高低创造性思维水平者定向遗忘效应的差异研究

采用单字法定向遗忘范式,考察远距离联想任务得分高低者在中性和负性词语定向遗忘效应上的差异,来探讨创造性思维水平高低与主动抑制的关系。实验采用2(高/低创造性思维水平)×2(中性/负性词汇)×2(记住/忘记指令)×2(2s/5s时间间隔)混合设计,发现高低创造力组,在材料不同呈现时间下,对不同情绪材料的定向遗忘效应分别不同。低创者在2s和5s以及高创者在5s时间间隔时,均对中性词语表现出定向遗忘效应,而对负性词汇没有表现出明显的定性遗忘效应。高创者在2s时间间隔下,对中性和负性词语均表现出定向遗忘效应。结果表明较短时间内高创者对负性情绪的主动抑制能力优于低创者。     

不同科学创造力个体干扰抑制机制的比较*

选取《科学创造力量表》筛选出高、低科学创造力个体各20名,通过完成经典Stroop色字干扰抑制任务,探讨高、低科学创造力的个体抑制机制的差异。结果发现:在Stroop色字任务上,无论是高科学创造力组还是低科学创造力组,都出现了Stroop干扰效应,但低科学创造力组的Stroop效应更明显;高科学创造力组在字色不一致条件下的错误率显著低于低科学创造力组,但是两组被试在Stroop任务反应时上差异不显著。本研究结果提示高科学创造力个体的认知抑制能力强于低科学创造力个体。     

不同提示线索对于Stroop干扰效应的影响

本研究采用线索提示任务探讨了不同提示线索颜色、SOA及提示有效应对于经典Stroop干扰效应的影响。结果发现,线索提示类型及其颜色是否与目标色词一致会对Stroop任务产生显著影响。其中有效提示下出现显著Stroop效应,而无效提示下Stroop效应消失,显示视觉注意空间搜索会影响Stroop效应;线索提示颜色与色词颜色是否一致同样影响Stroop干扰效应,两者不一致时存在显著Stroop效应,而两者一致时Stroop效应消失,表明Stroop效应的发生依赖于色词加工中不同通道间信息的转译。 关键词：Stroop 效应;线索提示任务;转译理论     

不同认知方式对词—面孔任务Stroop效应的影响

该研究采用词—面孔Stroop任务,以76名大学生为被试,探讨了不同认知方式（场独立、场依存）对情绪冲突Stroop效应的影响。结果发现：（1）情绪冲突的Stroop效应显著,即,在词—面孔Stroop任务中,当词和面孔的情绪效价一致时,被试的反应时更短,正确率更高。（2）认知方式对情绪冲突Stroop任务的影响显著,表现为无论是一致还是不一致条件下,场独立者比场依存者的反应时都更短。（3）场依存者的情绪冲突Stroop效应更大,表现为其在词—面孔情绪效价一致和不一致条件下的反应时差异更大。     

返回抑制对空间Stroop效应的影响

联合空间cue—target范式和空间Stroop任务,考察了空间注意在解决空间Stroop效应中所起的作用。结果表明：（1）与空间Stroop刺激出现在非线索化位置相比,出现在线索化位置上时,被试对位置和空间维度不一致试验的反应更快,且空间Stroop的量显著减少;（2）返回抑制影响空间Stroop效应量的大小,返回抑制对非空间Stroop效应量的调节和对空间Stroop效应量的调节有所不同,无论一致条件,还是不一致条件下,对空间Stroop反应的反应速度要快于非空间Stroop。     

情绪Stroop效应与Stroop效应的关系

摘 要 本研究通过位置判断任务、图-词干扰任务和色-词干扰任务来测量Stroop效应;通过表情面孔性别判断任务、情绪词汇判定任务和情绪图片颜色命名任务来测量情绪Stroop效应;运用结构方程建模的方法对情绪Stroop效应与Stroop效应的关系进行了探讨。结果发现：（1）Stroop效应和情绪Stroop效应是显著的。（2）情绪Stroop效应与Stroop效应是两种相互独立的现象。     

非平衡双语者Stroop效应的时间进程

运用Stroop任务的SOA范式,考察中-英双语者干扰和易化效应的时间进程及程度,比较双语者认知控制和词汇通达的差异。结果发现,在中文条件下,干扰效应的峰值发生在SOA为-200ms时,在英文条件下,最大的干扰效应发生在SOA为-300 ms时,由此可见,干扰效应时间出现了负转换。在英文条件下,-400ms SOA引发了最大的易化效应,而中文条件下最大的易化效应发生在-300ms SOA。该研究表明,双语者没有表现出认知优势,在Stroop任务中受到了词汇通达的影响。     

Stroop范式中不同语言条件下的双语优势效应

目的:采用Stroop范式探讨不同语言条件下的双语优势效应。方法:两个实验均为2(被试类型)x 3(色词一致性)的混合实验设计,被试为熟练双语者和非熟练双语者。结果:(1)L1条件下熟练双语者的Stroop效应量小于非熟练双语者,L2条件下无显著差异。(2)熟练双语者在两个实验条件下的平均反应时均小于非熟练双语者,L2条件下的易化效应量显著大于非熟练双语者。结论:(1)熟练双语者在L1条件下的抑制控制能力好于非熟练双语者,体现了"双语优势效应";(2)熟练双语者在Stroop干扰任务中可能比非熟练双语者具有更好的信息监控能力。     

类比数量表征的线索:离散量还是连续量

运用Stroop研究范式,对30名成人被试的类比数量表征线索进行了研究。结果发现:在类比数量的小数和大数段上,不存在表征线索的分化;在个数任务中不出现Stroop效应,但被试在强不一致条件下的错误率显著高于强一致条件下的错误率;在累积面积任务中出现Stroop效应,且在弱不一致、强不一致条件下的反应时、错误率都显著高于强一致、弱一致条件下的反应时、错误率。以上结果表明被试在进行类比数量表征时,可以同时提取离散量线索和连续量线索,但是对离散量线索的抑制要难于对连续量线索的抑制。     

中英文Stroop干扰效应的脑机制

以中国大学生为被试,采用事件相关电位对比研究中英文Stroop干扰效应的脑内时程动态变化。结果发现：两种文字材料都存在反应时的Stroop干扰效应,汉字的干扰效应明显强于英文;被试在完成不同文字材料的字词颜色命名任务时所诱发的ERP成分存在差异,具体为中文Stroop干扰效应表现为在350—550ms内,不一致条件比一致条件诱发一个更负的ERP成分（N450）,主要分布于额中部电极。英文Stroop干扰效应表现为不一致条件比一致条件在250—450ms内诱发一个更正的ERP成分（P300）,主要分布于左侧额顶叶;在450—550ms内诱发一个更负的ERP成分（N500）,主要分布于中后部。研究结果表明语言类型会影响Stroop干扰效应的脑内时程变化。     

创造性思维与认知抑制的关系

抑制是创造性思维过程中的一种重要的认知加工机制。创造性思维与认知抑制的关系主要有三种观点：创造性思维的认知去抑制假说、认知抑制假说和适应性认知抑制假说。本文系统评述了创造性思维与认知抑制关系的相关理论、研究新进展和神经机制。未来研究应加强创造性思维与认知抑制关系的理论整合与构建,分析创造性思维的不同阶段的认知抑制机制,采用无意抑制与有意抑制研究范式,对创造性思维与认知抑制的关系、影响因素及神经机制进行深入研究。     

不同冥想类型对创造性思维的影响及作用机制

冥想与创造性的关系正逐渐被关注,澄清冥想练习对创造性思维的影响效果和作用机制对个体创新潜能的培养与提升具有重要意义。不同冥想类型对创造性思维的影响具有特异性,专注冥想主要通过注意聚焦和提升自上而下的执行控制能力来对聚合思维产生积极影响;正念冥想引起的离焦的注意状态,以及对认知灵活性和积极情绪的促进,有助于发散思维。未来应加强不同冥想类型与创造性思维的整合研究,探讨冥想影响创造性思维的脑机制,以及冥想与其他干预训练对创造性思维的不同作用机制等。     

Different Effects of Cognitive Shifting and Intelligence on Creativity

The relationship between creativity and executive control has long been controversial. Some researchers view creative thinking as a defocused process with little executive control involvement, whereas others claim that executive control plays a vital role in creative thinking. In this study, we focused on one subcomponent of executive control, cognitive shifting, and examined its relationship with creativity by using latent variable analysis and structural equation modeling. We also analyzed whether this relation was mediated by intelligence. The results showed that: (a) cognitive shifting ability had a positive relationship with creativity, but only on the quantitative aspects (fluency and flexibility); (b) Intelligence had a positive relationship with both quantitative and qualitative aspects (originality) of creativity, and its effect on qualitative aspect was stronger than that on the quantitative aspect; (c) There was a mediating effect of intelligence on the relationship between creativity cognitive and shifting.     

The cognitive underpinnings of creative thought: A latent variable analysis exploring the roles of intelligence and working memory in three creative thinking processes

The field of creativity has largely focused on individual differences in divergent thinking abilities. Recently, contemporary creativity researchers have shown that intelligence and executive functions play an important role in divergent thought, opening new lines of research to examine how higher-order cognitive mechanisms may uniquely contribute to creative thinking. The present study extends previous research on the intelligence and divergent thinking link by systematically examining the relationships among intelligence, working memory, and three fundamental creative processes: associative fluency, divergent thinking, and convergent thinking. Two hundred and sixty five participants were recruited to complete a battery of tasks that assessed a range of elementary to higher-order cognitive processes related to intelligence and creativity. Results provide evidence for an associative basis in two distinct creative processes: divergent thinking and convergent thinking. Findings also supported recent work suggesting that intelligence significantly influences creative thinking. Finally, working memory played a significant role in creative thinking processes. Recasting creativity as a construct consisting of distinct higher-order cognitive processes has important implications for future approaches to studying creativity within an individual differences framework.     

认知控制在发散性思维中的作用

探讨认知控制在发散性思维中的作用是当前创造力研究领域的热点问题。目前一致认为认知控制包括工作记忆、抑制控制和认知灵活性三个核心成分。工作记忆对个体在发散性思维中维持任务目标、提取和操作信息发挥重要作用; 抑制控制, 包括优势反应抑制、分心干扰抑制和对潜在相关信息的低抑制, 分别压制对常规观点的提取、确保对内在注意状态的维持和提供更多观念的组合, 进而促进个体的发散性思维表现。此外, 流体智力作为一种高级认知控制能力, 可通过增强策略使用的灵活性从而利于发散性思维。近来神经科学研究表明, 发散性思维不同阶段需要执行控制网络和默认网络的动态协同加工。未来研究应澄清认知控制各子成分间的关系, 探讨认知控制影响发散性思维是否受到其他因素(如动机和情绪)的调节, 以及探索执行控制网络和默认网络的动态协作是否受到任务要求和个体差异(如人格和智力)的影响。     

Linkographic Evidence for Concurrent Divergent and Convergent Thinking in Creative Design

For a long time, the creativity literature has stressed the role of divergent thinking in creative endeavor. More recently, it has been recognized that convergent thinking also has a role in creativity, and the design literature, which sees design as a creative activity a priori, has largely adopted this view: Divergent and convergent thinking are seen as occurring in cyclic phases within the design process. Neurological evidence suggests that frequent shifts between defocused and focused attention to stimuli in memory activation, which equate divergent and convergent thinking, are a hallmark of creative thinking. In this article, we use linkography to show that the shifts between divergent thinking—forelinking of design moves, and convergent thinking—backlinking of moves, are so frequent that at the cognitive scale they can be seen as occurring concurrently in the ideation phase of creative designing. It is proposed that in assessments of creative potential, shifts between divergent and convergent thinking should be the yardstick instead of, or alongside measurements of divergent thinking.     

On the Cognitive Benefits of Cultural Experience: Exploring the Relationship between Studying Abroad and Creative Thinking

Drawing from research that shows a positive relationship between multicultural experiences and creative cognition, the present study investigates creative thinking as a possible cognitive benefit gained from studying abroad. The domain generality and specificity of creative thinking is also explored. Undergraduate students completed a general measure and a culture specific measure of creative thinking. Performance on the two creative thinking tasks were compared between students who have studied abroad, students who are planning to study abroad, and students who have not and do not plan to study abroad. Results showed that students who studied abroad outperformed the two groups of students who did not study abroad on both the general and culture specific measures of creative thinking. Findings from this study provide evidence that studying abroad supports complex cognitive processes that underlie creative thinking in culture specific and domain general settings. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

工作记忆容量对创造性思维的预测

创造性思维(CT)是人类高级认知的重要组成部分,而工作记忆容量(WMC)是个体认知功能的重要指标,对于WMC能否预测CT存在不同的观点。本文先从正向预测、负向预测和不能预测的角度分类总结了相关研究证据,然后用游乐园模型(APT)、双通道模型(DPCM)和注意控制理论(CAT)对不同结果进行解释,分析了以往研究可能存在的问题,包括测量WMC和测量CT的任务类型不匹配、测量CT的领域特殊性问题、忽略其他认知能力差异以及未考虑智力、人格等因素对二者关系的影响等。最后,结合已有问题与当前的研究重点对未来研究进行了相应的展望。     

Are Individuals with Schizophrenia or Schizotypy More Creative? Evidence from Multiple Tests of Creative Potential

Schizophrenia and schizotypy have been often associated with above average creativity; however, empirical studies on the relationship between schizophrenia spectrum disorders and enhanced creativity generated inconsistent results. This research investigates if the association between schizophrenia spectrum disorders and creative potential levels is dependent upon which cognitive processes are examined during administered tests of creative potential. Our study examined 117 participants stratified into the following three subgroups: (a) 39 psychometrically determined low-schizotypal individuals, (b) 35 psychometrically determined high-schizotypal individuals, and (c) 43 patients with schizophrenia. Each participant completed 2 divergent thinking (DT) tasks, 2 convergent thinking (CT) tasks, and 2 creative tasks that combine both DT and CT processes. The data suggest that Group C had typical abilities in the DT, CT, and the combined creative thinking tasks; however, the group as a whole had intact originality during the Figural Completion (DT task) and the Tangram Construction (combined task). Notably, Group B showed significant advantages in both verbal and figural DT tasks. Group A and Group B demonstrated no significant differences in the creative thinking processes of CT; however, both groups outperformed Group C in these tasks.