English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Jacobs and Michaels (2001) have argued that increased precision in judgments of the viewing distance to a perceived event should be attributed in part to perceptual learning. They found that observers used feedback to attune to the appropriate information variables gradually. McConnell, Muchisky, and Bingham (1998) had found that observers used feedback to calibrate event-specific scaling coefficients, that the calibration of one type of event generalized to other types, and that calibration occurred suddenly. We argue that Jacobs and Michaels must be partially correct and that, in our experiments, both calibration and perceptual attunement were required for accurate and precise judgments.

Commentary on Jacobs and Michaels (2001): Calibration and perceptual learning in event perception