父母差别对待与青少年问题行为的关系：一个有调节的中介模型

通过问卷调查的方式,采用同胞不同经历问卷、关系网络问卷和问题行为量表对开封市1179名初高中学生进行研究。研究结果显示：（1）父母差别对待与外/内化问题行为呈显著正相关;同胞关系与外/内化问题行为呈显著负相关;父母差别对待和同胞关系呈显著负相关。（2）同胞关系在父母差别对待与外/内化问题行为之间起部分中介作用。（3）“父母差别对待→同胞关系→外/内化问题行为”这一中介路径的前半段受出生顺序调节;与年幼个体相比,父母差别对待对年长个体的同胞关系影响更大。出生顺序会调节父母差别对待对同胞关系的影响,提示二胎家庭要更关注年长个体的变化。     

句子结构与控制动词类型对题元角色指派的影响

扩展论元依存模型认为：语序固定语言的题元角色指派依赖论元的语序线索; 论元线索与动词论元表征不一致时, 题元角色再分析会产生额外的加工负荷。为检验该模型, 本研究采用眼动记录方法, 实验为2 (句子结构：居中、前置) × 2 (控制动词类型：主语控制、宾语控制)被试内设计。通过操纵句子结构, 考察汉语读者对语序线索的依赖性; 通过操纵控制动词类型, 考察汉语论元线索与动词论元表征的一致性对题元角色指派的影响。结果发现：(1)前置结构的句子在名词1、名词2和动词区域的阅读时间和回视次数多于居中结构的句子; (2)宾语控制动词条件在动词和动词后区域的第二遍阅读时间和总回视次数多于主语控制动词条件; (3)在居中结构中, 宾语控制动词条件在名词2和动词区域的阅读时间和回视次数多于主语控制动词条件; 在前置结构中, 宾语控制动词条件在动词后区域的阅读时间多于主语控制动词条件。结果支持扩展论元依存模型。     

时序表征的空间特性

时间是个高度抽象的概念,必须依靠具体的、易感知的事物进行表征。时间表征本质上是隐喻性的,而时间的空间隐喻是时间隐喻表征的原型。受到数字空间表征研究的启示,发现时序表征同样具有空间特性。时序表征具有空间特性具有一定的普遍性,但是在具体的水平或垂直空间维度、“左-右”或“右-左”空间方向上存在一定的灵活性;此外时序能够导致空间注意的转移。     

句子先提述的参与者在可提取性上的优势现象

下述五个实验就汉语句子成分（包括句子的参与者及其动作）的提述次序对其可提取性的影响进行了研究,结果表明：（１）句子先提述的参与者比后提述的参与者容易被提取,提述的次序对参与者的可提取性有明显影响。（２）先提述参与者的这种优势与句子呈现的方式有一定的关系。（３）在系列呈现的条件下,先提述参与者的易提取性与探测词呈现的延迟间隔有关。（４）在系列呈现的条件下,参与者以名词形式出现时,被试的反应速度较快,而参与者以名字的形式出现时,反应则较慢;在同时呈现的条件下这种差异基本消失。（５）句子参与者的行动（即句子的动词）的提述次序对其可提取性也有明显的影响,说明提述次序对句子成分的可提取性的影响,不只限于句子参与者本身。     

Society’s Symbolic Order and Political Trials: Toward Sacrificing the Self for the “Big Other”

The need to establish a borderline between legitimate and illegitimate political trial is one of the central societal discourses. In this paper the author claims that the issues are complex and that a political trial can remain legitimate as long as it is not dealing with a confrontation with the symbolic order on which the society (and the court itself) is founded and as long as the subject (or action) it is dealing with does not threaten the symbolic order’s (or the “Big Other”) existence. When the symbolic order’s existence is in danger, the court is bound to participate in an act of “sacrifice” that is intended to protect the “order.” The author uses Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory of the “Big Other” (and its development to ideological-political terms) in examining three categories of sacrifice. Through these categories the author claims that in extreme cases of confrontation with the existence of the symbolic order, the court cannot remain objective and it would be difficult to justify the trial as legitimate (especially in historical perspective).     

公众时间回溯式记忆的特点

采用事后回溯设计,考察了大学生公众时间回溯式记忆的特点。研究选取1995到2001年之间发生可辨别的新闻事件14项,要求被试对新闻事件的时序、时点和时距进行回忆。结果表明：（1）公众事件回溯式时点记忆的正确率随时间的远近发生变化,较远的时间回忆正确率低,而较近的时间回忆正确率较高,存在近因效应。（2）公众事件的回溯式时距估计受真实时距的影响,短时距容易被高估,长时距容易被低估。（3）公众事件的回溯式时序回忆存在近因效应和首因效应,被试对发生较远的事件总是倾向于估计得更远,对发生较近的事件也倾向于估计得较近。而对两者中间的事件的顺序估计较为混乱。（4）本实验研究的公众事件回溯式时间记忆符合时间的重构理论和分段综合模型。     

Effects of stimulus order on discrimination processes in comparative and equality judgements: Data and models

In typical discrimination experiments, participants are presented with a constant standard and a variable comparison stimulus and their task is to judge which of these two stimuli is larger (comparative judgement). In these experiments, discrimination sensitivity depends on the temporal order of these stimuli (Type B effect) and is usually higher when the standard precedes rather than follows the comparison. Here, we outline how two models of stimulus discrimination can account for the Type B effect, namely the weighted difference model (or basic Sensation Weighting model) and the Internal Reference Model. For both models, the predicted psychometric functions for comparative judgements as well as for equality judgements, in which participants indicate whether they perceived the two stimuli to be equal or not equal, are derived and it is shown that the models also predict a Type B effect for equality judgements. In the empirical part, the models' predictions are evaluated. To this end, participants performed a duration discrimination task with comparative judgements and with equality judgements. In line with the models' predictions, a Type B effect was observed for both judgement types. In addition, a time-order error, as indicated by shifts of the psychometric functions, and differences in response times were observed only for the equality judgement. Since both models entail distinct additional predictions, it seems worthwhile for future research to unite the two models into one conceptual framework.