Stroop范式中不同语言条件下的双语优势效应

目的:采用Stroop范式探讨不同语言条件下的双语优势效应。方法:两个实验均为2(被试类型)x 3(色词一致性)的混合实验设计,被试为熟练双语者和非熟练双语者。结果:(1)L1条件下熟练双语者的Stroop效应量小于非熟练双语者,L2条件下无显著差异。(2)熟练双语者在两个实验条件下的平均反应时均小于非熟练双语者,L2条件下的易化效应量显著大于非熟练双语者。结论:(1)熟练双语者在L1条件下的抑制控制能力好于非熟练双语者,体现了"双语优势效应";(2)熟练双语者在Stroop干扰任务中可能比非熟练双语者具有更好的信息监控能力。     

Interhemispheric cooperation and non-cooperation during word recognition: evidence for callosal transfer dysfunction in dyslexic adults

Participants report briefly-presented words more accurately when two copies are presented, one in the left visual field (LVF) and another in the right visual field (RVF), than when only a single copy is presented. This effect is known as the 'redundant bilateral advantage' and has been interpreted as evidence for interhemispheric cooperation. We investigated the redundant bilateral advantage in dyslexic adults and matched controls as a means of assessing communication between the hemispheres in dyslexia. Consistent with previous research, normal adult readers in Experiment 1 showed significantly higher accuracy on a word report task when identical word stimuli were presented bilaterally, compared to unilateral RVF or LVF presentation. Dyslexics, however, did not show the bilateral advantage. In Experiment 2, words were presented above fixation, below fixation or in both positions. In this experiment both dyslexics and controls benefited from the redundant presentation. Experiment 3 combined whole words in one visual field with word fragments in the other visual field (the initial and final letters separated by spaces). Controls showed a bilateral advantage but dyslexics did not. In Experiments 1 and 3, the dyslexics showed significantly lower accuracy for LVF trials than controls, but the groups did not differ for RVF trials. The findings suggest that dyslexics have a problem of interhemispheric integration and not a general problem of processing two lexical inputs simultaneously.     

The semantic/episodic distinction: The case for social information processing

The directed-forgetting paradigm was used in order to dissociate episodic from semantic processes in an impression formation task. Results demonstrate that incongruent behaviors are more prone to manipulations that disrupt episodic memory, whereas congruent behaviors are unaffected by such manipulations. The results suggest that the distinction between episodic and semantic memory processes is central for the understanding of social information processing. An explanation is put forward according to which the incongruency effect, a signature effect of impression formation, is due to an episodic encoding advantage for incongruent behaviors because of their semantically isolated nature, and their impoverished semantic encoding.     

A brief diversity training: Raising awareness of ingroup privilege to improve attitudes towards disadvantaged outgroups

Diversity training is a popular strategy to reduce prejudice within educational settings. However, in practice, diversity training rarely relies on social-psychological theory, and research on its effectiveness in real-world settings is scarce. Previous research regarding diversity training has particularly neglected an important theoretical concept: privilege as the counterpart of discrimination. Therefore, we developed a diversity training aiming to increase awareness of ingroup privilege, using an intersectional approach to teach participants the complex interaction between privilege and oppression. We randomly allocated students of educational science (N = 112) to a repeated-measures (pre-test, post-test, follow-up) control-group design. Compared with the control group, training participants showed a significant increase in awareness of ingroup privilege 1 week after the training, whereas there was no change in awareness of discrimination. Furthermore, increased awareness of ingroup privilege 1 week after the training mediated improved outgroup attitudes (i.e., more positive outgroup feelings towards immigrants and refugees, reduced subtle prejudice towards immigrants and reduced homonegativity) 2 weeks after the training.     

Deficits of subliminal self-face processing in schizophrenia

Most studies show that self-processing in schizophrenia is impaired at the supraliminal level. Schizophrenic patients generally lack the ability to prioritize the processing of self-related information, such as their own face. However, some evidence suggests that schizophrenic patients may retain intact subliminal processing abilities even though their conscious experiences are compromised. We conducted the first study exploring schizophrenic patients’ subliminal self-face processing. Using a breaking continuous flash suppression (bCFS) paradigm, we interocularly suppressed face images (self, famous, and unknown faces). Participants’ reaction times to detect the faces when they broke the suppression were recorded as an index for the subliminal processing of faces. Unlike the healthy controls, schizophrenic patients did not demonstrate a processing advantage for their own face when it broke interocular suppression; only a face familiarity effect was found. These findings contribute to the understanding of self-processing deficits in schizophrenia.     

Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity

Drawing on the evidence of the role of social categorisation and identity in the development and maintenance of intergroup biases, research on the Common Ingroup Identity Model (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000 Gaertner, S. L. and Dovidio, J. F. 2000. Reducing intergroup bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model, Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.  [Google Scholar]) has investigated how modifying the ways that the self and others are categorised can reduce prejudice and discrimination. In this article, we review more recent research that extends our initial formulation of the model by considering more fully alternative forms of recategorisation (a dual identity as well as a one-group representation), the different preferences of majority and minority groups for these different forms of recategorised representations, and the potential implications of these different preferences on the content of intergroup interaction and on the possibilities for social change towards equality.     

Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model

This chapter summarises results from a research programme on the psychological basis of tolerance and discrimination in intergroup relations, with particular consideration of the role of superordinate identities. According to the ingroup projection model, a relevant superordinate group provides dimensions and norms for comparisons between ingroup and outgroup. Groups gain positive value or status when they are considered prototypical for the (positively valued) superordinate group. Group members tend to generalise (project) distinct ingroup characteristics onto the superordinate category, implying the relative prototypicality of their ingroup. To the extent that outgroup difference is regarded as a deviation from the ethnocentrically construed prototype it is evaluated negatively. Our research studied consequences and determinants of ingroup projection, as well as moderators of its implications. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the processes involved in intergroup discrimination and indicate new pathways for the reduction of prejudice, towards mutual intergroup appreciation and tolerance.     

Stereotypes and stereotyping: What's the brain got to do with it?

Influential social-psychological models suggest that perceivers frequently use information-processing strategies that result in the stereotype-based construal and treatment of other people. To elucidate in greater detail when, why, and how social encounters elicit stereotyping, researchers have begun to incorporate neuroscientific tools into their repertoire of investigative methods. The current article reviews these studies and considers their significance in light of existing theories of person perception, knowledge representation, and impression formation. Finally, using the concrete example of stereotyping, benefits and pitfalls of adopting a social neuroscience approach are discussed.     

In the eye of the beholder? Universality and cultural specificity in the expression and perception of emotion

Do members of different cultures express (or “encode”) emotions in the same fashion? How well can members of distinct cultures recognize (or “decode”) each other's emotion expressions? The question of cultural universality versus specificity in emotional expression has been a hot topic of debate for more than half a century, but, despite a sizeable amount of empirical research produced to date, no convincing answers have emerged. We suggest that this unsatisfactory state of affairs is due largely to a lack of concern with the precise mechanisms involved in emotion expression and perception, and propose to use a modified Brunswikian lens model as an appropriate framework for research in this area. On this basis we provide a comprehensive review of the existing literature and point to research paradigms that are likely to provide the evidence required to resolve the debate on universality vs. cultural specificity of emotional expression. Applying this fresh perspective, our analysis reveals that, given the paucity of pertinent data, no firm conclusions can be drawn on actual expression (encoding) patterns across cultures (although there appear to be more similarities than differences), but that there is compelling evidence for intercultural continuity in decoding, or recognition, ability. We also note a growing body of research on the notion of ingroup advantage due to expression “dialects,” above and beyond the general encoding or decoding patterns. We furthermore suggest that these empirical patterns could be explained by both universality in the underlying mechanisms and cultural specificity in the input to, and the regulation of, these expression and perception mechanisms. Overall, more evidence is needed, both to further elucidate these mechanisms and to inventory the patterns of cultural effects. We strongly recommend using more solid conceptual and theoretical perspectives, as well as more ecologically valid approaches, in designing future studies in emotion expression and perception research.