Time-course of hemispheric preference for processing contralateral relevant shapes: P1pc, N1pc, N2pc, N3pc

A most sensitive and specific electrophysiological indicator of selective processing of visual stimuli is the N2pc component. N2pc is a negative EEG potential peaking 250 ms after stimulus onset, recorded from posterior sites contralateral to relevant stimuli. Additional deflections preceding or following N2pc have been obtained in previous studies, possibly produced by specific stimulus features or specific prime-target sequences. To clarify the entire time-course of the contralateral- ipsilateral (C-I) difference recorded from the scalp above visual cortex in response to left-right pairs of targets and distracters, C-I differences were here compared between two types of stimuli and between stimuli that were or were not preceded by masked neutral primes. The C-I difference waveform consisted of several peaks, termed here P1pc (60-100 ms after target onset), N1pc (120-160 ms), N2pc (220-280 ms), and N3pc (360-400 ms). Being markedly enhanced when stimuli were preceded by the neutral primes, P1pc may indicate a response to stimulus change. Also, when stimuli were primed, N2pc reached its peak earlier, thereby tending to merge with N1pc. N3pc seemed to increase when target discrimination was difficult. N1pc, N2pc, and N3pc appear as three periods of one process. N3pc probably corresponds to L400 or SPCN as described in other studies. These observations suggest that the neurophysiological basis of stimulus-driven focusing of attention on target stimuli is a process that lasts for hundreds of milliseconds, with the relevant hemisphere being activated in an oscillating manner as long as required by the task.     

Moral development, executive functioning, peak experiences and brain patterns in professional and amateur classical musicians: interpreted in light of a Unified Theory of Performance

This study compared professional and amateur classical musicians matched for age, gender, and education on reaction times during the Stroop color-word test, brainwaves during an auditory ERP task and during paired reaction-time tasks, responses on the Gibbs Sociomoral Reflection questionnaire, and self-reported frequencies of peak experiences. Professional musicians were characterized by: (1) lower color-word interference effects (Stroop task), (2) faster categorization of rare expected stimuli (P3b), and a trend for faster processing of rare unexpected stimuli (P3a), (3) higher scores on the Sociomoral Reflection questionnaire, and (4) more frequent peak experiences during rest, tasks, and sleep. Both groups had high values on the Brain Integration Scale. These findings are interpreted in light of a Unified Theory of Performance, which posits that effectiveness in any area is influenced by one’s level of mind-brain development—emotional, cognitive, moral, ego and cortical development—with higher mind-brain development supporting greater effectiveness in any domain.     

错误正波的神经发生源与功能意义解释

错误正波(error positivity, Pe)是指在错误反应后200~600ms后出现的事件相关电位(ERP)的正偏转, 对Pe的研究有助于揭示人类错误加工机制的全貌。现有研究表明Pe主要产生于前扣带回喙部, 但不同的研究对其精细神经发生源并没有达成一致。Pe的功能意义解释主要有错误意识假说、行为适应假说、情绪评估假说。当根据有关P3的理论来解释Pe的功能意义时, Pe可能反映了对错误背景的刷新。然而上述每一种对Pe的功能意义的解释都还受到了一些研究结果的质疑和挑战。基于此, 作者对现有研究存在的问题进行了总结和分析, 并对今后如何对Pe的神经发生源和功能意义的进一步研究提出了建议。     

绝句韵律边界的认知加工及其脑电效应

语言理解过程中, 句子内部的韵律短语边界会诱发反映韵律短语终止的特异性脑电成分终止正漂移 (CPS, closure positive shift), 而句末语调短语边界则会诱发反映句法终止和完整语言单元结束的脑电效应P3。研究采用汉语特有的语篇绝句, 考察了听者加工绝句中各句末语调短语边界的认知过程及其诱发的脑电效应。结果发现五言绝句内部各语调短语边界分别诱发了时间进程、头皮分布和波幅均相同的CPS, 表明语篇内部韵律边界加工不受其所处语篇位置的影响; 五言和七言绝句末的韵律边界则分别诱发了一个P3, 并且前者诱发的P3波幅小于后者, 而二者在时间进程和头皮分布上不存在差异。本研究表明, 句末语调短语边界诱发何种脑电效应与其承担的功能有关, 既表示前面信息终止又预期后面信息出现的句末边界会诱发CPS, 而只表示信息终止的句末边界则会诱发P3。     

青少年结果预期与评价的ERP研究

大脑不断地对环境事件产生预期并将这些预期与实际结果进行比较, 通过对反馈刺激的结果评价以优化后续行为。采用抽奖式赌博任务范式, 操纵得奖的确定性程度, 利用事件相关电位技术(ERP), 研究青少年结果预期与评价的认知和神经电生理过程, 以成人作为对照组进行比较分析。研究结果表明：(1)在反映自动、快速结果评价的FRN上, 无论在高确定性还是在低确定性条件下, 青少年与成人均未表现出显著性差异; (2)组别与确定性程度在P300波幅上表现交互作用显著, 简单效应分析表明, 在高确定性条件下, 青少年组输、赢的P300波幅表现出差异; 而成人组输、赢的P300波幅无显著性差异。青少年对反馈刺激自动的快速结果评价能力已接近成人水平, 而对反馈刺激功能意义评价的控制加工能力还未发展成熟。     

不同性质的评价对特质焦虑者抑制功能影响的ERP研究

特质焦虑者作为焦虑障碍易感性个体,会表现出对威胁性刺激的注意偏向,从而损害中央执行系统的抑制功能。但是不同情绪性评价刺激会如何调控特质焦虑者的抑制功能还不太清楚。为此,本研究以脑电P3b为抑制功能指标,要求高低特质焦虑组在三种不同评价下完成反向眼跳范式,考察不同性质的评价如何影响特质焦虑的抑制功能。行为结果发现,高焦虑组比低焦虑组错误率更高;积极评价条件下,高焦虑组的反应时慢于低焦虑组。ERP结果进一步发现,无评价条件下,高焦虑组的P3b波幅大于低焦虑组;低焦虑者在积极评价条件下的P3b波幅大于消极评价条件,但是高焦虑者没有显著差异。结果表明,积极评价会损害高特质焦虑者的抑制功能,而消极评价则促进了高特质焦虑个体的抑制功能。     

Applied Logic without Psychologism

Logic is a celebrated representation language because of its formal generality. But there are two senses in which a logic may be considered general, one that concerns a technical ability to discriminate between different types of individuals, and another that concerns constitutive norms for reasoning as such. This essay embraces the former, permutation-invariance conception of logic and rejects the latter, Fregean conception of logic. The question of how to apply logic under this pure invariantist view is addressed, and a methodology is given. The pure invariantist view is contrasted with logical pluralism, and a methodology for applied logic is demonstrated in remarks on a variety of issues concerning non-monotonic logic and non-monotonic inference, including Charles Morgan’s impossibility results for non-monotonic logic, David Makinson’s normative constraints for non-monotonic inference, and Igor Douven and Timothy Williamson’s proposed formal constraints on rational acceptance.     

如何才能成为一个真正的马克思主义者?——汤普森“致列泽克·科拉克夫斯基的公开信”解读

在1973年的"致列泽克·科拉克夫斯基的公开信"中,汤普森通过给科拉克夫斯基这个受到第二代英国新左派热捧、然而在他看来已经出现背叛迹象的东欧马克思主义者写公开信,向第二代英国新左派阐发了他对在英国如何才能成为一个真正的马克思主义者这个重大问题的基本理解.     

CyclinD、P16在子宫内膜异位症中的表达及意义

采用免疫组化法检测子宫内膜异位症（EMs）及对照组子宫内膜CyclinD和P16的表达。发现EMs组异位和在位内膜中两者的表达无显著差异（P〉O．05）,EMs组CyclinD的表达均高于对照组,而P16低于对照组,CyclinD在EMsⅠ期～Ⅱ期的表达低于Ⅲ期～Ⅳ期,P16的表达高于Ⅲ期～Ⅳ期,两者呈负相关,对照组与在位内膜CyclinD表达分泌期低于增生期,P16高于增生期（P均〈0.05）,而异位内膜的表达无周期性改变（P〉0.05）,提示两者在EMs的发生发展中起重要作用。     

责任归因对“做效应”的调控及其ERP证据

“做效应(action effect)”是指决策中由“做(action)”与“不做(inaction)”行为引起的相同决策后果, 却诱发了不同强度的情绪体验。本研究使用ANSIE量表筛选了责任归因不同倾向的两类被试(极端内控者、极端外控者), 运用ERP技术, 在一项简单赌博实验任务中考察了这两类被试的“做效应”差异及其电生理证据, 旨在探讨责任归因对“做效应”的调控作用。行为结果表明, 无论结果输赢, 极端内控被试的“做”与“不做”行为结果诱发的情绪强度和责任感强度都没有差异, 而极端外控被试的“做”行为诱发的情绪强度和责任感强度都比“不做”行为诱发的明显大; 脑电结果表明, 在FRN和P300上, 极端内控被试的“做”与“不做”行为诱发的FRN和P300波幅之间都没有差异, 而极端外控被试的“做”行为诱发的这两种脑电成分波幅都比“不做”诱发的较大。简言之, “做效应”在极端内控被试身上表现不明显, 而在极端外控被试身上表现明显。“做效应”很可能是由于个体对不同行为导致的相同决策后果的责任归因不同引起的。