自主创新的心理实质

如果不局限于哲学反映论来认识心理的实质可以看到,心理是人在不断适应与促进环境和自身发展变化的过程中人脑对现实的主观反映与创新。人的心理表现为适应心理、反映心理和创新心理三者的相互作用与协调统一。创新心理的实质是人脑为适应现实的发展变化,以反映心理为基础而进行的新颖、独特的认知结构的重组与外化。自主创新本质上属于积极适应创新。     

论儿童心理发展的模块性问题

模块理论是当代认知心理学中影响很大的一种关于人类认知结构性质及其组成的观点,它对儿童心理发展特别是认知发展领域的研究产生了重要影响。本文从儿童心理发展的视角,探讨了模块理论对于我们理解人类心理发展的意义。     

父母自主支持与青少年未来规划:基本心理需要与个人成长主动性的中介作用

基于自我决定理论,采用问卷法对广州市2所初中（初一和初二）和2所高中（高一和高二）共562名学生进行调查,考察了父母自主支持与青少年未来规划的关系,以及基本心理需要和个人成长主动性在其中的链式中介作用。结果发现：（1）父母自主支持显著正向预测青少年未来教育规划,但对未来职业规划的预测作用不显著;（2）基本心理需要和个人成长主动性在父母自主支持和青少年未来教育、职业规划之间均起着显著的链式中介作用;（3）纳入基本心理需要和个人成长主动性的中介作用后,父母自主支持对未来职业规划具有显著的负向残余效应,但对未来教育规划的残余效应不显著,这表明父母自主支持对青少年未来规划的影响可能存在坏的一面。因此,基本心理需要和个人成长主动性是影响父母自主支持与青少年未来规划之间关系的重要内因。     

Getting less than their fair share: Maltreated youth are hyper‐cooperative yet vulnerable to exploitation in a public goods game

Human cooperative behavior has long been thought to decline under adversity. However, studies have primarily examined perceived patterns of cooperation, with little eye to actual cooperative behavior embedded within social interaction. Game‐theoretical paradigms can help close this gap by unpacking subtle differences in how cooperation unfolds during initial encounters. This study is the first to use a child‐appropriate, virtual, public goods game to study actual cooperative behavior in 329 participants aged 9–16 years with histories of maltreatment (n = 99) and no maltreatment (n = 230) while controlling for psychiatric symptoms. Unlike work on perceived patterns of cooperation, we found that maltreated participants actually contribute more resources to a public good during peer interaction than their nonmaltreated counterparts. This effect was robust when controlling for psychiatric symptoms and peer problems as well as demographic variables. We conclude that maltreatment may engender a hyper‐cooperative strategy to minimize the odds of hostility and preserve positive interaction during initial encounters. This, however, comes at the cost of potential exploitation by others.     

预先承诺的理论解释及其神经机制

预先承诺是指个体提前做出一个有长远目标的决定来限制对即时诱惑的选择,从而避免在未来决策中由于意志力缺乏而出现的自我控制失败。最后期限法和限制选择法是开展预先承诺研究的常用范式。本研究在系统回顾预先承诺的三种理论解释（自我控制资源模型、神经网络模型和时间差强化学习模型）的基础上,尝试提出一个整合性的认知神经机制模型来解释预先承诺的作用过程。未来研究可进一步丰富预先承诺的研究范式和应用范围,并探究预先承诺调控非理性决策的心理与神经机制。     

Maximum Likelihood Analysis of Linear Mediation Models with Treatment–Mediator Interaction

Psychometrika - This research concerns a mediation model, where the mediator model is linear and the outcome model is also linear but with a treatment–mediator interaction term and a residual...     

Factor analysis and validation of a self-report measure of impaired fear inhibition

Difficulties with inhibiting fear have been associated with the emergence of anxiety problems and poor response to cognitive–behavioural treatment. Fear inhibition problems measured using experimental paradigms involving aversive stimuli may be inappropriate for vulnerable samples and may not capture fear inhibition problems evident in everyday life. We present the Fear Inhibition Questionnaire (FIQ), a self-report measure of fear inhibition abilities. We assess the FIQ’s factor structure across two cultures and how well it correlates with fear inhibition indices derived experimentally. Adolescent participants from Hong Kong and England completed the FIQ, with the English participants also completing a conditioning and extinction task to assess fear inhibition problems. Across both cultures, the FIQ showed a single factor structure and low FIQ scores, or worse fear inhibition problems, were associated with self-reports of heightened anxiety. Correlation of FIQ scores with experimental indices, whilst controlling for anxious symptoms, suggests that the FIQ represents a valid and unique measure of fear inhibition abilities. The FIQ might be used to assess more ecologically valid fear inhibition problems particularly amongst people who have or who are at risk of anxiety diagnoses.     

SACRED LAW RECONSIDERED

People everywhere search for answers by using the resources of their traditions. They wish to do so in a legitimate way, and so they consult official institutions, specialists, and skilled individuals for their opinions; regardless of religious or cultural contexts, the common aim of these experts is to produce security, unity, and trust. Therefore, the norm‐finding processes in Islamic and Western contexts share fundamental similarities: the problem of finding a final ground for judgment, the strategies of constructing coherence and of organizing consensus, and the difficulties of obtaining legitimacy. What makes one debate “Islamic” and the other one “Western” is the different semantic materials, the different authorities, the different languages, and the different juridical frameworks. In my comparison of Muslim and Western discourses and practices, I conclude that Muslim and non‐Muslim scholars tend to overemphasize the uniqueness of Muslim legal and practical responses to bioethical challenges, because they restrict their purview to legal opinions, ignoring larger dynamics of legitimization.     

What day is today? A social-psychological investigation into the process of time orientation.

Social-psychological research on time has pointed to the social construct of time rather than a mere physical entity that we reflect cognitively. Using two paradigms (day retrieval process and goal priming), the authors show that the time orientation is strongly prone to social influences and argue that a self-regulatory process underlies these findings. The degree of social comparison orientation in Study 1 and the degree of identification with groups for which the landmark is relevant (Study 2) both moderate the functionality of the landmarks within time orientation. Consistent with these findings, Studies 3 and 4 offer evidence that the activation of a personally relevant goal activates the day of goal attainment, a process that again can be moderated by social comparison orientation and identification. Overall, these results suggest a socially regulated time orientation. The internal clock (if any) is at least partly a "social clock."