汉语词类歧义解决初探

采用自定步速移动窗口阅读实验范式,考察汉语词类歧义解决过程。阅渎材料为含有单字词类歧义词的句子,歧义词前面的语境不提供明确的偏向性信息．后语境提供解歧信息。结果发现,主要用法和次要用法的句子都在解歧区比控制句阅读时间加长,表明汉语词类歧义解决没有即时受到歧义词两种用法的相对频率影响,而是在歧义词处暂时不进行完全的句法分配,延迟到获得充分解歧信息的时候才分配句法角色。这一结果支持词类歧义解决的延迟模型。     

IAT效应在不同目标概念水平上的差异研究

采用IAT实验设计,考察大学生对不同概念词的内隐态度之间的差别。结果发现,八组实验材料都产生了显著的IAT效应;不同性别的测验材料的IAT效应间不存在显著差异,不同喜好程度的测验材料的IAT效应间存在显著差异,且两个因素存在显著的交互作用。研究表明,IAT效应既可在上位概念水平上产生,亦可在下位概念水平上产生。     

中学生知识获得过程是从情景记忆向语义记忆转化的过程

本研究探讨中学生的知识掌握过程。针对2001—2002年度上学期教学内容,对初中二年级学生的四门课程分别进行两次测验。对于每道选择题,学生首先选择正确答案,然后指出记忆的意识状态：记住的、知道的、猜测的。结果发现,学生记忆意识类型的转变(由记住向知道)取决于课程类型、保持时间和学生等级。对于不同课程,学生占优势的意识类型不同,自然学科知道的反应占优势,社会学科记住的反应占优势;优等生知道的反应多于其他学生;随着学习时间的延长,中学生的意识类型发生了由记住向知道的转变,这表明知识掌握过程中,中学生的知识表征发生了由情景记忆向语义记忆的转变。     

公共行政伦理价值定位与规范体系

加强公共行政伦理建设,是加强政风建设、建设廉洁勤政务实高故政府、建设高素质公务员队伍的基本途径。因此,必须对公共行政伦理进行价值定位,借鉴国外公共行政伦理建设的经验,建构中国当代公共行政伦理的规范体系。     

汉语词汇产生中音、形、义三种信息激活的时间进程

采用图-词干扰范式和图片命名方法,探讨语音、语义、字形在汉语词汇产生中激活的时间进程与特点。选择与目标图片名称(如“羊”)具有同音(“阳”)、语义相联(“牛”)、字形相似(“丰”)或无关控制(“冷”)等四种关系的干扰字,依SOA条件呈现在将要被命名的图片上,发现图片命名时间受干扰字的影响：语义干扰效应存在于较早期的SOA(0ms)条件中,在较晚期SOA(150ms)时有很大的减弱;语音促进效应和字形促进效应同时强烈地存在于早期和晚期SOA。实验发现了词条选择(语义激活)和音位编码(语音提取)在激活时间上的重叠现象,与传统的独立两阶段模型的预期存在明显矛盾,倾向于支持交互作用理论的观点。     

年龄、焦虑与情节记忆之内容与来源的关系

将情节记忆区分为内容记忆和来源记忆,筛选年老和年轻的高、低特质焦虑者完成记忆任务,以探讨情节记忆年老化的选择性和变异性及其与焦虑之间的联系。两项实验结果表明来源记忆是否随增龄而有选择性受损受来源性质影响,与来源呈现方式和来源识记意识性无关。焦虑干扰了老年组的记忆操作,是老年人情节记忆存在个体差异的原因之一;但焦虑对青年组没有不利影响,提示焦虑调节两类记忆的年龄差异。     

A century of Chinese developmental psychology

At the turn of last century, psychology, including developmental psychology, was introduced into China. Since then, developmental psychology has always been one of the main branches of Chinese psychology. This paper reviews the progress of Chinese developmental psychology in the last century, with special emphasis on its development during the recent 20 years. The paper consists of three sections. The first is a historical review. The 100 years' history of Chinese developmental psychology has been divided into three phases: first half of the 20th century; the period between 1950s and 1970s after the foundation of the People's Republic of China; and the period from the end of the 1970s up to the present. The authors briefly describe the initiation of Chinese developmental psychology, highlighting the research and related work in the field during the three phases. The second section of the paper introduces the research conducted by Chinese developmental psychologists during the last two decades in the following areas: cognitive development, language development, social development and socialization, the study of gifted children, cross‐cultural studies of child development, the study of only children, and the psychology of ageing. This section is the focus of the paper, because in this period, developmental psychology in China has progressed steadily on a sustained course and entered an unprecedented thriving period along with the State opening‐up policy and structural reformation. The last section is an appraisal of the past and prospects for the future. Here, the authors comment on the characteristics and achievements of Chinese developmental psychology in the 20th century and discuss future directions for its further development in terms of research scope and depth, research methods, indigenization, and application.     

当代西方社会科学哲学发展的三种态势

从历史的角度看,社会科学哲学的历史发展并不存在一个连续和统一的过程.曼尼卡斯(Peter T.Manicas)把社会科学哲学的历史发展大致分为四个阶段,每个阶段都有与之相对应的主题[1]:第一个阶段开始于西方哲学和科学的肇始——主题是古希腊城邦;第二个阶段开始于文艺复兴晚期,延续到法国革命——主题是西方现代性;第三个阶段大约是在19世纪——主题是科学观念与人文科学观念之争;第四个阶段是现在,开始于20世纪50年代——主题是实证主义与反自然主义关于人文科学观念的争论.     

Make‐or‐Break: Chasing Risky Goals or Settling for Safe Rewards?

Humans regularly pursue activities characterized by dramatic success or failure outcomes where, critically, the chances of success depend on the time invested working toward it. How should people allocate time between such make‐or‐break challenges and safe alternatives, where rewards are more predictable (e.g., linear) functions of performance? We present a formal framework for studying time allocation between these two types of activities, and we explore optimal behavior in both one‐shot and dynamic versions of the problem. In the one‐shot version, we illustrate striking discontinuities in the optimal time allocation policy as we gradually change the parameters of the decision‐making problem. In the dynamic version, we formulate the optimal strategy—defined by a giving‐up threshold—which adaptively dictates when people should stop pursuing the make‐or‐break goal. We then show that this strategy is computationally inaccessible for humans, and we explore boundedly rational alternatives. We compare the performance of the optimal model against (a) a myopic giving‐up threshold that is easier to compute, and even simpler heuristic strategies that either (b) only decide whether or not to start pursuing the goal and never give up or (c) consider giving up at a fixed number of control points. Comparing strategies across environments, we investigate the cost and behavioral implications of sidestepping the computational burden of full rationality.