时间知觉与估计的认知理论综述

本文回顾时间知觉与估计的实验研究 ,总结该领域的国内外研究结果 ,对该领域的各主要认知模型作了较全面的考察和评述 ,并进一步探讨了时间认知领域研究的今后发展 ,尤其是时间知觉与估计研究的脑电研究思路。     

Taking As: Experience & Judgment in the Life of Agents

Although appearances may deceive them, agents are capable of achieving their ends; this success is frequently explained by the fact that the agents may, for example, see a stick in water as bent without believing that it is actually bent. Although the notion of ‘seeing as’ is supposed to both bridge the gap between experience and action and explain our reaction to illusions, such accounts break down because of their exclusive focus on visual episodes and their tendency to interpret the metaphysics of agency in a psychologistic fashion. This paper shows that ‘seeing as’ needs to be understood as a species of the genus ‘taking as.’ The genus admits a wider array of expression, in terms of the kinds of attitudes, actions, and epistemological statuses involved. Such an analysis allows us to avoid the problems of ‘seeing as’ accounts and deepens our understanding of the relationship between practical and theoretical reason.     

非言语声音影响汉语听者言语声音的知觉

采用启动范式, 以汉语听者为被试, 考察了非言语声音是否影响言语声音的知觉。实验1考察了纯音对辅音范畴连续体知觉的影响, 结果发现纯音影响到辅音范畴连续体的知觉, 表现出频谱对比效应。实验2考察了纯音和复合音对元音知觉的影响, 结果发现与元音共振峰频率一致的纯音或复合音加快了元音的识别, 表现出启动效应。两个实验一致发现非言语声音能够影响言语声音的知觉, 表明言语声音知觉也需要一个前言语的频谱特征分析阶段, 这与言语知觉听觉理论的观点一致。     

自我参照框架决定了自我面孔优势效应的出现

研究使用外显面孔再认实验(实验一)和内隐面孔感知实验(实验二)检验自我参照框架是否是自我面孔加工优势出现的决定性因素这一假设。具有不同朝向(左或右)的被试自己面孔和朋友面孔呈现在视野中央, 实验一中, 被试的任务为参照自我框架(观察者角度)或他人框架(被观察的像的角度)判断自我面孔的朝向(忽视朋友面孔), 或者判断朋友面孔的朝向(忽视自我面孔); 实验二中, 被试的任务为参照自我框架或他人框架判断所有面孔的朝向。结果表明：自我参照框架促进自我面孔加工优势的出现, 而他人参照框架消减自我面孔优势, 这种效应稳定地存在于外显和内隐两项任务中。并且, 自我参照框架对自我优势效应的促进作用不依赖于面孔刺激背景。     

传统时空观下“左阳右阴”在中医学的化用

“左阳右阴”理论作为一种思想文化,其形成和发展不可避免地受到经济、政治、科技、思想运动、地理环境等社会与自然多方面因素的影响。鉴于传统时空观对中医学生命观存在指导意义,以时空观为出发点,窥探“左阳右阴”思想形成的自然缘由。这一思想化用于中医领域,演变为中医学认识人体、辨治疾病的重要理论,在脏腑、气血、病证等方面均有体现。关于“左血右气”与“左阳右阴”的矛盾现象,认为原因在于阐述的角度差异,两种理论具体应用时彼此支持,这是中医学立足于整体,论述气血阴阳浑为一体的具体体现。     

In search of a learning model

While the four commentaries reflect a range of different perspectives on my target paper (Vihman, 2017), all basically accept the overall approach, which has been central to my research for 30 years. Each commentary proposes ways of deepening aspects of the ideas expressed or points out limitations and potential areas in which elaboration would be useful. This response takes up each commentary in turn.     

A systematic review on perceptual-motor calibration to changes in action capabilities

Perceptual-motor calibration has been described as a mapping between perception and action, which is relevant to distinguish possible from impossible opportunities for action. To avoid movement errors, it is relevant to rapidly calibrate to immediate changes in capabilities and therefore this study sought to explain in what conditions calibration is most efficient. A systematic search of seven databases was conducted to identify literature concerning changes in calibration in response to changes in action capabilities. Twenty-three papers satisfied the inclusion criteria. Data revealed that calibration occurs rapidly if there is a good match between the task that requires calibration and the sources of perceptual-motor information available for exploration (e.g. when exploring maximal braking capabilities by experiencing braking). Calibration can take more time when the perceptual-motor information that is available is less relevant. The current study identified a number of limitations in the field of perceptual-motor research. Most notably, the mean participant age in the included studies was between 18 and 33 years of age, limiting the generalizability of the results to other age groups. Also, due to inconsistent terminology used in the field of perceptual-motor research, we argue that investigating calibration in older cohorts should be a focus of future research because of the possible implications of impaired calibration in an aging society.     

Aesthetics as evaluative forms of agency to perceive and design reality: A reply to aesthetic realism

Following a naturalist-realist point of view, this paper attempts to contribute to the metaphysical question of whether or not reality includes aesthetics. During evolution, cognitive agents have constructed (goal-directed) regulatory abilities forming anticipatory contents in the form of feelings regarding opportunities for interaction. These feelings are considered to be the fundamental part of an evaluative or (what in this paper considered as aesthetic) behavior through which agents show a preference to aspects of their external world. Thus, ‘aesthetic’ denotes an agential behavior based on an organization of processes integrated in a form that identifies, evaluates, and compares sources of interaction-success or error in specific aspects of external reality. While agents approach the same aspects of reality as they all interact with the same world, our claim is that aesthetic normativity cannot be an objective feature of this reality. This model overcomes problems of correspondence in the sense that an agent's actions and thoughts ought to react to any pre-given (aesthetic) quality or norm, while at the same time it emphasizes the self-directedness of aesthetic behavior that enables the development of creative forms of cognition.     

Affordances after spinal cord injury

Spinal cord injury can cause cognitive impairments even when no cerebral lesion is appreciable. As patients are forced to explore the environment in a non-canonical position (i.e., seated on a wheelchair), a modified relation with space can explain motor-related cognitive differences compared to non-injured individuals. Peripersonal space is encoded in motor terms, that is, in relation to the representation of action abilities and is strictly related to the affordance of reachability. In turn, affordances, the action possibilities suggested by relevant properties of the environment, are related to the perceiver's peripersonal space and motor abilities. One might suppose that these motor-related cognitive abilities are compromised when an individual loses the ability to move. We shed light on this issue in 10 patients with paraplegia and 20 matched controls. All have been administered an affordances-related reachability judgement task adapted from Costantini, Ambrosini, Tieri, Sinigaglia, and Committeri (2010, Experimental Brain Research, 207, 95) and neuropsychological tests. Our findings demonstrate that patients and controls show the same level of accuracy in estimating the location of their peripersonal space boundaries, but only controls show the typical overestimation of reaching range. Secondly, patients show a higher variability in their judgements than controls. Importantly, this finding is related to the patients’ ability to perform everyday tasks. Finally, patients are not faster in making their judgements on reachability in peripersonal space, while controls are. Our results suggest that not moving freely or as usual in the environment impact decoding of action-related properties even when the upper limbs are not compromised.