enabling the fans in places like Australia, Columbia, Poland, Portugal, and Greece to see the band for the first time. After tireless touring, Once had sold about one million copies. However, the year was not over yet - far from it. Immediately after the final concert, Tarja Turunen is presented with an open letter signed by the musicians in the band. Their message is clear: Holopainen, Nevalainen, Vuorinen, and Hietala have decided to continue Nightwish without Turunen. The Once World Tour had shown the rest of the band that continued collaboration with Turunen and her husband and manager Marcelo Cabuli had become impossible.
As the hullaballoo caused by Turunen's departure slowly dies out, Nightwish announce a search for new vocalist. In early summer, the DVD End Of An Era is released, along with a biography by Mape Ollila called Once Upon A Nightwish. The musicians spend their summer on the Finnish countryside, rehearsing and arranging the songs for their forthcoming album, and the actual recordings begin in September.
All in all, Nightwish receive over two thousand demos from hopeful vocalists. The task seems endless, but slowly but surely the number of candidates decreases. After considering long and hard, the band choose Anette Olzon from Sweden as their new front woman. The recording of Dark Passion Play then continues at Abbey Road studios, London and at Finnvox, Helsinki. The veil of secrecy is lifted at the end of May, when Nightwish announce the identity of their new singer in connection with the release of Eva, the first single off the forthcoming album. Yet another single, Amaranth, is released before Dark Passion Play is finally unleashed in the end of September. The multifaceted album sells 50,000 copies in Finland in one day. Just as Once incorporated new influences to the band's sound a few years earlier, Dark Passion Play also sees Nightwish navigate unknown waters: "Master Passion Greed" is probably the heaviest track the band had ever recorded, while "Last Of The Wilds", featuring the multi-instrumentalist Troy Donockley, takes the listener to the moors of Scottish Highland. The Dark Passion Play World Tour kicks off with three secret warm-up gigs under various pseudonyms, and during the autumn, the band tour heavily in the US as well as in Scandinavia. A video for "The Islander" is also shot in Lapland, and as you will see, this production will have long-lasting effect on the future of Nightwish.
The intensive Dark Passion Play World Tour continues on the first day of the year in Helsinki and takes Nightwish all over the world, from Australia to the Far East, from South America to North America, and onwards to Europe. It's not until the end of the year that the band get some well-earned rock 'n' roll.
The Dark Passion Play World Tour continues in March, as the new live EP Made In Hong Kong (And In Various Other Places) is released. The European venues have become gigantic, as Nightwish appear on arenas such as Ahoy, Rotterdam and Zenith, Paris. After an US tour in the spring and some European festival appearances in the summer, the Dark Passion Play World Tour (that saw the band play no less than 200 gigs) culminates in a sold-out show at the Hartwall Arena in Helsinki. After the tour, the band retire from the public eye, but outside the limelight, there's a lot of stuff going on, as the preparations for the new studio album are already in full swing.
The first months of the year are spent writing music and lyrics, and already in April, Holopainen is ready to record an early demo of the forthcoming album Imaginarium. During the hot summer, Nightwish arrange their own summer camp near Kitee, where they rehearse and arrange the material on Imaginarium, a process that takes a couple of months. The actual recordings begin in October at Petrax studios in Hollola, Finland. The drum, bass, and guitar parts are finished by the end of the year.
February starts with a blast, as Holopainen makes the following statement: "We're recording a concept album, where the moods in the songs vary even more radically than ever before. Our amusement park and its surreal, Burton/Gaiman/Dali-type rides are almost ready."
After a bit over a week, the band reveal a closely-guarded secret. As the press release read: "In all silence, along with their forthcoming album, Nightwish have also been working on a movie. Imaginarium is a musical fantasy based on the album of the same name and its 13 songs."
The double nature of Imaginarium had been conceived already years earlier, as Holopainen had presented Stobe Harju - the director of "The Islander" video - with the idea of shooting 13 music videos for the album. As the director suggested they'd add some dialogue between the songs, the final idea was crystallized: Imaginarium would be a full-length movie that carries a story. The recordings of Imaginarium continued during the first part of the year in Helsinki and London, and once again, Nightwish trusted Pip Williams with the orchestral and choral arrangements. This time there would also to be a children's choir on the album, among other new things. After Anette Olzon had recorded her vocal parts in April, Mikko Karmila could start with the final mix.
In late summer, Nightwish refine the spelling of the title to Imaginarium and announce that the new album will be released in Finland in late November. The single Storytime is released as a taster for the 75-minute roller coaster ride.
In mid-September, Nightwish fly to a Montreal movie studio, where the Imaginarium movie, to be released in spring 2012, is being filmed. The musicians' parts are immortalized during an intensive week. At the same time, the band announce their forthcoming gigs in Europe, while the details of the Finnish tour are revealed in late October. The world tour will kick off from Los Angeles on January 21, 2012.
The last weeks of 2011 will be interesting indeed, as the next year should become the most eventful and exciting in the history of Nightwish.
Having intensively rehearsed their new songs at Nosturi, Helsinki, during early January, Nightwish put their new set to test on a "secret" warm-up gig at Key Club, Los Angeles, on January 19, billed as Rubber Band Of Wolves. The first actual concert of the Imaginaerum World Tour follows two days later at the famous Gibson Amphitheater.
The spring sees the band play Finnish, Ukrainian, Russian, and Continental European arenas, where thousands and thousands of fans get to marvel at the massive Nightwish show, complete with big video screens and spectacular pyrotechnics. Legendary venues include the Hanns-Martin-Schleyer-Halle in Stuttgart, Germany, and Hallenstadion in Zürich, Switzerland, both boasting a capacity of over 10,000.
After the festival season, including appearances at Masters Of Rock, Nova Rock, Download, and Ruisrock festivals, Nightwish embark on a North American tour, unaware that this leg of the tour will become one of their most memorable treks ever.
The unexpected chain of events begins in late September, as vocalist Anette Olzon falls sick and is rushed to hospital just before the concert in Denver, CO. As Nightwish do not want to disappoint the fans that have already filled the venue, after a quick counsel, they decide to take the stage after all, performing the songs with the help of Elize Ryd and Alissa White-Gluzin of the support band Kamelot.
Olzon returns to front the band for one more performance, but nothing can prevent the ending of a chapter in the story of Nightwish. After the concert in Salt Lake City on September 29, Olzon and the band part ways.
The situation is challenging to say the least, as Nightwish's professional ethic does not let them cancel the remaining eleven concerts of the important US tour. The band immediately contact their old friend Floor Jansen, who had proven her vocal skills in the Dutch band After Forever. The timetable seems nearly impossible, but against all odds, Nightwish take the stage in Seattle on October 1st with Floor Jansen as their singer. Having rehearsed the vocal parts during the intercontinental flight, Jansen tackles the formidable challenge amazingly well, and the band get to sigh in relief. The tour can go on, and what's even better, Jansen, whose skillful vocals and dedicated stage presence are immediately recognized, receives a great welcome by the fans on the West Coast, in Florida, and elsewhere in the US.
The Imaginaerum World Tour continues in early November in the UK. The band then rush home in anticipation of the eagerly-awaited world premiere of the movie Imaginaerum at the Hartwall Arena, Helsinki, on November 10, where Nightwish play to a sold-out arena. The successful event leaves everyone with warm memories. The Imaginaerum wine is also launched, and the soundtrack Imaginaerum - The Score is released.
There's still work to be done before the Christmas, however, as Imaginaerum World Tour continues to South America, where the band play ten concerts. The famously passionate and hot-blooded Latin fans give the new front woman a vibrant welcome. The eventful year culminates in two memorable performances in Buenos Aires. Afterwards, they let out a big sigh of relief that could almost be heard in Finland, too.
Nightwish begin 2013 with a bang, as the band hop on a plane immediately after the New Year celebrations to tour Australia and New Zealand, exchanging the Finnish winter for the record heat wave of Australia.
While the spring is quiet on the live front, there's laurels to be collected: in the Finnish Emma Awards in March, Nightwish win the categories Metal Album Of The Year and Band Of The Year. The movie Imaginaerum By Nightwish is also released in April in numerous formats.
The band hit the road again in May, playing four concerts in Japan. A Nightwish exhibition is opened in Kitee, Finland, where guests of the local history museum get to see artifacts connected to the band's history.
The second festival season of The Imaginaerum World Tour starts at Sauna Open Air in Tampere, Finland, and the highlights of the summer include Ilosaarirock in Joensuu, a "home festival" for the band, where they play in front of 25,000 people, Byblos in Lebanon, and Midnattsrocken in Lakselv, northern Norway.
There's excitement in the Nightwish camp in early August, as the concert at Wacken Open Air will be shot for the forthcoming live release. Over 80,000 fans witness a spectacular performance in northern Germany. A week later, The Imaginaerum World Tour that had ran for 18 months and over 100 concerts is capped off at the M'era Luna festival.
In September Nightwish get more well-earned recognition in Germany, as Metal Hammer magazine awards the band with the title Best International Band.
In early October Nightwish fans are thrilled to hear the new line-up confirmed: having been accepted by the fans, Floor Jansen is expectedly announced as the new vocalist, and the British multi-instrumentalist Troy Donockley, who has collaborated with the band for years, is simultaneously confirmed as a permanent member of the band.
Late November sees the release of Showtime, Storytime, a DVD/Blu-Ray that, in addition to the spectacular Wacken Open Air performance, also features a two-hour documentary film Please Learn The Setlist In 48 Hours. Directed by Ville Lipiäinen, the film follows the band on their roller-coaster ride through The Imaginaerum World Tour.
In 2014, the band will concentrate on writing their next album, scheduled for spring 2015 release, while a new world tour is being booked. As a taster of what's to come, let us reveal that the forthcoming album will feature, among others, the longest song in the history of the band so far.
(Source: Official website, 30.1.2013)


He was lamenting the lack of intellectual stimulus for students majoring in Science.
Reams of facts have to be memorized, tested then forgotten. It seemed fairly pointless. He could have scored a string of As without understanding the whys and hows.
Social sciences - psychology, economics, political science - are, comparatively, more relevant to real life.
But, as he studied these disciplines, there was an increasing awareness of how inward looking they essentially are. There is an obsession with examining the past to project into the future. There is an unhealthy preoccupation with sitting around in comfy chairs to criticise current affairs without engaging in meaningful, forward-looking activities.
Make no mistake: criticism is necessary for progress. But such criticism must be tempered with good sense. There must be a limit at which people cease writing superfluously long essays and start making a difference with their actions. Well-meaning intentions must be augmented with proactive changes.
So, where does this leave him?
He must learn to love the earth sciences; there's no point being miserable over it. After all, chemistry is an acquired taste. The subject is like the Hunchback of Notre Dame - fairly ugly at a distance but really quite lovable up close.
He must read the finest readings in the social sciences and diligently apply the hard-earned knowledge. It is easy to lapse into a state of limbo, but no, he mustn't do that.
To balance earth sciences with social sciences... Now, that's an art.


text:
Reading: Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator
Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator
Carolin Dudschig ,
School of Psychology, Tübingen University, DE
About Carolin
Barbara Kaup
Negation is a critical cognitive operator that is investigated across a wide range of psychological phenomena (e.g., language, eating control, emotion control, stereotype processing). A core function of negation is reversing input information. In the current study, we investigated whether this reversing process benefits from temporal preparation. In Experiment 1, participants were first presented with either the negator "not" or the affirmative counterpart "now", and in a variable delay with the response indicating stimulus "left" or "right". Participants had to respond according to phrase meaning (e.g., "now right" ➔ right response; "not right" ➔ left response). The results showed a persisting negation effect of 150 ms that did not reduce with preparatory time. In Experiment 2, we replicated this study using non-linguistic input information (i.e. crosses, tick-marks and arrows). Again, despite standard temporal preparation effects being present, the reversal process itself did not benefit from preparatory time. In summary, these experiments suggest that capacity demanding reversal processes are not eased if we know that a reversal process is coming up soon. This is particularly interesting, as in the current experiments a very basic binary negation paradigm was implemented. The implications of these results for models of negation processing are discussed.
Keywords: Word processing, Cognitive Control, Reading
How to Cite: Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2020). Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Accepted on 03 Aug 2020 Submitted on 07 May 2019
Negation is typically an effortful and cognitively demanding process (e.g., Deutsch, Gawronski, & Strack, 2006; Deutsch, Kordts-Freudinger, Gawronski, & Strack, 2009; Dudschig & Kaup, 2018). To date, negation has been investigated across various research disciplines. For example, negation is of interest in philosophy, in linguistics, in animal research, and psychology. In psychology, research on the processing of negation has been carried out in various subfields, for instance in research dealing with language comprehension (e.g., Nieuwland & Kuperberg, 2008), in research investigating control processes related to action planning (e.g., Wegner, Ansfield, & Pilloff, 1998), emotion control (e.g., Herbert, Deutsch, Platte, & Pauli, 2012; Herbert, Deutsch, Sütterlin, Kübler & Pauli, 2011) and eating control (e.g., Adriaanse, van Oosten, de Ridder, de Wit, & Evers, 2011), as well as in research on rule-breaking (e.g., Pfister, Wirth, Schwarz, Steinhauser, & Kunde, 2016; Wirth, Pfister, Foerster, Huestegge, & Kunde, 2016), and stereotype modification (e.g., Gawronski, Deutsch, Mbirkou, Seibt, & Strack, 2008; Kawakami, Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen, & Russin, 2000). Recently, research into the mechanisms underlying the processing of negation has moved towards a more integrated approach, investigating negation as a central cognitive operation that falls-back on general cognitive mechanisms, such as inhibition or control (e.g., Beltrán, Muñetón-Ayala, & de Vega, 2018; Dudschig & Kaup, 2018; Dudschig & Kaup 2020; de Vega, Morera, León, Beltrán, Casado, & Martín-Loeches, 2016; Wirth, Kunde, & Pfister, 2019). Despite negation being such a central cognitive operator that is involved in various key cognitive domains, it is currently still widely discussed whether certain conditions help or hinder negation processing.
Given the diverse fields under which negation is investigated, we are currently far from a unifying explanation of the processes and mechanisms contributing to negation processing. One of the few agreements in the negation literature seems to be the fact that negation processing is typically difficult and demands increased cognitive resources. However, the source of this difficulty is still rather unclear. Intuitively, negation might be difficult to process because negated statements often leave open what the factual situation is. For example, when understanding a sentence such as "The dress is not red", it remains unclear what colour the dress is (in the following non-binary negation). However, prolonged processing times for negated statements are also observed in situations where this is not the case. Such binary negation is present when the meaning of the negated statement equals the meaning of an affirmative statement (e.g., "The door is not open" => the door is closed), or when only two values of a certain attribute dimension are implemented such that a negative statement (e.g., "The dots are not blue") allows inferring the factual property (e.g., "The dots are red"; for an overview, see Kaup & Dudschig, 2020). Taken together it seems that negation processing demands certain additional processing steps relative to affirmation, both for binary and non-binary negation. In the literature on negation processing, researchers have discussed several possibilities for such additional processing steps, namely processes related to inhibition or suppression (e.g., Giora, Fein, Aschkenazi & Alkabets-Zlozover, 2007; McDonald & Just, 1987), processes related to tagging information in the scope of the negation operator as false (Clark & Chase, 1972; Mayo, Schul, & Burnstein, 2004), as well as meaning-reversion processes particularly in the case of binary negation (e.g., Clark & Chase, 1974; Deutsch et al., 2006).
In the language processing literature, two factors have been investigated that presumably ease negation processing. First, it has been suggested that the pragmatically licenced use of negation makes negation integration accessible and easy, and second, it has been suggested that additional time facilitates negation processing. With regard to pragmatic licensing, it has been argued that negation is such a common phenomenon in everyday language that there must be situations in which negation processing takes place rather spontaneously without demanding additional processing time or resources. Accordingly, several studies have aimed at investigating negation in language situations in which negation is used in a pragmatically licensed manner (e.g., "With the proper equipment, scuba-diving isn't very dangerous") and indeed observed that negation integration took place instantly during comprehension (Nieuwland & Kuperberg, 2008). Nieuwland (2016) extended these findings and showed that such initial integration only takes place in situations where negation occurs in sentences that are highly constraining and therefore evolve in a highly predictable manner. However, such pragmatic licencing of negation is not present and also not possible in all situations of negation use. As mentioned above, negation as a cognitive operator is also implemented in other domains such as eating control, emotion control or as an instruction to reverse certain input information and is not even always used in a linguistic format. For example, when investigating the comprehension of traffic signs involving symbols indicating "no right turn" (Walker, Nicolay, & Stearns, 1965; see also Giora, Heruti, Metuki & Fein, 2009) or in situations where negation is used as a maker to indicate to reverse certain information (e.g., stereotype processing, mental control). In these cases, there seems no instance of licencing the use of negation. Indeed, negation has been shown to be extremely difficult to process under all these circumstances.
In addition to the benefits from pragmatic licencing of negation use, it has been suggested that unlicensed linguistic negation integration benefits from additional processing time. In the studies by Kaup et al. (2006), additional time after encountering the negated proposition (e.g. "The door is not closed") allowed comprehenders to integrate the negation into the meaning representation. Here, following a delay of 1500 ms, an image depicting the factual situation (e.g., an open door) was processed faster than an image depicting the non-factual situation (e.g., a closed door); see also Hasson & Glucksberg, 2006). However, in these studies, the additional time was given after both the negator and the to-be-negated proposition was presented. Thus, these studies do not allow conclusions regarding whether additional time to deal with the negator itself facilitates subsequent core processes of tagging, suppressing or reversing of information. In contrast, these studies show that if there is additional processing time after encountering the full to-be-negated information, comprehenders are indeed able to integrate un-licenced negations to a level that the final meaning represents the factual states of affairs (see also Dudschig & Kaup, 2018). In this context, an electrophysiological study by Dudschig, Mackenzie, Kaup and Leuthold (2018) is of particular relevance. In this study, it has been shown that negation does not benefit from additional time if provided prior to the information in the negator's scope (e.g., "It is not true that ladybirds are stripy"). Critically however, this study did not involve binary negations, or in other words, did not implement attribute dimensions that allowed the inference of the factual state of affairs from a negated statement (if a ladybird is not stripy, we don't know what it is instead). Therefore, it remains to be answered whether those aspects of negation processing that are presumably involved in the processing of binary negation can be eased by additional time. In the current study, we focus on processes related to meaning reversal. We consider it likely that in the processing of binary negation (e.g., "not left" ➔ right keypress; "not right" ➔ left keypress) preparatory time allows preparing the reversal process. Here, we aim to investigate such negation-related reversal processes by analysing whether preparatory time helps with these processes.
In cognitive psychology, temporal preparation is a well-studied phenomenon. When executing standard choice or simple stimulus-response tasks, it is well known that two core factors influence response time: event preparation and temporal preparation (Jennings & Van der Molen, 2005). Temporal preparation is typically investigated by means of presenting a warning signal that allows participants to prepare for the upcoming response without specifying response parameters (e.g., Niemi & Näätänen, 1981). Also, other mental operators, such as task switching highly benefit from temporal preparation (e.g., Meiran & Daichman, 2005). In the current study, we aim to investigate whether temporal preparation will facilitate the upcoming reversal processes as a key component of processing binary negation. Therefore, in our current experiment we use the phrases "not left", "now left", "not right" and "now right". Participants are asked to respond according to phrase meaning (Dudschig & Kaup, 2018). Importantly, in this study, we vary the temporal distance between the presentation of the negation information (i.e. "not" vs. "now") and the response triggering stimulus (i.e. "left" or "right") across five fixed intervals, giving the participants more or less time to prepare for the upcoming reversal process. In a previous study we showed that a similar paradigm – without manipulating temporal distance – resulted in an increase of processing time by approximately 150 ms in the negation compared to the non-negation condition, and even at the end of the experimental session, the negation effect persisted (Dudschig & Kaup, 2018). Electrophysiological data supported the claim that such a type of negation demands a cognitive reversal process, as initially incorrect motor activation was found over the motor cortex ipsilateral to the response side. Only later this activation was reversed to result in activation of the correct motor cortex. In the current experiment, we expect in line with the temporal preparation literature reaction times to be fastest in the longest stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) condition (e.g., Niemi & Näätänen, 1981; Trillenberg, Verleger, Wascher, Wauschkuhn, & Wessel, 2000). Second, if reversal processes in this setup can be prepared with additional time, we expect a reduction of the negation effect with increasing SOA. In contrast, if reversal processes are not facilitated by additional preparation time, we expect the negation effect not to interact with the SOA.
In our view, the results of the current study will also be informative with respect to a classic question within the negation processing literature. According to the two-step model of negation processing, comprehenders grasp the meaning of a negative sentence by mentally simulating two states of affairs. In a first step, they simulate the non-factual state of affairs (i.e., a stripy ladybird for "this ladybird is not stripy"). In a second step, they turn their attention away from this simulation and instead focus on simulating the factual state of affairs (i.e. a dotted ladybird, or a ladybird without a specific pattern in case the comprehender lacks the respective knowledge). Importantly, the first processing step (simulating the non-factual state of affairs) is an integral part of negation processing, both for binary and non-binary negation (cf. Kaup, Yaxley, Madden, Zwaan, & Lüdtke, 2007; Kaup, Zwaan, & Lütke, 2007). In contrast, according to the fusion model of negation processing, comprehenders only engage in the first processing step for negative sentences with non-binary negation where the comprehender does not have enough knowledge to simulate the factual state of affairs (e.g. "The dress was not red" – here it remains unclear what colour the dress was). For binary negation (e.g. "The door is not open"), however, the comprehender presumably fuses the negation operator with the respective attribute and arrives at the factual state of affairs (= the door is closed) within one processing step (e.g., Horn, 1989; Lyons, 1995; Mayo, Schul, & Burnstein, 2004). Concerning the question investigated in the current experiment, namely whether negation-related reversal processes are facilitated by additional time between processing the negation operator (i.e., "not") and processing the spatial term (i.e., "left" vs. "right"), the two processing models of negation make different predictions. According to the two-step model of negation processing, comprehenders always need to mentally simulate the negated state of affairs in order grasp the meaning of the negated phrase. For "not left" they need to simulate "left" and for "not right" they need to simulate "right" in a first processing step. As the content of the simulation depends on the spatial term, additional time between negation operator and spatial term should not facilitate negation processing. In contrast, according to the fusion model, the binary negation in phrases such as "not left" and "not right" in the context of an experiment with only two spatial terms allows for the possibility that comprehenders directly fuse "not right" into "left" and "not left" into "right". From the perspective of this processing model, it therefore seems well conceivable that additional time between processing the negation operator and processing the spatial term might allow participants to prepare the reversal process and therefore facilitate negation processing. Thus, in our view, finding evidence for facilitation by additional time in the current paradigm would be more in line with the fusion model than with the two-step model of negation processing.
In the first experiment we used standard linguistic negation whereby the word "not" or "now" indicated whether participants either had to respond to the meaning of the following spatial term "left" or "right" or had to reverse their response. The phrases "not" and "now" were temporally separated from the spatial terms in order to investigate the influence of preparation on the subsequent reversal process.
20 participants were tested, Mage = 25.25, SDage = 4.12, range = 19 to 36, 16 female, 19 right handed. Sample sizes were determined using the partial eta square form the previous study investigating negation in a similar experimental setup (Dudschig & Kaup, 2018), resulting in a sample size of 8 participants in order to replicate the negation effect. As we were interested in investigating an influence of an additional factor (SOA) on the negation effect, we increased sample size to 20. We had planned to remove the data of individual participants from the subsequent analysis if their overall error rate was greater than a predefined error rate of 20%. No data had to be removed. Participants were paid 8€/h or received course credits. All participants provided signed informed consent prior to the experiment.
Stimuli and Procedure
The experimental procedure was programmed in Matlab using the Psychtoolbox 3.0.15 (Kleiner, Brainard, Pelli, Ingling, Murray, & Broussard, 2007) and presented on a Linux computer running Ubuntu 18.04 displayed on a CRT. All stimuli were displayed in black (RGB 0,0,0) on a white (RGB 255,255,255) background. Each trial started with a fixation cross presented for 750 ms (ca. 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm). This was followed by the presentation of the German word for "not" (=nicht) or "now" (=jetzt) for 300 ms (ca. 1 cm × 0.5 cm). Subsequently, there followed a random SOA of 100 ms, 300 ms, 600 ms, 1000 ms or 1500 ms with a blank screen until the response triggering German directional word ("left" (=links) or "right" (=rechts)), was presented. The word took up approximately 1.3 × 0.5 cm. The word stayed on the screen until response or for 2000 ms if no response occurred. It followed a 1000 ms interval until the fixation cross was presented again. If participants did not respond within 2000 ms, the feedback "too slow" was displayed for 1000 ms. If participants responded anticipatory and thereby faster than 150 ms (see Dudschig & Kaup, 2018), the feedback "too fast" was displayed. In the case of an error, the feedback "error" was displayed. The experiment consisted of six experimental blocks with 100 trials each, resulting in 60 trials in each experimental condition. The experiment started with a practice block consisting of 20 trials.
The experimental design was a 2(polarity: affirmative vs. negated) * 5(SOA: 100, 300, 600, 1000 vs. 1500 ms) repeated measures design. The dependent variables were reaction times (RT) and error rates.
The overall error rate was 4.83%. Individual trials classified as too fast (<150 ms) or too slow (>1500 ms) were removed from the subsequent reaction time analysis, resulting in 0.55% percentage of trials removed as outliers. The analysis of the RTs showed a main effect of negation F(1,19) = 170.86, p < .001, η2p = .90 (Maff = 525 ms, Mneg = 645 ms). There was also a main effect of SOA, F(4,76) = 11.41, p < .001, η2p = .38 (M100 = 602 ms, M300 = 601 ms, M600 = 581 ms, M1000 = 579 ms, M1500 = 562 ms). Importantly for the current question under investigation, there was no interaction between negation and SOA, F(4,76) = 1.24, p = .30, η2p = .06, suggesting that additional time to prepare for the upcoming reversal process did not facilitate it. The error rates mirrored the main findings: There was a main effect of negation, F(1,19) = 10.92, p < .001, η2p = .36 (Maff = 3.17%, Mneg = 6.23%) and no interaction between negation and SOA, F(4,76) = 1.57, p =.21, η2p = .08. The SOA however did not influence the error rates, F(4,76) = 0.66, p = .55, η2p = .03. Mean reaction times and error rates in the ten different conditions are displayed in Figure 1.1
Reaction time (top) and error rate (bottom) of Experiment 1 as a function of polarity (negation vs. affirmation) and SOA. The error-bars represent ±1 SEM.
The current experiment shows that additional time to prepare for an upcoming negation does not benefit the negation process. Both the RTs and error rates were affected by negation and did not significantly benefit from increased preparatory time regarding the negation process. This is rather surprising, especially given that in the current experimental setup only two directional words (left vs. right) were used. Therefore preparation should, in principle, be possible following the processing of the negation operator, at least according to the fusion model of negation processing. The current results therefore underscore the wide held assumption that negation processing is inherently difficult and fits well with the view that negation processing involves two processing steps, even in case the negation is binary.
According to the two-step model of negation processing (e.g. Kaup et al., 2007), the first processing step of simulating the non-factual state of affairs reflects pragmatic aspects of language processing. The contexts in which negation is used during everyday communication are rather limited. Negation is typically used to communicate exceptions from rules or expectancies or to correct a previously made assumption (for an overview, see Moeschler, 1992). When encountering a negation out of the blue, comprehenders can therefore be assumed to infer the respective context, accommodating the rule, the expectancy or the previous statement. Thus, when encountering a sentence such as "The ladybird is not stripy" comprehenders are assumed to "infer" that there is reason to assume that the ladybird is stripy or that someone must have made such a statement. This accommodation of the missing context is reflected in the first simulation step during which a stripy ladybird is being conceptualized. In a pragmatically felicitous context, this accommodation is either unnecessary or particularly easy, and negation processing is thus facilitated. As pragmatics is part of the linguistic system, it seems conceivable that these kinds of accommodation processes are limited to negation use in language. In the next experiment, we therefore investigated whether negation processing can indeed be facilitated by additional time in case of non-linguistic negation. Maybe here, the first simulation step is not necessary, and the fusion model is the better description of the processing of negation.
The results of Experiment 1 show that negation integration processes do not seem to benefit from preparatory time. Experiment 2 was designed to replicate Experiment 1, but this time using a non-linguistic type of negation and non-linguistic directional symbol. This was done to investigate whether the findings from Experiment 1 are due to specifics in the linguistic system. Thus, Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1 with the only difference being that instead of words, pictorial negation symbols and arrows as directional cues were used (see also Dudschig & Kaup, in revision).
20 participants (Mage = 26.5, SDage = 5.05, range = 19 to 37, 13 female, 16 right handed) took part in this experiment. As in Experiment 1, it was planned to remove the data of individual participants from the subsequent analysis if their overall error rate was greater than a predefined error rate of 20%. In this experiment, this resulted in the removal of the data of one participant. Participants were paid 8€/h or received course credits. All participants signed informed consent.
The procedure was identical to Experiment 1, but this time instead of the linguistic words a pictorial stimulus type was used. These stimuli were all unicode symbols (check mark (✔) with decimal code: ✔ ballot x (✗) with decimal code ✗ leftwards arrow (←) with decimal code: ← rightwards arrow (→) with decimal code: &#8594).
The overall error rate was 6.51%. Individual trials classified as too fast (<150 ms) or too slow (>1500 ms) were removed from the subsequent reaction time analysis, which resulted in the removal of 1.02% of the trials. There was a main effect of negation, F(1,18) = 45.37, p < .001, η2p = .72 (Maff = 472 ms, Mneg = 527 ms). There was also a main effect of SOA, F(4,72) = 8.99, p < .001, η2p = .33 (M100 = 516 ms, M300 = 504, ms, M600 = 507 ms, M1000 = 487 ms, M1500 = 482 ms). As in Experiment 1, there was no interaction between the negation effect and the SOA, F(4,72) = 0.94, p = .42, η2p = .05. The error rates showed no significant effects (main effect negation: F(1,18) = 1.19, p = .29, η2p = .06; main effect SOA: F(4,72) = 2.17, p = .09, η2p = .11; interaction: F(4,72) = 0.47, p = .70 η2p = .03). Mean reaction times and error rates in the ten different conditions of Experiment 2 are displayed in Figure 22.
Experiment 2 was planned as a conceptual replication of Experiment 1 with the use of pictorial instead of linguistic input. The core results replicated the findings from Experiment 1, suggesting that negation processing is similar for linguistic and non-linguistic negation, in particular concerning the view that negation processing involves conceptualizing what it is that is being negated during a first processing step. Nevertheless, there were some surprising differences, especially with regard to the negation effect. First, the negation effects seemed much smaller in Experiment 2 than in Experiment 1. Second, the error rates were not affected by negation in this experiment, in which a non-linguistic input format was used. In order to determine whether these differences were significant, a post-hoc analysis was performed directly comparing the two experiments. Therefore, we ran an ANOVA with the three factors: polarity, SOA and experiment. The analysis of the RTs showed a main effect of experiment, F(1,37) = 5.91, p = .02, η2p = .14, due to RTs in average being faster in Experiment 2 (Mpictorial = 499 ms) compared to Experiment 1 (Mlinguistic = 585 ms). Additionally, there was the to-be-expected main effect of polarity, F(1,37) = 205.52, p < .001, η2p = .85, due to negation trials (Mneg = 587 ms) being slower than affirmative trials (Maff = 499 ms). Also the main effect of SOA was significant, F(4,148) = 18.78, p < .001, η2p = .34, due to a decrease in RTs with increasing SOA. Most interestingly, the interaction between Experiment and polarity was significant, F(1,37) = 28.03, p < .001, η2p = .43, indicating that there was a smaller negation effect in Experiment 2 (Mneg – Maff = 55 ms) than in Experiment 1 (Mneg – Maff = 120 ms). No other interaction was significant. In the analysis with error rates, only the effect of polarity was significant, F(1,37) = 10.84, p < .001, η2p = .23, with smaller error rates in the affirmative than in the negated condition. There was no significant interaction with the factor Experiment.
Despite negating information being a core cognitive function – also linguistically present in every language (Horn, 1989) – it is still debated why negating is so difficult and how this process could be facilitated. In the negation processing literature, there is clear evidence that pragmatic licencing eases negation integration (Nieuwland, 2016; Nieuwland & Kuperberg, 2008) and additionally that time is a crucial factor for negation integration (e.g., Kaup, Lüdtke & Zwaan, 2006). Interestingly, up to date it remains unclear how this factor of time actually helps with the specific process of negating. The current experiments were designed to investigate the potential benefit of temporal preparation for negation processing. Two experiments – using both linguistic and pictorial negation – showed that additional preparatory time does not benefit the core process of reversing. Participants were presented with the negator "not" and subsequently had between 100 ms and 1500 ms to prepare for the upcoming reversing process. However, this additional time to prepare did not ease the actual impact of negation. Specifically, across all five SOA conditions there persisted a negation effect of approximately 150 ms. This is specifically surprising given the fact that in the current study an experimental setup was implemented that demanded a binary reversing process given the input information. What could be the reasons making negation processing such a difficult process?
Negation has been shown to be hard to comprehend, difficult to integrate into action plans and to demand specific licencing processes in numerous studies. Nevertheless, it has been demonstrated that even subliminal presentation of a negator implemented in negator-noun pairs (e.g., pick baby vs. not baby) can be processed to a level that it correctly modifies subsequent tendencies towards the choice of the correct noun (e.g., baby vs. other word (e.g. yard)) (Armstrong & Dienes, 2013). Importantly, this study focused on showing that even a subliminally presented negator can influence subsequent choices. However, this study did not demand a full integration of the negator and the noun, and the results therefore do not necessarily indicate that participants engaged in reversal processes. Interestingly, the current study shows that in situations where negation is used to reverse the given input information, there seems hardly any possibility of preparing for this reversal process. As this holds both for linguistic and pictorial input information, it can be concluded that negation under these circumstances does not benefit from preparatory time. For linguistic input, one might argue that specifics in the linguistic input might hinder such a preparatory process. However, for visual input in the form of arrows, one might assume that during a preparatory time, an internal preparation for the upcoming reversal process might take place, which was not the case.
As argued in the introduction, we consider this result to fit well with the view that negation processing involves two processing steps (Kaup et al., 2007), even in the case of binary negation. When grasping the meaning of "not left", comprehenders must first grasp the meaning of "left" and only in a second step integrate the negation and arrive at the factual situation (right). The first step depends on the spatial term used in the current trial and processing can therefore not be sped up by additional time between encountering the negation operator and the spatial term. The fact that additional time did not lead to processing ease for both linguistic and non-linguistic negation suggests that the first processing step is not only required for linguistic negation processing, but also for non-linguistic negation processing. This seems to speak against the idea that pragmatic aspects are at the root of the first processing step. Alternatively, pictorial negation might be similarly dependent on context as linguistic negation. After all, pictorial negation is probably also mainly used in situations in which the state of affairs that is being negated constitutes at least a possibility. For instance, it would probably be surprising to encounter a crossed out left-pointing arrow as a road sign in a situation in which there is no left turn road.
There is, however, another interesting aspect supported by the current two experiments, that actually does point towards a difference in the way the linguistic and pictorial information is processed. Negation processing often triggers ironic effects of negation (Wegner, Ansfield & Pilloff, 1998): Ironic action effects occur when a comprehender executes exactly the response or behaviour that should explicitly not be executed. For example, Wegner, Ansfield and Pilloff report that during putting a golf ball or swinging a pendulum, participants more likely performed the to-be-avoided type of action (e.g., don't overshoot -> overshooting) than in conditions in which they were not explicitly instructed to avoid this exact type of behaviour. Such effects are not only observed in the domain of action planning, but also for mental control (e.g., "Don't think about the pink elephant", Wegner & Erber, 1992) or eating control (Adriaanse et al., 2011). One could argue that in the current experiment such ironic effects of negation were observed in the error data: Especially in Experiment 1 using linguistic negation, participants exhibited an increased error rate in the negation condition – showing that they are more likely to execute the to-be-negated response (e.g., "not left" -> participants press the left response key). Interestingly, this pattern did not occur when using pictorial input format in Experiment 2, suggesting that ironic action effects are specifically triggered by linguistic input in such an experimental setup. Therefore, indeed specificities in the linguistic system seem to underlie the way negation is processed. One explanatory attempt would be to argue that ironic effects reflect the first processing step and that this is more pronounced for linguistic than non-linguistic negation because of pragmatic aspects of language. However, as argued above, if non-linguistic negation processing does not involve the first processing step then we would have expected to see facilitatory effects in the longer SOA conditions for non-linguistic negation, which is not what we observed. Therefore, it seems unlikely that differences with respect to pragmatic aspects explain the differences between the two input formats. A further difference between the two input formats related to the size of the negation effect. Pictorial negation led to a smaller negation effect than linguistic negation. One possible interpretation is that linguistic negation is highly associated with prohibition during language acquisition and might therefore carry a highly unpleasant connotation. Maybe some part of the negation effect in linguistic processing indeed reflects processing difficulties due to this negative connotation (for an overview see Kaup & Dudschig, in press). Our studies do not allow to draw definite conclusions with respect to the discussed explanations of format differences. Further studies are clearly needed to better understand when and how negation processing in different input domains differ, and which types of input domains are more likely to trigger erroneous behaviour.
There is a final major question that needs to be addressed with regard to the current study and findings: In how far can the results be explained from an action-control perspective? In both experiments participants operate a spatial stimulus-response task (see Miles & Proctor, 2012). It could now be argued that in the affirmative condition participants can formulate basic stimulus-response bindings, where the stimulus word "left" (vs. "right") is bound to the left vs. right response – a congruent stimulus-response code mapping. In the negated condition such bindings are resulting in a conflicting representation, as participants need to link the word "left" ("right") to a right (vs. left) response. In such a view, the incongruency between the stimulus and response code in the negated condition can explain the main effect of negation. Also, in the Miles and Proctor study (Experiment 3, incompatible condition) participants were instructed to press the opposite direction of what is implied by a word, location or arrow stimulus. In line with the results of the current study, the spatial compatibility effects were stronger for words than for arrows under such conditions (cf. Vu & Proctor, 2004). Critically, in the current study we don't have a general instruction to follow that instructs to reverse the stimulus code to the opposite, instead in each trial we have the negation or affirmation cue that indicates whether participants need to follow the standard stimulus-response mapping or whether they need to reverse the mapping. From an action-control perspective it might be highly unlikely that participants are able to prepare for such cued reversal process. Indeed, our study shows that such a reversal process is extremely difficult.
In the present paradigm, there was a relatively tight coupling between the linguistic codes and the expected behaviour. Therefore, the findings of the present study possible do not generalize to all types of language processing where the coupling is often more diffuse. However, it should be noted that also in everyday language there sometimes exist exactly such a tight coupling where language is used to instruct or inhibit certain behaviour, especially with the use of negation (e.g. "Don't run across the street"). In any case, the results of the present study indicate that reversal processes that are typically involved in the processing of certain types of negations cannot be effectively prepared. Thus, the question outlined in the introduction whether adding more time in between the negation and the information in its scope would facilitate the reversal process can be answered with no.
In summary, to date it has been shown that pragmatic licensing of negation – in a manner that allows prediction of the upcoming information – allows instant negation integration to occur. The current study shows that temporally preparing for an upcoming reversal process does not ease the reversal process itself. Therefore, it seems that negation that calls for reversing the input information is a highly demanding process for the cognitive system. Such findings are in line with the two-step model of negation processing according to which grasping the meaning of a negative sentence requires grasping the meaning of what is being negated as a first processing step. These results are also consistent with previous claims regarding ironic effects of negation, indicating that negation probably should be avoided for instructions even if there is sufficient preparatory time. Interestingly, especially in the linguistic experiment, the error rates remained increased in the negation condition, directly supporting that idea that ironic effects of negation occur across all preparatory intervals to a similar level.
Data Accessibility Statement
Data will be made available upon publication on the Potsdam Mind Research Repository (http://openscience.uni-leipzig.de/index.php/mr2).
1In addition, the Bayes factor was determined (Wetzels, van Ravenzwaaij, & Wagenmakers, 2015). For the RTs, the test of the model with only the main effects against the model containing the interaction between polarity and SOA resulted in a Bayes factor of approx. 10, which can be interpreted as strong evidence against the interaction. For the analysis of error rates a Bayes factor of approx. 7 resulted, providing moderate evidence against the interaction.
2In addition, the Bayes factor was determined. For the RTs the interaction between polarity and SOA resulted in a Bayes factor of approx. 10, which can be interpreted as strong evidence against the interaction. For the analysis of error rates a Bayes factor of approx. 15 resulted, providing strong evidence against the interaction.
Approvedby the ethics committee of the Psychology Department at the University of Tübingen (falling under the ethics 2018_0831_132).
We thank our student assistants Lena Naumann and Emily Herter for help with collecting the data. Funding was provided by the DFG ().
Adriaanse, M. A., van Oosten, J. M., de Ridder, D. T., de Wit, J. B., & Evers, C. (2011). Planning what not to eat: Ironic effects of implementation intentions negating unhealthy habits. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(1), 69–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210390523
Armstrong, A. M., & Dienes, Z. (2013). Subliminal understanding of negation: Unconscious control by subliminal processing of word pairs. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(3), 1022–1040. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2013.06.010
Beltrán, D., Muñetón-Ayala, M., & de Vega, M. (2018). Sentential negation modulates inhibition in a stop-signal task. Evidence from behavioral and ERP data. Neuropsychologia, 112, 10–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.03.004
Clark, H. H., & Chase, W. G. (1972). On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 472–517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(72)90019-9
Clark, H. H., & Chase, W. G. (1974). Perceptual coding strategies in the formation and verification of descriptions. Memory & Cognition, 2(1), 101–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197499
Deutsch, R., Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2006). At the boundaries of automaticity: negation as reflective operation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(3), 385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.385
Deutsch, R., Kordts-Freudinger, R., Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2009). Fast and fragile: A new look at the automaticity of negation processing. Experimental Psychology, 56(6), 434–446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.56.6.434
Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2018). How does "not left" become "right"? Electrophysiological evidence for a dynamic conflict-bound negation processing account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(5), 716–728. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000481
Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2020). Negation as conflict: Conflict adaptation following negating vertical spatial words. Brain and Language. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2020.104842
Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (in revision).
Dudschig, C., Mackenzie, I. G., Leuthold, H., & Kaup, B. (2018). Environmental sound priming: Does negation modify N400 cross-modal priming effects? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(4), 1441–1448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1388-3
Gawronski, B., Deutsch, R., Mbirkou, S., Seibt, B., & Strack, F. (2008). When "just say no" is not enough: Affirmation versus negation training and the reduction of automatic stereotype activation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(2), 370–377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.004
Giora, R., Fein, O., Aschkenazi, K., & Alkabets-Zlozover, I. (2007). Negation in context: A functional approach to suppression. Discourse Processes, 43(2), 153–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530709336896
Giora, R., Heruti, V., Metuki, N., & Fein, O. (2009). "When we say no we mean no": Interpreting negation in vision and language. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(11), 2222–2239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.041
Hasson, U., & Glucksberg, S. (2006). Does understanding negation entail affirmation? An examination of negated metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 1015–1032. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.005
Herbert, C., Deutsch, R., Platte, P., & Pauli, P. (2012). No fear, no panic: probing negation as a means for emotion regulation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8(6), 654–661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss043
Herbert, C., Deutsch, R., Sütterlin, S., Kübler, A., & Pauli, P. (2011). Negation as a means for emotion regulation? Startle reflex modulation during processing of negated emotional words. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 11(2), 199–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-011-0026-1
Horn, L. (1989). A natural history of negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jennings, J. R., & van der Molen, M. W. (2005). Preparation for speeded action as a psychophysiological concept. Psychological Bulletin, 131(3), 434–459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.3.434
Kaup, B., & Dudschig, C. (2020). Understanding negation: Issues on the processing of negation. The Oxford Handbook of Negation.
Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1033–1050. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.012
Kaup, B., Yaxley, R. H., Madden, C. J., Zwaan, R. A., & Lüdtke, J. (2007). Experiential simulation of negated text information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 976–990. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210600823512
Kaup, B., Zwaan, R. A., & Lüdtke, J. (2007). The experiential view of language comprehension: How is negation represented? In F. Schmalhofer & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes (pp. 255–288). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kawakami, K., Dovidio, J. F., Moll, J., Hermsen, S., & Russin, A. (2000). Just say no (to stereotyping): Effects of training in the negation of stereotypic associations on stereotype activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.5.871
Kleiner, M., Brainard, D., Pelli, D., Ingling, A., Murray, R., & Broussard, C. (2007). What's new in Psychtoolbox-3. Perception, 36(14), 1.
Lyons, J. (1995). Linguistic semantics: An introduction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810213
Mayo, R., Schul, Y., & Burnstein, E. (2004). "I am not guilty" vs "I am innocent": Successful negation may depend on the schema used for its encoding. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 433–449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.07.008
Meiran, N., & Daichman, A. (2005). Advance task preparation reduces task error rate in the cuing task-switching paradigm. Memory & Cognition, 33(7), 1272–1288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193228
Miles, J. D., & Proctor, R. W. (2012). Correlations between spatial compatibility effects: are arrows more like locations or words? Psychological Research, 76(6), 777–791. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-011-0378-8
Moeschler, J. (1992). The pragmatic aspects of linguistic negation: Speech act, argumentation and pragmatic inference. Argumentation, 6, 51–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154259
Niemi, P., & Näätänen, R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychological bulletin, 89(1), 133–162. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.89.1.133
Nieuwland, M. S. (2016). Quantification, prediction, and the online impact of sentence truth-value: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(2), 316–334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000173
Nieuwland, M. S., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2008). When the truth is not too hard to handle: An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1213–1218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02226.x
Pfister, R., Wirth, R., Schwarz, K. A., Steinhauser, M., & Kunde, W. (2016). Burdens of non-conformity: Motor execution reveals cognitive conflict during deliberate rule violations. Cognition, 147, 93–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.11.009
Trillenberg, P., Verleger, R., Wascher, E., Wauschkuhn, B., & Wessel, K. (2000). CNV and temporal uncertainty with 'ageing' and 'non-ageing' S1–S2 intervals. Clinical Neurophysiology, 111(7), 1216–1226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1388-2457(00)00274-1
Vu, K. P. L., & Proctor, R. W. (2004). Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: Elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(3), 539–556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000387
Walker, R. E., Nicolay, R. C., & Stearns, C. R. (1965). Comparative accuracy of recognizing American and international road signs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49(5), 322–325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022525
Wegner, D. M., Ansfield, M., & Pilloff, D. (1998). The putt and the pendulum: Ironic effects of the mental control of action. Psychological Science, 9(3), 196–199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00037
Wegner, D. M., & Erber, R. (1992). The hyperaccessibility of suppressed thoughts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 903–912. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.903
Wetzels, R., van Ravenzwaaij, D., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2015). Bayesian analysis. In R. L. Cautin, & S. O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology (pp. 274–283). Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp453
Wirth, R., Kunde, W., & Pfister, R. (2019). How Not to Fall for the White Bear: Combined Frequency and Recency Manipulations Diminish Negation Effects on Overt Behavior. Journal of Cognition, 2, 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.62
Wirth, R., Pfister, R., Foerster, A., Huestegge, L., & Kunde, W. (2016). Pushing the rules: Effects and aftereffects of deliberate rule violations. Psychological Research, 80(5), 838–852. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0690-9
Dudschig, C. and Kaup, B., 2020. Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), p.32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Dudschig C, Kaup B. Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator. Journal of Cognition. 2020;3(1):32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2020). Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Dudschig C and Kaup B, 'Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator' (2020) 3 Journal of Cognition 32 DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Dudschig, Carolin, and Barbara Kaup. 2020. "Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator". Journal of Cognition 3 (1): 32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Dudschig, Carolin, and Barbara Kaup. "Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator". Journal of Cognition 3, no. 1 (2020): 32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119
Dudschig, C.and B. Kaup. "Can We Prepare to Negate? Negation as a Reversal Operator". Journal of Cognition, vol. 3, no. 1, 2020, p. 32. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.119

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Returning to a new, improved 'normal' in the Magistrates Courts
The year 2020 has already established itself as one that none of us will ever forget.
It is only June and already we've all been exposed both personally and professionally to innumerable, unforeseeable, life-altering and intense challenges as a result of the global coronavirus pandemic.
Those challenges have had profound and even tragic outcomes for almost all of the more than 7.5 billion who inhabit our tiny planet.
Here in Queensland, the legal profession has been confronted with its own unique set of issues – perhaps none more so than the state's Magistrates Court, where social distancing is nigh on impossible as it deals with more than 90% of all criminal matters that ordinarily require defendants, legal representatives, prosecutors, witnesses and the judiciary and court support staff to be physically in the same room at the same time.
But with necessity being the mother of invention, Queensland's Chief Magistrate Terry Gardiner (pictured below) spoke to Proctor to explain how the court and his fellow 100 magistrates have overcome a myriad of problems and issues, and how as a result there may be improvements to the way courts 'do business' in a post-COVID-19 world.
"After the initial declaration of the pandemic, the (COVID-19 response) practice direction was issued on 27 March to restrict people coming into the courthouses, because regrettably a lot of the courthouses are not built for social distancing," Judge Gardiner said.
"And we don't have expansive common areas that allow for large groups of people to gather. So we were very conscious of the hardship caused to the solicitors, especially the criminal law practitioners, who depend on the courts to be open for their livelihood and to assist clients.
"Currently this practice direction allows practitioners to bring matters on to be dealt with. The courts are (and have been) open and have the capacity to deal with matters, and I encourage all practitioners to list matters and have them determined.
"I myself have been doing sentencing over the phone and by video. Solicitors have been appearing via video from their offices into the court. I've had practitioners in (actually in) court cross examining witnesses by video."
Judge Gardiner said a new practice direction – expected to be released in mid-June – would continue to focus on minimising people's physical presence in courthouses.
However, he said it would also make special provisions for prosecutors and solicitors to come to court if they wished to.
"To the extent we can, we will be trying to normalise things," he said. "So that's where we are (right now)."
Judge Gardiner said that one of the biggest 'benefits' to come out of the COVID-19 pandemic was the building of strong collegiality between the judiciary, the Queensland Law Society, the Queensland Bar Association, Police Prosecutions Corp, the Department of Corrective Services, Youth Justice, the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Parole Board Queensland and "importantly", the Government, to find solutions to the problems facing the profession.
"The leadership of the Chief Justice (Catherine Holmes), QLS President Luke Murphy and President of the Bar Association Rebecca Treston QC has been outstanding," he said.
"The response of (all 101 Queensland) magistrates is something I am very proud of and they have managed all of the challenges COVID-19 thrown at them and are transitioning to clear the workload with determination.
"We have had a huge increase in the uptake of telephone and video communication. This has demonstrated that we can operate without having the huge physical presence of people in courthouses.
"There has been a large increase in the sentencing of prisoners by video and it has resulted in significant reductions of costs of transporting prisoners from correctional centres. And importantly, there has been a large uptake of electronic adjournments by practitioners and also the emailing of documents to the registry that would usually be tendered if there was a physical presence in the court. So there are a lot of things that have been working pretty well.
"In saying that, there have been a few challenges as well. The Magistrates Court is the engine room of the criminal justice system in Queensland. It deals with in excess of 200,000 defendants facing more than 455,000 charges each year. It deals with 95% of criminal lodgements in the state and our 101 magistrates sit at 33 courthouses where there are resident magistrates and they circuit to (courts in) 81 other communities throughout the state.
"So one of the main challenges when the pandemic commenced was to ensure that domestic violence aggrieved (complainants) could continue to apply for protection orders in person, and that has continued. We have also sought to ensure people in custody can apply for bail and equally have their sentences determined, so there is no risk of them serving more time in prison than they would otherwise be sentenced to.
"Initially when the (social distancing) restrictions were put in place, physical appearances had to be minimised and thousands of matters that were before the courts had to be adjourned. That placed a significant strain on the registry. But, the registries (across Queensland) have met all the challenges and we are now in a position to start clearing the backlogs.
"The remaining challenge is to clear the backlog as efficiently and quickly as possible."
Judge Gardiner said he was optimistic the backlog challenge could be overcome with a return to the hearing of matters in which defendants and legal representatives could appear in person.
"The Magistrates Courts are large enough to accommodate the (legally required) four square metre social distancing expectations. It's really the common areas outside the courts that are the problem, because people usually congregate in those areas.
"We've learned a lot of lessons from this pandemic and the Magistrates Court (ordinarily) operates on paper fi les. The increased use of technology over the last two months has highlighted the need to transition to a paperless court. This, when it happens, will ultimately relieve a lot of the pressure on the registry from handling of paper files.
"Pleasingly, the Attorney-General (Yvette D'Ath) knows the work of the court well and has always been responsive to the courts' needs.
"But I believe more can be done to electronically reduce the physical presence of people in courts, particularly at long callovers when on some days a magistrate can mention 100 to 200 matters.
"So in respect to the future, there is always going to be a need for a level of physical presence in courts, especially for trials and sentences. But in the future, I expect more appearances will be accommodated electronically.
"We're proposing to introduce an electronic application that will extend electronic adjournments to all court events…for practitioners to get dates for sentencing hearings and other standard orders to accommodate the progression of committal hearings.
"I can also envisage sentences for minor matters to continue being done via video and I can envisage the more expansive use of video to receive evidence of some witnesses, such as corroborating police, experts or uncontentious witnesses. So we will continue to identify innovative ways to do the business of the courts."
Tony Keim is Queensland Law Society Media Manager.
This story was originally published in Proctor June 2020.
JP community signings suspended
The Justices of the Peace Branch (JP Branch) of the Justice Department has suspended all JPs in the community signing sites for four weeks from 10 January 2022. With rising…
Updated: New QCAT practice directions
The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal has released three new practice directions. QCAT Practice Direction No.4 of 2022, released today, outlines the arrangements for all guardianship matters until further notice….
Jury trials suspended
The Chief Justice and Chief Judge have advised that all new trials in Queensland requiring a jury have been suspended as a COVID-related precautionary measure. A new notice to legal…
QLS supports work from home advice
Given the advice from Queensland Government for employees to work from home where practicable in order to lessen the current COVID-19 outbreak, Queensland Law Society recommends that law firms consider…
COVID update from your law library
Supreme Court Library Queensland is open. All online and face to face library services are available, with some COVID-safe conditions in place to protect visitors and library staff. Library visitors…


THE WORLD TELLS US NOT TO FORGIVE. THE WORLD TELLS US WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE BITTER & HARD HEARTED. LIFE SCREAMS AT US TO STOP HOPING. THAT IT WILL ALL BE IN VAIN & WE WILL BE MADE OUT AS FOOLS.
THIS IS MY TESTIMONY THAT GOD HAS A BETTER WAY & TRUTH THAN WHAT CULTURE OFFERS.
Divorce is hard enough. Embracing your Ex Spouse's New Spouse is harder still. I had never seen broken families done 'well' but I just knew i didn't want to be more married to my own entitlement to be bitter, than i was to raising my daughter with an emotionally healthy & God directed family. Here's what that journey looked like.


text:
Tenebrae celebrated at St Patrick's Cathedral
Tenebrae 2018 at St Patrick's Cathedral, Parramatta. Image: Diocese of Parramatta.
Bishop of Parramatta, Most Rev Vincent Long OFM Conv led the Office of Tenebrae prayers and chanting on the evening of 26 March 2018 at St Patrick's Cathedral, Parramatta.
The name Tenebrae – the Latin word for 'darkness' or 'shadows' – has for centuries been applied to the combined Offices of Matins and Lauds on the last three days of Holy Week.
Last night's service was based on the Office of Readings (Matins) and Morning Prayer (Lauds) of Tuesday in Holy Week in the present Divine Office, arranged into the structure of three nocturns.
VIEW: Images from Tenebrae 2018 below or click here.
In addition to the psalms and readings, each nocturn drew upon traditional elements of the Office of Tenebrae, including the chanting of the Lamentations of Jeremiah, in which some of the verses are introduced by a letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Each lamentation was followed by a responsory, which was sung to polyphonic settings by the cathedral schola, led by Bernard Kirkpatrick (Director of Music for the Diocese of Parramatta).
A distinct feature of the Tenebrae service was the progressive extinguishing of candles as the psalms and readings progressed, until only a single candle – a symbol of Christ – remained.
WATCH: Tenebrae at St Patrick's Cathedral below or click here.
For a brief time towards the end of the service, the Cathedral remained in darkness, until loud noise (strepitus) and banging on the cathedral pews symbolised the earthquake at the time of the resurrection (Matthew 28:2).
The single candle was restored to its place, and by its light the gathered faithful prayed briefly before departing in silence.
Joseph Younes


text:
> Construction Market Trends
Water Infrastructure Construction Market in Austria - Market Size and Forecasts to 2026 (including New Construction, Repair and Maintenance, Refurbishment and Demolition and Materials, Equipment and Services costs)
The water infrastructure construction sector in Austria registered a positive Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 5.04% during the period 2017 to 2021 with an output value of EUR678.59 million in 2021, a decrease of 13.20% over 2020. The sector achieved its strongest performance in 2020 when it grew by 19.98% over the previous year and its weakest performance in 2018, when it decreased by 18.70% over 2017.
Water Infrastructure Construction Market in Austria - Market Size and Forecasts to 2026 (including New Construction, Repair and Maintenance, Refurbishment and Demolition and Materials, Equipment and Services costs) is a broad level market review of Water Infrastructure construction market in Austria.
Drinking and utility water treatment, storage and distribution infrastructure.This includes, but is not limited to, aqueducts, desalination plants, filtration plants, distribution lines, irrigation systems and reservoirs.
Dams and hydro-power plants are excluded from this category..
This research handbook provides historic and forecast market data for the Water Infrastructure construction market in Austria, with a detailed breakdown of the data by construction activity (new construction, repair and maintenance, refurbishment and demolition) and by cost type (construction materials, construction equipment and construction services). It provides up-to-date market size data for the period 2017-2021 and an illustrative forecast to 2026.
This report also provides a top-level overview and detailed insight into the operating environment of the Water Infrastructure construction market in Austria. It is an essential tool for companies active across the Austria construction value chain and for new players considering to enter the market.
Values in the handbook are depicted in USD ($) and local currency of the country.
*Note: Certain content / sections in the research handbook may be removed or altered based on the availability and relevance of data.
- Overview of the water infrastructure construction market in Austria.
- Historic (2017 through 2021) and forecast (2022 through 2026) construction market output values are provided.
- A detailed breakdown of the data by construction activity (new construction, repair and maintenance, refurbishment and demolition) and by cost types (construction materials, construction equipment and construction services) across the water infrastructure market and the data is provided for both historic and forecast periods.
- Enhances your knowledge of the market with key figures detailing construction type.
- Provides you with a breakdown of the market by construction activity (new construction, repair and maintenance, refurbishment and demolition).
- Provides you with a breakdown of the construction market by cost type (construction materials, construction equipment and construction services).
- Allows you to plan future business decisions using the forecast figures given.
- The broad but detailed perspective will help all the players in the construction activity to understand and succeed in the challenging construction market.
$500 - 1 User License - PDF $750 - Site License - PDF $1000 - Corporate License - PDF
Europe Loading Spout Market Forecast to 2028 – COVID-19 Impact and Regional Analysis – by Loading System, Type, and End User
Europe Loading Spout Market Forecast to 2028 – COVID-19 Impact and Regional Analysis – by Loading System (Closed Loading, Open Loading, and Combined Loading), Type (Heavy-Duty Loading Spout and Standard ...
Facade Systems Market by Type, End-use And Region – Global Forecast to 2027 $ 4950 January 2023
U.S. Data Center Construction Market - Industry Outlook & Forecast 2022-2027 $ 3995 September 2022
Wooden Interior Door Market Forecast to 2028 - COVID-19 Impact and Global Analysis By Type, Mechanism, and End User $ 4550 December 2022
Fire Pits Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By Product Type, By Type By End-use, By Sales Channel, By Region And Segment Forecasts, 2023 - 2030 $ 3950 December 2022
Saudi Arabia Portable Generator Market, By Fuel Type, By End-User, By Power Rating, By Application, By Region, Competition Forecast & Opportunities, 2027 $ 3500 December 2022
Global Construction Estimating Software Market Size, Share & Industry Trends Analysis Report By License Type, By End User, By Enterprise Size, By Deployment, By Regional Outlook and Forecast, 2022 - 2028 $ 3600 November 2022
Global Fly Ash Market 2023-2027 $ 2500 November 2022
Construction Anchors Market $ 5000 November 2022
Global Bathroom Sinks Market 2023-2027 $ 2500 November 2022
Construction in the World
Construction in Europe
Construction in Asia
Construction in North America
Construction in the United States
Construction in APAC
Construction in Middle East
Construction in Latin America
Construction in Northern Europe


text:
Scientists discover key component of cellular malfunction that contributes to growth of tumors
Reviewed by Emily Henderson, B.Sc.Nov 2 2021
Scientists have homed in on a crucial step within the sequence of chemical reactions that govern regulation of cell division, proliferation and death, and whose malfunction contributes to the growth of tumors.
The research appears in the journal Communications Biology on Nov. 1, 2021.
Within biology, the term signalling pathways describes the cascade of chemical reactions whereby particular molecules work to govern a cell's function. The 'Hippo' signalling pathway in animals is one of these and controls organ size via the regulation of cell division, proliferation and death (apoptosis). It takes its name from one of its main components, the Hpo or 'hippo' kinase. A kinase is a type of protein that adds or removes phosphate groups to other molecules, a process known as phosphorylation. Phosphorylation works as a sort of biological on/off switch and plays a critical role in the regulation of many cellular processes including cell cycle, growth, and apoptosis.
As many cancers are the product of uncontrolled cell division, researchers have increasingly focused a lot of attention on the hippo pathway, which when malfunctioning results in irregular activity of a pair of its downstream targets, the Yes-associated protein (YAP) and transcriptional co-activator with PDZ binding motif (TAZ). YAP/TAZ act to regulate the transcription of genes (copying their information from DNA form to RNA form) that are involved in cell proliferation. When the Hippo signalling pathway is active, YAP is inhibited, thus playing a role in control of tumor suppression. On the other hand, when Hippo signaling is inactive, YAP becomes persistently active and promotes cell proliferation.
But the precise mechanisms of YAP/TAZ activation remains poorly understood. It is known that the gene that encodes epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), a protein that helps cells grow, is often over-activated, especially in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), and EGFR is often mutated and activated in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAC).
As a result, EGFR is a common target of anti-cancer therapies, either using kinase inhibitor drugs, or blocking antibodies. Yet here too, whether EGFR controls YAP/TAZ activation has been an open question.
"EGFR fails to reduce phosphorylation of YAP in some cellular systems, but inhibits the Hippo pathway to activate YAP in others," said Toshinori Ando, a main researcher working on the study and Assistant Professor at the Center of Oral Clinical Examination at Hiroshima University Hospital (with a cross-appointment as a post-doctoral scientist in the University of California, San Diego). "If EGFR is being targeted by therapeutics, we really should know a bit more about why we're doing this."
Chinese scientists reveal key role of lysosome cell death regulator in lung tumor survival
Prevalence and evolution of PTSD symptoms in cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic
Researchers implement and evaluate an educational intervention for prostate cancer
So the researchers carried out a series of investigations of Hippo pathway mechanisms, including via comparisons of EGFR gene activation (expression) and activation of YAP in a series of HNSCC cancer cells; cells that showed the most expression of EGFR amongst HNSCC cells; an analysis of all cancer types; and gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA)—a technique of identifying groups of genes that are over-represented within a large set and may be associated with certain diseases.
They found that EGFR activation promotes tyrosine phosphorylation of one of the core Hippo pathway components, called MOB1. This is a gene that directs activation of particular kinases, LATS1 and LATS2, which modulate the function of the YAP/TAZ. The EGFR-promoted MOB1 tyrosine phosphorylation followed by LATS1/2 inactivation leads to aberrant YAP/TAZ activation in many cancers harboring EGFR alterations such as HNSCC and LUAC.
Emerging evidence have shown that YAP is overexpressed and contributes to cancer growth, poor prognosis, and acquired resistance to EGFR-targeted drugs in HNSCC and LUAC, although the mechanism of YAP re-activation is unclear."
J. Silvio Gutkind, Lead Researcher and Professor, University of California, San Diego
This EGFR-MOB1-YAP/TAZ signaling axis may represent a novel target for cancer therapies. In addition, a combination of EGFR targeting therapy and YAP/TAZ targeting therapy could prevent cancer cells from acquiring resistance that might have occurred if just one or the other therapies were used on their own.
A drug targeting YAP/TAZ has yet to be approved for the treatment of cancer patients. The researchers consider the development of such a drug to be an urgent priority as well as to clarify the unknown mechanism of YAP re-activation.
Ando, T., et al. (2021) EGFR Regulates the Hippo pathway by promoting the tyrosine phosphorylation of MOB1. Communications Biology. doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02744-4.
Posted in: Cell Biology
Tags: Adenocarcinoma, Antibodies, Apoptosis, B Cell, Cancer, Carcinoma, Cell, Cell Cycle, Cell Division, Cell Proliferation, DNA, Drugs, Education, Gene, Genes, Growth Factor, Hospital, Kinase, Kinase Inhibitor, Neck, Phosphorylation, Proliferation, Protein, Receptor, Research, RNA, Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Therapeutics, Transcription, Tumor, Tyrosine
New pathways responsible for hepatocellular carcinoma identified
New pioneering test helps predict the spread of deadly skin cancer
Study shows AI systems can accurately identify and grade prostate cancer
Non-invasive, novel urinary miRNA biomarker panel for colorectal cancer diagnosis
Cancer patients receiving treatment may mount inadequate immune response to COVID-19 vaccination
Study findings could help guide treatment planning for men with high-risk prostate cancer
Researchers develop nanotherapeutic drug to prevent cancer from spreading to the liver
Addition of hormone therapy to radiotherapy treatments improves survival in prostate cancer patients
Top Life Sciences Articles
Hemp compounds show ability to prevent the entry of SARS-CoV-2 into cells
Respiratory viruses lacking NS2 protein can be destroyed by the body's immune response
Study reveals a causal link between deficiency in Parkinson's disease gene and reduced immunoaging
Scientific review highlights the impact of coffee on digestive organs
How Could Microbes Help to Solve Climate Change?
Microbes and Biotechnology
What is in Silico?
How Important are Microorganisms?
What is Predictive Microbiology?
Latest Life Science News
A newly discovered species of worm kills tarantulas
Hamilton Storage Expands the Verso® Q-Series Automated Sample Storage System Family
UW and Stanford researchers complete study on the link between food environment and dietary health
Paradigm4 joins the Tetra Partner Network to leverage Tetra Data into high-performing analytical computing applications for pharmaceutical customers
PhoreMost expands into new facility at Unity Campus, Cambridge, UK
New study to help understand the effect of cancer medicine