同伴互评对初中生的TAT中亲和意象的影响研究

本研究以北京市47名初二学生为被试,选用6张图片研究了TAT故事中的亲和意象在同伴互评前后的变化,以及图片线索、性别等因素对亲和意象影响。结果表明：（1）在互评前亲和主题数较少的被试在互评后亲和主题数增多,而在互评前的亲和主题数较多的被试在互评后反而减少。（2）图片线索对亲和主题数有显著影响,引发亲和动机的线索较少的图片在互评后的故事中亲和主题数的增加最为显著。（3）女生的亲和动机高于男生,且性别与其它因素有交互作用。     

前瞻记忆的自评和延时特点

前瞻记忆的自评和延时研究目前由于实验任务的不同结果差异很大。该文采用由前瞻记忆自我评价题目构成的并且包含前瞻记忆任务的测验材料,探索了前瞻记忆研究的一种新方法,研究了可能影响前瞻记忆的几个因素。结果发现,0延时与其它延时(7min,17min,27min,57min)均有显著差异,其它各延时之间没有显著差异,年龄对前瞻记忆和前瞻记忆自我评价均有显著影响,前瞻记忆与性别、人格、智力、回溯记忆没有显著相关。     

主题关系对无线索回忆再认效应的影响

本研究采用RWCR范式,从无线索回忆再认的视角考察了主题关系对熟悉性的影响。结果发现,主题关系能够引发无线索回忆再认效应。具体表现为,在回忆错误项目中,被试对与学过项目有主题关系线索的熟悉性评分显著高于与学过项目无主题关系线索的熟悉性评分。这一结果表明,个体在信息提取失败时,概念形式的语义信息也能引发基于熟悉性的再认判断。     

梅尔美术判断测验在中国应用的信、效度检验

目的:修订梅尔美术判断测验(Meier Art Judgment Test)并对其信度、效度进行检验。方法:通过对来自6所大学、中专共2270人施测梅尔美术判断测验,采用CTT区分度和IRT的模型拟合检验、区分度筛选项目,以霍兰德艺术分测验、学生艺术创作水平自评与艺术过往经历分量表为效标,以及采用效标组法(美术与非美术专业)检验效标关联效度。结果:保留的61题都拟合IRT的2参数logistic模型,量表得分与各效标得分相关显著,美术与非美术专业学生得分存在显著差异; 但测验信息量分析表明,对高能力被试的测量误差相对较大。结论:修订的量表能测量个体的美术判断能力; 今后改进方向应该是增加更难的试题。     

经颅电刺激与视功能调控

经颅电刺激(Transcranial Electrical Stimulation, TES)通过电极将特定模式的低强度电流作用于大脑头皮以调控皮层活动, 是一种非侵入、无创的神经刺激方法。根据刺激电流的模式的不同, TES分为经颅直流电刺激(tDCS), 经颅交流电刺激(tACS)和经颅随机电刺激(tRNS)。TES能对视功能诸如光幻视阈值、视野、对比敏感度、视知觉运动等进行一定程度上的调控, 并且能够与传统的视觉知觉学习训练相结合以调控视觉功能。对于不同的视觉功能, 不同的TES参数和模式的调控效果有所不同。     

重新发现屈尔佩:二重心理学思想的演进轨迹与启示

屈尔佩二重心理学思想旨在调和冯特的内容心理学与布伦塔诺的意动心理学,是心理学史上第一次整合心理学自然科学取向与人文科学取向的尝试。文章基于对屈尔佩二重心理学思想演进轨迹的具体分析,尝试厘清其与内容心理学体系之间的继承关系与改良缘由,探究其走近意动心理学的理论动因。最后,从主要贡献和局限两方面来重新发现屈尔佩二重心理学思想的意义与启示。     

Larval zebrafish display dynamic learning of aversive stimuli in a constant visual surrounding

Balancing exploration and anti-predation are fundamental to the fitness and survival of all animal species from early life stages. How these basic survival instincts drive learning remains poorly understood. Here, using a light/dark preference paradigm with well-controlled luminance history and constant visual surrounding in larval zebrafish, we analyzed intra- and intertrial dynamics for two behavioral components, dark avoidance and center avoidance. We uncover that larval zebrafish display short-term learning of dark avoidance with initial sensitization followed by habituation; they also exhibit long-term learning that is sensitive to trial interval length. We further show that such stereotyped learning patterns is stimulus-specific, as they are not observed for center avoidance. Finally, we demonstrate at individual levels that long-term learning is under homeostatic control. Together, our work has established a novel paradigm to understand learning, uncovered sequential sensitization and habituation, and demonstrated stimulus specificity, individuality, as well as dynamicity in learning.

Learning while being exposed to a stimulus (i.e., nonassociative learning) is of great importance in that it triggers intrinsic constructs for subsequent recognition of that stimulus and provides a foundation for associative learning (e.g., learning about relations between stimuli in Pavlovian conditioning and stimuli responses-outcomes in instrumental conditioning). Nonassociative learning precedes associative learning in the evolutionary sequence and involves a broad range of behavioral phenomena including habituation, sensitization, perceptual learning, priming, and recognition memory (Pereira and van der Kooy 2013; Ioannou and Anastassiou-Hadjicharalambous 2018).As the simplest learning form, habituation is defined as the progressively reduced ability of a stimulus to elicit a behavioral response over time (Glanzman 2009; Rankin et al. 2009; Thompson 2009). Such a response reduction is distinguished from sensory adaptation and motor fatigue and is often considered adaptive in that it helps animals to filter out harmless and irrelevant stimuli (Rankin et al. 2009). Since an early study of EEG arousal in cats (Sharpless and Jasper 1956), the habituation phenomenon has been widely documented in invertebrates such as C. elegans (Rankin and Broster 1992; Rose and Rankin 2001; Giles and Rankin 2009; Ardiel et al. 2016) and Aplysia (Glanzman 2009) as well as in vertebrates such as rodents (Bolivar 2009; Salomons et al. 2010; Arbuckle et al. 2015), zebrafish (Best et al. 2008; Wolman et al. 2011; Roberts et al. 2016; Randlett et al. 2019; Pantoja et al. 2020) and humans (Bornstein et al. 1988; Coppola et al. 2013).Accompanying habituation is a process termed sensitization, which in contrast enhances responses to a stimulus over time (Kalivas and Stewart 1991; McSweeney and Murphy 2009; Robinson and Becker 1986). This counterpart of habituation may also be adaptive if it helps animals avoid potentially risky or costly situations (Blumstein 2016; King et al. 2007). Like habituation, sensitization has also been documented in a phylogenetically diverse set of organisms (Cai et al. 2012; Kirshenbaum et al. 2019; Tran and Gerlai 2014; Watkins et al. 2010), suggesting an evolutionarily conserved biological underpinning for both processes. Furthermore, these simple learning forms are observed in various functional outputs of nervous systems ranging from simple reflexes (Blanch et al. 2014; Pantoja et al. 2020; Pinsker et al. 1970; Randlett et al. 2019) to complex cognitive phenotypes (Bolivar 2009; Leussis and Bolivar 2006; Thompson and Spencer 1966) and may represent deeper neurobiological constructs associated with anxiety-memory interplay (Morgan and LeDoux 1995; Ruehle et al. 2012; Sullivan and Gratton 2002). Therefore, understanding basic building blocks of habituation and sensitization is essential to fully understand complex behaviors.Habituation and sensitization have been reported with short-term (intrasession) and long-term (intersession) mechanisms in a number of systems (Rankin et al. 2009; Thompson 2009). Short-term mechanisms sensitize or habituate a response within a session (Meincke et al. 2004; Leussis and Bolivar 2006; Rahn et al. 2013; Byrne and Hawkins 2015). In contrast, long-term mechanisms retain memory formed in previous session and use it to modify behavioral responses in a subsequent session (Rankin et al. 2009).Although both short- and long-term learning and memory have been demonstrated in young larval zebrafish (Wolman et al. 2011; O''Neale et al. 2014; Roberts et al. 2016; Randlett et al. 2019), so far, most paradigms use unnatural stimuli and are designed without integrating sensitization and habituation in the same paradigm. The latter limitation is crucial as the influential dual-process theory, proposed by Groves and Thompson (1970), suggests that the two learning forms interact to yield final behavioral outcomes and therefore assessment of only one process might be confounded by alteration in the other process (Meincke et al. 2004).In this study, we examined stimulus learning in a large population of larval zebrafish using a light/dark preference paradigm over four trials across 2 d. Light/dark preference as a motivated behavior is observed across the animal kingdom (Serra et al. 1999; Bourin and Hascoët 2003; Gong et al. 2010; Lau et al. 2011). Larval zebrafish display distinct motor behaviors that are sensitive to the intensity of both preadapted and current photic stimuli (Burgess and Granato 2007; Burgess et al. 2010; Facciol et al. 2019). In our paradigm with well-controlled luminance history and constant visual surrounding, larval zebrafish generally display dark avoidance and center avoidance (also known as thigmotaxis) with heritable individual variability and are considered fear- or anxiety-related (Steenbergen et al. 2011; Schnörr et al. 2012; Bai et al. 2016; Wagle et al. 2017; Dahlén et al. 2019). From an ethological perspective, the extent of avoidance is likely a readout of the circuitry that balances anti-predation (i.e., avoid the dark and the center) and free exploration (i.e., approach the dark and the center). As described below, we have uncovered stimulus-specific temporal dynamicity of learning (both short term and long term), as well as individual differences in learning that are under homeostatic control.     

What worries first-year students? Psychometric properties of the Student Worry Scale

The transition to university can be stressful for first-year university students. Despite the fact where the feeling of worry is a shared symptom by various mental health issues, there is a lack of studies that investigate into this matter. As worry is a domain-specific construct, there is a need for a valid and reliable measure of worry specifically for university students. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Student Worry Scale (SWS), particularly in terms of its validity and reliability. For this purpose, the current study recruited a sample of 295 first-year students to evaluate the psychometric properties of SWS. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a five-factor structure of SWS, which explained 55.7% of the total variance. The yielded five factors were general worries, financial-related concerns, significant other’s well-being, academic concerns, and social adequacy concerns. Inter-correlations between the five factors were all significant (r ranged between 0.395 and 0.625). The SWS demonstrated good internal consistency in this study (Cronbach’s alpha ranged between 0.786 and 0.941). Overall, the SWS is psychometrically evidenced to be a reliable and valid content-based worry measure specifically for university students.