婴儿心理理论的发展:表现和机制

婴儿心理理论发展研究是探索人类社会认知起源、发生和发展的重要领域.从联合注意、情绪理解、意图理解、愿望理解和错误信念理解等方面分析了几个月至3岁左右的婴儿心理理论发生和发展的研究现状.为了探讨3岁以下婴儿心理理论的发展过程,研究者发展了一些适合婴儿语言和行为发展特征的非言语和言语测试任务,包括非言语自发—反应错误信念任务、言语自发—反应错误信念任务,同时也采用眼动技术和事件相关电位技术来考察心理理论发展水平和发展机制.婴儿心理理论的发生和发展在不同测试任务上表现出一定的年龄特征.这与认知功能(如语言、执行功能)的发展、环境因素(如家庭、同伴、文化)以及神经系统发育有关.也有一些最新研究从心理理论发生和发展的基因、激素水平进行了探讨.最后提出了该领域未来研究可以进一步探讨的问题.     

群际接触理论介评

群际接触理论是关于群际关系的一个重要理论,其核心是过失无知现象,该理论认为通过在最佳情境中进行接触能减少群体间的偏见。该文阐述了Allport的接触假说,从四个方面论述了其他研究者对Allport接触假说的质疑及其对理论的完善,最后对Pettigrew提出的理论模型进行了介绍。     

错误加工的神经机制

错误加工在认知控制和行为监控中起着关键的作用。监控自己的认知和行为结果,觉察到应该的反应和实际的反应之间的差别（即错误）,纠正这种错误并防止再犯是错误加工的主要内容。错误反应或由代表反应错误等负性反馈刺激诱发的ERP相对于正确反应或由代表反应正确等正性反馈刺激诱发的ERP,表现出一个相对负走向的波形变化,称为错误相关负波（error-related negativity, ERN）和反馈相关负波（feedback-related negativity, FRN）,两者都定位于前扣回附近。错误加工神经机制的研究主要集中于前扣回与ERN、错误意识与错误加工、ERN与FRN的关系。对于前扣带回和ERN的功能意义的解释主要有错误检测理论、冲突监控理论、强化学习理论和预期违反假说。目前错误加工神经机制的研究在研究内容、研究方法和理论观点等方面还存在些问题,这些可能是未来进一步的研究方向     

未意识到错误影响错误后调整的电生理证据

现有研究一致认为意识到错误可引起错误后调整, 但是未意识到错误能否促使个体进行错误后调整尚存争议。本实验采用基于go/no-go范式的错误意识任务考察上述问题, 并根据被试对自己按键反应正误主观报告将no-go错误反应分为意识到错误和未意识到错误。行为结果发现, 意识到错误和未意识到错误后正确率均显著高于正确击中试次(正确go试次)后正确率; 但是, 意识到错误后试次反应时显著快于正确击中后反应时, 未意识到错误后反应时显著慢于正确击中后反应时。该结果表明两类错误均优化了错误后行为表现, 但是意识到错误后被试调整速度加快, 未意识到错误后被试调整速度减慢。进而, 时频分析发现意识到错误相较于未意识到错误诱发显著更强的alpha波能量。并且, 前者在错误意识主观报告前已诱发alpha波, 后者在错误意识主观报告反应后诱发alpha波。该结果表明意识到错误一直处于持续的注意监控中, 而未意识到错误是任务引起的暂时注意控制。因此, 本实验说明错误意识影响错误后调整, 意识到错误可能采用类似主动性控制的策略调节错误后行为, 而未意识到错误可能采用类似反应性控制的策略调节错误后行为。     

为什么会出现“舌尖现象”?——TOT现象发生机制之争

舌尖现象(tip-of-the-tongue,TOT)是一种普遍发生的现象,但是发生TOT的对象、情景、机制等却是特殊和复杂的。因此,它引起了研究者的关注,尤其是在其产生机制上更是存在着很多争论。国外研究者提出了部分激活理论、传递缺陷理论、障碍物假说、神经网络模型、元认知理论等。但研究者大多都基于单一条件或情景来探讨TOT的产生,因此提出的理论的使用范围,解释广度等均有局限。关于TOT依然有许多疑惑,同时也存在值得探讨的课题。     

刺激同一性对错误后反应的影响

当错误发生后,人们往往会放慢错误后反应的速度,以避免错误的再次发生,许多研究者认为,这是自上而下的认知控制对错误后反应的影响.为了探讨刺激属性是否也在错误后的反应中起作用,本研究从刺激同一性角度出发,探讨错误反应刺激与错误后刺激的同一性以及反应-刺激间隔时间(RSI)对错误后反应的影响.结果发现,当错误后的刺激与错误反应的刺激一致时,可减小错误后反应时延长的程度,同时,RSI越大,PES越小.本研究得出结论,刺激同一性和RSI作为自下而上的刺激驱动在PES的产生过程中发挥了作用.     

老年人面孔识别衰退的理论探究

面孔识别是指个体能够正确再认面孔及正确辨认面部表情的能力.在老龄化进程加剧的背景下,面孔识别能力的衰退机制成为近年来该领域研究的热点问题之一.通过对近20年来面孔识别衰退的实证研究的深入分析和整理,归纳出当前解释面孔识别衰退现象的四种理论:编码衰减理论、知觉熟悉性理论、基于交流理论和自我管理策略理论,同时指出了该研究领域中存在的问题和发展趋势.     

愉快面孔识别优势及其认知神经机制

愉快面孔识别优势表现为被试对高兴面孔比对其他情绪面孔的识别正确率更高、反应时更短。大量研究以简笔画和面孔图片为材料, 在情绪分类任务和视觉搜索任务中均发现这一优势。该优势存在诊断性价值假说、情绪独特性假说和出现频率假说三种不同的理论解释。近年来, 研究者采用ERP技术发现这一优势形成于反应选择阶段, 但其起始阶段尚无一致结论。未来可借助fMRI技术进一步研究其认知神经机制。     

错误正波的神经发生源与功能意义解释

错误正波(error positivity, Pe)是指在错误反应后200~600ms后出现的事件相关电位(ERP)的正偏转, 对Pe的研究有助于揭示人类错误加工机制的全貌。现有研究表明Pe主要产生于前扣带回喙部, 但不同的研究对其精细神经发生源并没有达成一致。Pe的功能意义解释主要有错误意识假说、行为适应假说、情绪评估假说。当根据有关P3的理论来解释Pe的功能意义时, Pe可能反映了对错误背景的刷新。然而上述每一种对Pe的功能意义的解释都还受到了一些研究结果的质疑和挑战。基于此, 作者对现有研究存在的问题进行了总结和分析, 并对今后如何对Pe的神经发生源和功能意义的进一步研究提出了建议。     

错误后反应的影响与干预

人们在日常生活中经常会犯错，这种由人引发的人因失误在复杂人机系统中占据了相当大的比重。本研究从人因失误后操作者的行为反应（如错误后反应减慢、正确率提高等）入手，详细探讨了错误发生后操作者行为反应的生理、心理和情境影响因素及认知神经机制，并在此基础上提出可从行为训练、神经工效增强和界面设计增强三方面对错误后反应进行检测干预的手段，以达到推进和提高复杂系统人机工效研究的目的。     

How to measure post-error slowing: A confound and a simple solution

In many response time tasks, people slow down after they make an error. This phenomenon of post-error slowing (PES) is thought to reflect an increase in response caution, that is, a heightening of response thresholds in order to increase the probability of a correct response at the expense of response speed. In many empirical studies, PES is quantified as the difference in response time (RT) between post-error trials and post-correct trials. Here we demonstrate that this standard measurement method is prone to contamination by global fluctuations in performance over the course of an experiment. Diffusion model simulations show how global fluctuations in performance can cause either spurious detection of PES or masking of PES. Both confounds are highly undesirable and can be eliminated by a simple solution: quantify PES as the difference in RT between post-error trials and the associated pre-error trials. Experimental data are used as an empirical illustration.     

Error reactivity in self-paced performance: Highly-accurate individuals exhibit largest post-error slowing

Reaction time is typically increased following an erroneous response. This post-error slowing is traditionally explained by a strategic adjustment of response threshold towards more conservative behaviour. A recently proposed orienting account provides an alternative explanation for post-error slowing. According to this account, committing an error evokes an orienting response (OR), which inhibits information processing in the subsequent trial, resulting in slow and inaccurate performance. We tested a straightforward prediction of the orienting account in the context of self-paced performance, adopting an individual-differences approach: Post-error slowing should be larger the less frequent an error is. To this end, participants were classified into three groups differing in overall performance accuracy. Larger post-error slowing and stronger post-error accuracy decrease were observed for the high-accuracy group than for the two other groups. Practice pronounced the post-error accuracy decline, especially for the high-accuracy group. The results are consistent with the orienting account of post-error slowing but are problematic for accounts based on strategic evaluation mechanisms.     

Error reactivity in self-paced performance: Highly-accurate individuals exhibit largest post-error slowing

Reaction time is typically increased following an erroneous response. This post-error slowing is traditionally explained by a strategic adjustment of response threshold towards more conservative behaviour. A recently proposed orienting account provides an alternative explanation for post-error slowing. According to this account, committing an error evokes an orienting response (OR), which inhibits information processing in the subsequent trial, resulting in slow and inaccurate performance. We tested a straightforward prediction of the orienting account in the context of self-paced performance, adopting an individual-differences approach: Post-error slowing should be larger the less frequent an error is. To this end, participants were classified into three groups differing in overall performance accuracy. Larger post-error slowing and stronger post-error accuracy decrease were observed for the high-accuracy group than for the two other groups. Practice pronounced the post-error accuracy decline, especially for the high-accuracy group. The results are consistent with the orienting account of post-error slowing but are problematic for accounts based on strategic evaluation mechanisms.     

Age-related qualitative differences in post-error cognitive control adjustments

Detecting an error signals the need for increased cognitive control and behavioural adjustments. Considerable development in performance monitoring and cognitive control is evidenced by lower error rates and faster response times in multi-trial executive function tasks with age. Besides these quantitative changes, we were interested in whether qualitative changes in balancing accuracy and speed contribute to developmental progression during elementary school years. We conducted two studies investigating the temporal and developmental trajectories of post-error slowing in three prominent cognitive conflict tasks (Stroop, Simon, and flanker). We instructed children (8-, 10-, and 12-year-old) and adults to respond as fast and as accurately as possible and measured their response times on four trials after correct and incorrect responses to a cognitive conflict. Results revealed that all age groups had longer response times on post-error versus post-correct trials, reflecting post-error slowing. Critically, slowing on the first post-error trial declined with age, suggesting an age-related reduction in the orienting response towards errors. This age effect diminished on subsequent trials, suggesting more fine-tuned cognitive control adjustments with age. Overall, the consistent pattern across tasks suggests an age-related change from a relatively strong orienting response to more balanced cognitive control adaptations.     

Oops!.. I did it again: an ERP and behavioral study of double-errors

To understand the sequealae of action monitoring failures, most previous studies have focused on neural (e.g., the ERN and Pe) and behavioral (e.g., post-error slowing) measures associated with correct trials that precede and follow errors. However, trials that precede and follow errors are not always correct, and no study to date has examined RT and ERP indices in double-error sequences that could shed additional light on multiple response monitoring failures. In the present study, we examined ERP and behavioral data surrounding double-errors to explore the possibility that double-errors could either result from the failed detection of the first error, or from a reduction in compensatory post-error behavioral adjustments. Results indicate a normal ERN and Pe surrounding double-errors; however, errors that followed errors were characterized by reduced post-error reaction time slowing. These data are discussed in terms of existing response monitoring data, and in terms of the utility of double-errors to shed light on distinct types of response monitoring failures.     

社会评价影响错误后调整效应

现有研究主要采用结果评价或结果反馈的方式考察评价对错误后调整效应的影响,但是任务前的社会评价怎样影响错误后调整效应尚不清楚。本研究采用社会评价任务,以错误后反应时和错误后正确率为指标,在两个实验中考察正性和负性评价对错误后调整效应的影响。结果发现,实验1和实验2中正性和负性评价条件下错误后减慢效应差异均不显著,说明正性和负性评价对错误后调整的作用是一致的,且不受实验任务的影响。在实验1中通过和无评价条件比较发现,评价条件下的正确后反应显著慢于无评价条件,但是评价条件下的错误后反应与无评价条件无差异,说明社会评价加速了个体错误后调整。而且在实验2中发现高低自我效能组个体错误后调整效应差异不显著,说明当前结果不受个体自我效能感的影响。因此,当前研究说明任务前的社会评价促进了个体错误后行为调整,但是错误后调整效应不受社会评价效价的影响。     

Testing theories of post-error slowing

People tend to slow down after they make an error. This phenomenon, generally referred to as post-error slowing, has been hypothesized to reflect perceptual distraction, time wasted on irrelevant processes, an a priori bias against the response made in error, increased variability in a priori bias, or an increase in response caution. Although the response caution interpretation has dominated the empirical literature, little research has attempted to test this interpretation in the context of a formal process model. Here, we used the drift diffusion model to isolate and identify the psychological processes responsible for post-error slowing. In a very large lexical decision data set, we found that post-error slowing was associated with an increase in response caution and-to a lesser extent-a change in response bias. In the present data set, we found no evidence that post-error slowing is caused by perceptual distraction or time wasted on irrelevant processes. These results support a response-monitoring account of post-error slowing.     

Heart work after errors: Behavioral adjustment following error commission involves cardiac effort

Posterror slowing (PES) is the observation that people respond slower on trials subsequent to error commissions than on trials subsequent to correct responses. Different accounts have been proposed to explain PES. On the one hand, it has been suggested that PES arises from an adaptive increase in cognitive control following error commission, thereby making people more cautious after making an error. On the other hand, PES has been attributed to an orienting response, indicating that attention is shifted toward the error. In the present study we tested these accounts by investigating the effects of error commission in both flanker and switch tasks on two task-evoked cardiac measures: the interbeat interval—that is, the interval between two consecutive R peaks—and the RZ interval—that is, the interval between the R peak and the Z point—as measured using electro- and impedance cardiography, respectively. These measures allowed us to measure cardiac deceleration (autonomic orienting) and cardiac effort mobilization, respectively. Our results revealed a shorter RZ interval during posterror trials, indicating increased effort mobilization following errors. In addition, we replicated earlier studies that have shown cardiac slowing during error trials. However, multilevel analyses showed that only the posterror decrease in RZ interval predicted posterror reaction times, whereas there was no positive relationship between error-related cardiac deceleration and posterror reaction times. Our results suggest that PES is related to increased cardiac effort, supporting a cognitive-control account of PES.