5 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Daniel V. Meegan [4]Daniel Meegan [1]
  1. Daniel Meegan (2008). Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "Neuroimaging Techniques for Memory Detection: Scientific, Ethical and Legal Issues". American Journal of Bioethics 8 (1):1-4.
  2. Daniel V. Meegan (2008). Neuroimaging Techniques for Memory Detection: Scientific, Ethical, and Legal Issues. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (1):9 – 20.
    There is considerable interest in the use of neuroimaging techniques for forensic purposes. Memory detection techniques, including the well-publicized Brain Fingerprinting technique (Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc., Seattle WA), exploit the fact that the brain responds differently to sensory stimuli to which it has been exposed before. When a stimulus is specifically associated with a crime, the resulting brain activity should differentiate between someone who was present at the crime and someone who was not. This article reviews the scientific literature on (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Digby Elliott & Daniel V. Meegan (2004). Visual Context Can Influence on-Line Control. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):33-34.
    Several lines of evidence indicate that the on-line control of rapid target-aiming movements can be influenced by the visual context in which the movements are performed. Although this may result in movement error when an illusory context is introduced, there are many situations in which the control system must know about context in order to get the limb to the target rapidly and safely.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Daniel V. Meegan, Lew B. Stelmach & W. James Tam (2001). Unequal Weighting of Monocular Inputs in Binocular Combination: Implications for the Compression of Stereoscopic Imagery. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 7 (2):143.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Daniel V. Meegan (1999). Winner-Takes-All and Action Selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):692-693.
    Winner-takes-all (WTA) typically describes a mechanism for selecting the highest peak of activity in a sensory map that encodes independent representations of potential targets. To Findlay & Walker, WTA is an inherent property of a motor map that is incapable of representing multiple targets independently. Although the output of a WTA system should be characteristic of only one target, actions can be influenced by multiple targets.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation