The goal of this review paper is to elucidate prospective memory (PM) mechanisms by identifying the roles of inhibition. Recently, inhibitory functions in PM have become of interest, but little is known about them. Previous studies examining the relationship between PM and inhibition can be broken into two categories: (1) studies that have examined the relationship using analyses based on the correlation of scores in related tasks and (2) studies that have employed experimental manipulations and have focused on inhibition that actually functioned in the PM remembering process. In reviewing these studies, we have found that both response inhibition and representation inhibition are involved in PM. Based on these results, we suggest that PM involves two control processes and that the separate inhibitory mechanisms apply to each of the control processes. This cognitive psychological hypothesis is supported by neuroscience studies. Finally, we argue that this distinction in the roles of inhibition is important for the development of PM theory.

Until now, various types of threshold and signal-detection models have been proposed. These models have broadly different assumptions on recognition memory mechanisms, and thus predict different patterns of Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROCs). Assessing the models for their flexibility and goodness of fit to empirical ROC data provides evidence on which model has more concise description on the phenomenon of recognition memory and may provide a better understanding of it. I have illustrated the structures and properties of various recognition memory models with their relation to a dual process theory in mind. Then, I have summarized the basics and recent developments of model selection methods. Further, I have explained the pragmatic use of these measurement models, using several examples of empirical studies on different research topics.

The purpose of this study is to comprehensively review the trends in psychological research on manipulation of others and to consider the direction of future research in this area. Based on the studies in this review, a model is proposed that can order in terms of effectiveness or susceptibility the manipulations used in antisocial behaviors using combinations of “personality traits that seek to manipulate others or techniques for manipulating others” and “specificities of the object persons of the manipulation”, respectively. As for future issues and prospects, it is desirable to develop a comprehensive model that includes various underlying concepts by defining the common theoretical structure that encompasses various concepts in each area while repeatedly testing the validity of the model. The applicability of the model should be evaluated based on the many actual techniques of manipulating others and on the social cases of manipulating others.

Stress-related research in psychology has traditionally focused on both understanding and reducing stress responses. This paradigm has changed in recent years to more detailed studies on recovery from extreme stress responses and on growth. Therefore, in addition to paradigms of the past, it has become necessary to develop a process model that includes recovery from psychological maladaptation and trauma, as well as growth. Such a model is expected to facilitate new approaches to both maintaining and promoting well-being during the total lifespan of an individual, as well as to preventing the recurrence of maladaptation. This study focused on “resilience,” “posttraumatic growth,” and “mindfulness,” which are areas that are attracting the attention of researchers working in fields related to stress research. Moreover, a model of recovery from and growth after difficult situations is suggested by applying these concepts.

Pearson’s correlation coefficient is an important statistic. For over a century, the index has been used in various branches of science. This paper introduces both its creation and initial developments that are often forgotten or ignored. Because no theory is independent of the original setting and the research plan of its creators, knowledge about the context of pioneering ideas helps researchers better understand the meaning of the coefficient. The paper highlights the work of Bravais, Galton, Pearson, artillery scientists, Spearman, and many other early contributors, and describes their original intentions, achievements, and faults. Key comments on the present statistical theories and practices are also presented in several pivotal comments.