The man who wasn't there: Subliminal social comparison standards influence self-evaluation

Life provides an endless stream of social comparison information. Because opportunities to compare with others are so abundant, social comparison theory traditionally assumes that people are selective in their comparison activities and primarily compare with deliberately selected standards. Recent research, however, demonstrates that social comparisons often occur spontaneously, even if no standard is explicitly provided or deliberately selected. We examined whether comparisons are so spontaneous that they are even engaged if people are fleetingly exposed to a potential standard—so fleetingly that they remain unaware of the standard. In three studies, participants were subliminally primed with moderate versus extreme, high versus low standards during self-evaluation. Results demonstrate that self-evaluations are influenced by subliminally presented standards. Specifically, self-evaluations are assimilated towards moderate standards and contrasted away from extreme standards. These self-evaluative consequences of subliminal standards, however, were only obtained if participants engaged in self-reflection during standard exposure. These findings emphasize that social comparisons are truly ubiquitous processes that are engaged even for fleeting exposure to standard information.     

技术文明社会的生态危机意识--评法兰克福学派的科技决定论

本文介绍和分析了法兰克福学派内部在如何看待科技的生态功能问题上的两种迥然不同的观点,指出了它们各自论点中存在的误识和留给人们的启迪,论证了科技进步与合理解决环境污染,生态平衡等全球性问题之间密不可分的关系。     

Hindsight bias redefined: It’s about time

Four experiments introduced a new conceptual and methodological approach to hindsight bias, traditionally defined as the tendency to exaggerate the a priori predictability of outcomes after they become known. By examining likelihood estimates rooted to specific time points during an unfolding event sequence (videos and short text stories), judged both in foresight and hindsight, we conceptualized hindsight bias as a contrast between two “inevitability curves,” which plotted likelihood against time. Taking timing into account, we defined three new indicators of accuracy: linear accuracy (how well hindsight judgments capture the linear trend of foresight judgments over time), rate accuracy (how well hindsight judgments reflect the slope of foresight judgments over time), and temporal accuracy (how well hindsight judgments specify the overall timing of the full envelope of foresight judgments). Results demonstrated that hindsight judgments showed linear and rate accuracy, but were biased only in terms of lack of temporal accuracy. The oft-used catchphrase “knew it all along effect” was found to be a misnomer, in that participants were well aware in hindsight that their earlier foresight judgments reflected uncertainty. The current research therefore points to one way in which retrospective judgments can be considered biased, yet simultaneously suggests that considerable accuracy exists when people render such judgments.     

学前儿童视、触大小知觉实验研究

本实验探讨了3—6岁学前儿童的视、触大小知觉的发展规律及视、触不同感觉道在大小知觉中的相互作用。结果表明:无论哪一个年龄组的儿童均以“视—视”条件的大小知觉结果最优,其次是“触—触”条件的结果,而“视—触”及“触—视”的结果均较差。本文结果否定了认为交叉感觉道(“视—触”、“触—视”)对大小知觉的辨别与单一感觉道(“视—视”,“触—触”)没有差异的看法。实验结果还表明了,学前儿童的视、触大小知觉有其发展变化的特点。单一感觉道(视—视”,“触—触”)的大小知觉的准确性随着年龄的增长而提高;交叉(不同)感觉道(“视—触”,“触—视”)的大小知觉的准确性在5岁阶段为高峰期,6岁后便开始有所下降。