DEFINING “RELIGION” AS NATURAL: A CRITICAL INVITATION TO ROBERT McCAULEY

Previous critics have argued that Robert McCauley defines religion and science selectively and arbitrarily, cutting them to fit his model in Why Religion Is Natural and Science Is Not. McCauley has responded that final definitions are “overrated” and that artificial distinctions can serve an important role in naturalistic investigation. I agree with this position but argue that a genealogy of the category of religion is crucial to the methodology that McCauley describes. Since the inherent ambiguity of religion will undermine any essential claims about its cognitive naturalness, I invite McCauley to consider how his research might investigate scientific and religious cognition in new terms.     

EXPLANATORY MODESTY

Although I certainly have differences with some of my commentators, I am grateful for the time, effort, and attention that each has devoted to my book, Why Religion Is Natural and Science Is Not. They have helpfully pointed out features of my positions that need clarification and elaboration. I am also grateful to the editor of Zygon, Willem Drees, for this opportunity to undertake that task here.     

组织型插图对不同认知方式个体说明性文本阅读的影响

采用图文相继呈现、文本逐句阅读的范式,通过反应时技术与出声思维的方法考察了组织型插图对不同认知方式个体说明性文本阅读过程与阅读结果的影响,结果发现,与单一文本相比,场独立个体在有插图条件下的阅读成绩显著提高,而阅读时间没有增加,并产生了更多的推理、细化和提问策略;而场依存个体在有插图条件下的阅读成绩显著提高,阅读时间也显著增多,而理解策略没有变化。这说明组织型插图对两种认知方式个体说明性文本的阅读均起到促进作用,但场独立个体没有因为增加组织型插图而付出更多的加工努力,而是通过调整理解策略的方式来提高阅读效果;而场依存个体在阅读过程中没有根据组织型插图调整理解策略,阅读效果的提高是以付出更多的加工努力为代价的。     

On the Decision to Explore New Alternatives: The Coexistence of Under‐ and Over‐exploration

The decision whether to explore new alternatives or to choose from familiar ones is implicit in many of our daily activities. How is this decision made? When will deviation from optimal exploration be observed? The current paper examines exploration decisions in the context of a multi‐alternative “decisions from experience” task. In each trial, participants could choose a familiar option (the status quo) or a new alternative (risky exploration). The observed exploration rates were more sensitive to the frequent outcome from choosing new alternatives than to the average outcome. That is, the implicit decision whether to explore a new alternative reflects underweighting of rare events: Over‐exploration was documented in “Rare Disasters” environments, and insufficient exploration was evident in “Rare Treasures” environments. In addition, the results reveal a decrease in exploration of new alternatives over time even when it is always optimal and some exploration even when it is never reinforcing. These results can be captured with models that share a distinction between “data collection” and “outcome‐driven” decision modes. Under the data collection mode, the decision maker collects information about the environment, to be used in future choices. Under the outcome‐driven mode, the decision maker relies on small samples of previous experiences with familiar versus unfamiliar alternatives, before the selection of a specific alternative. The predictive value of a two‐parameter “explorative sampler” quantification of these assumptions is demonstrated. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

对恐怖情绪的调节:认知重评和表达抑制的差异——一项ERP研究

本研究采用事件相关电位(ERP)技术,通过测量由视觉诱发的脑电成分晚正波(LPP)来比较情绪调节策略在生理电特征上的差异,探讨认知重评和表达抑制的优劣。实验结果表明:(1)从波幅的角度来比较:在400—600ms时间窗口内,认知重评条件下恐怖图片诱发的LPP波幅显著小于在自由观看条件下的波幅,而表达抑制和自由观看组所诱发的LPP波幅差异较小。(2)从时间进程的角度来比较:认知重评与自由观看组的差异发生在400ms并持续到600ms;而表达抑制和自由观看之间的差异发生在450ms但是只持续到550ms。这表明认知重评相较于表达抑制,对负性情绪起调节作用开始较早,并且持续时间较长。这为认知重评优于表达抑制策略提供了神经生理学上的证据。     

儿童侵犯性性别差异的社会认知技能视角

影响侵犯性性别差异的因素众多,本研究认为的社会认知技能的性别差异与侵犯性性别差异有密切关系,认知技能是风险因素和行为之间的调节者。女性相比于男性侵犯性行为少与女性神经机制的发展缺陷概率小,生理成熟早,最终发展形成较男性更好的社会认知技能有密切关系。