Specificity of face processing without awareness

The recognition memory for inverted faces is especially difficult when compared with that for non-face stimuli. This face inversion effect has often been used as a marker of face-specific holistic processing. However, whether face processing without awareness is still specific remains unknown. The present study addressed this issue by examining the face inversion effect with the technique of binocular rivalry. Results showed that invisible upright faces could break suppression faster than invisible inverted faces. Nevertheless, no difference was found for invisible upright houses and invisible inverted houses. This suggested that face processing without awareness is still specific. Some face-specific information can be processed by high-level brain areas even when that information is invisible.     

双任务并存条件下的信息提取

将短时记忆再认与长时记忆范畴判断两类不同性质的信息提取任务相并列,探讨了双任务条件下的信息提取过程是如何进行的。实验结果表明,双任务并存时,ｎｏ反应的总平均反应时不等于两种任务单独进行时各自ｎｏ反应的平均反应时之和（减去一次视觉动作反应时后）,而是与其中一个较后完成的过程的ｎｏ反应平均反应时相近。因此推断双任务并存时,信息提取过程不是完成一个再进行另一个的系列加工过程,而是二者同时平行加工的过程。     

SOA对Stroop启动效应的影响:行为和ERP研究

在Stroop启动范式中,启动刺激是灰色的色词,目标刺激是颜色块,被试的任务是命名颜色块的颜色。本研究通过行为实验和事件相关电位(ERP)实验的方法,研究SOA(Stimulus Onset Asynchrony)对Stroop启动效应的影响。当SOA为107ms时,在行为数据(反应时)和ERP数据(N300成分)上均表现出明显的启动效应;当SOA为1040ms时,行为上和ERP上的启动效应消失。该结果提示了在Stroop启动效应中,启动刺激对目标刺激的影响很可能是发生在对目标刺激的知觉加工晚期。     

Hume's Internalist Epistemology in EHU 12

Much has been written about Kemp Smith's (1941) famous problem regarding the tension between Hume's naturalism and his scepticism. However, most commentators have focused their attention on the Treatise; those who address the Enquiry often take it to express essentially the same message as the Treatise. When Hume's scepticism in the Enquiry has been investigated in its own right, commentators have tended to focus on Hume's inductive scepticism in Sections 4 and 5. All in all, it seems that Section 12 has been unduly neglected. This paper seeks to address Kemp Smith's problem from the standpoint of Hume's treatment of scepticism in EHU 12, and finds an interesting internalist account that makes sense both of Hume's discussion in EHU 12, and his aims in the Enquiry as a whole. Moreover, it is one that is of substantive philosophical interest, having intriguing parallels to contemporary epistemological accounts.     

哈尼族祖先崇拜丧葬习俗及调适作用探讨

本文在实际调查和广泛收集资料的基础上,运用民俗学、社会学、民族学、文化人类学等学科理论梳理和分析了哈尼族祖先崇拜在丧葬期间和节假日中的不同礼仪分类及其特点,探讨了哈尼族祖先崇拜在道德评价、行为约束、情感凝聚等三方面的调适作用。     

表达形式影响自我积极偏向的表现:来自P200的证据

该研究运用事件相关电位技术,采用肯定和否定的表达方式呈现自我参照任务,探讨不同表达方式对自我积极偏向效应的影响。实验一中,行为数据显示,自我积极偏向效应表现的并不完整;ERP数据显示,P200波幅的结果与行为数据结果相一致。实验二中,行为数据显示,自我积极偏向效应表现得完整;ERP数据显示,P200成分上并未产生任何实验效应。综合两个实验结果,证明了不同表达方式对自我积极偏向效应的表现存在影响。导致这种差异的根本原因可能在于两种表达方式造成的注意资源不同。     

目标刺激的熟悉度和呈现角度对情绪启动的影响

本研究初步考察目标刺激的熟悉度和呈现角度对情绪启动的影响。研究采用女性面孔图片作为实验材料,随机选取30名大学生被试进行实验,采用重复测量方差分析对数据进行统计分析。结果发现:当目标刺激为熟悉图片时,出现了情绪启动效应;当目标刺激为不熟悉的图片时,未发现情绪启动效应;目标刺激的呈现角度对情绪启动效应没有影响。     

Hume’s practically epistemic conclusions?

The inoffensive title of Section 1.4.7 of Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature, ‘Conclusion of this Book’, belies the convoluted treatment of scepticism contained within. It is notoriously difficult to decipher Hume’s considered response to scepticism in this section, or whether he even has one. In recent years, however, one line of interpretation has gained popularity in the literature. The ‘usefulness and agreeableness reading’ (henceforth U&A) interprets Hume as arguing in THN 1.4.7 that our beliefs and/or epistemic policies are justified via their usefulness and agreeableness to the self and others; proponents include Ardal (in Livingston & King (eds.) Hume: a re-evaluation, 1976), Kail (in: Frasca-Spada & Kail (eds.) Impressions of Hume, 2005), McCormick (Hume Stud 31:1, 2005), Owen (Hume’s reason, 1999), and Ridge (Hume Stud 29:2, 2003), while Schafer (Philosophers, forthcoming) also defends an interpretation along these lines. In this paper, I will argue that although U&A has textual merit, it struggles to maintain a substantive distinction between epistemic and moral justification—a distinction that Hume insists on. I then attempt to carve out the logical space for there being a distinctly epistemic notion of justification founded on usefulness and agreeableness. However, I find that such an account is problematic for two reasons: first, it cannot take advantage of the textual support for U&A; secondly, it is incompatible with other features of the text.     

Estimating valence from the sound of a word: Computational,experimental, and cross-linguistic evidence

It is assumed linguistic symbols must be grounded in perceptual information to attain meaning, because the sound of a word in a language has an arbitrary relation with its referent. This paper demonstrates that a strong arbitrariness claim should be reconsidered. In a computational study, we showed that one phonological feature (nasals in the beginning of a word) predicted negative valence in three European languages (English, Dutch, and German) and positive valence in Chinese. In three experiments, we tested whether participants used this feature in estimating the valence of a word. In Experiment 1, Chinese and Dutch participants rated the valence of written valence-neutral words, with Chinese participants rating the nasal-first neutral-valence words more positive and the Dutch participants rating nasal-first neutral-valence words more negative. In Experiment 2, Chinese (and Dutch) participants rated the valence of Dutch (and Chinese) written valence-neutral words without being able to understand the meaning of these words. The patterns replicated the valence patterns from Experiment 1. When the written words from Experiment 2 were transformed into spoken words, results in Experiment 3 again showed that participants estimated the valence of words on the basis of the sound of the word. The computational study and psycholinguistic experiments indicated that language users can bootstrap meaning from the sound of a word.