职前教师情绪觉察能力对情绪信息注意偏向的影响

采用修订的情绪觉察水平量表（LEAS）对315名职前教师进行调查,并从中筛选出高、低情绪觉察能力组被试各60人,分别完成情绪面孔Stroop任务（研究1）和情绪词Stroop任务（研究2）。（1）研究1的正确率上,中性面孔最高,愉快面孔次之,悲伤面孔最差;反应时上,悲伤面孔最长,愉快面孔次之,中性面孔最短;高分组仅在愉快和中性面孔上的反应时长于低分组;消极面孔的干扰效应高于积极面孔的干扰效应。（2）研究2的反应时上,消极词的反应时最长,显著长于中性和积极词;高分组仅在积极词和中性词上的反应时长于低分组,且高分组在积极词上的干扰效应高于低分组。研究结果表明与中性刺激相比,高低情绪觉察能力组均对情绪刺激产生了注意偏向,尤其是负性情绪刺激;与低情绪觉察能力组相比,高情绪觉察能力职前教师不仅对消极情绪信息产生注意偏向,还对积极情绪信息产生注意偏向。     

Moderating Loss Aversion: Loss Aversion Has Moderators,But Reports of its Death are Greatly Exaggerated

Loss aversion, the principle that losses impact decision making more than equivalent gains, is a fundamental idea in consumer behavior and decision making, though its existence has recently been called into question. Across five unique samples (N_total = 17,720), we tested several moderators of loss aversion, which supported a preference construction account. Across studies, more domain knowledge and experience were associated with lower loss aversion, though people of all knowledge and experience levels were loss averse. Among car buyers, those who knew more about a particular car attribute (e.g., fuel economy) were less loss averse for that attribute but not other attributes (e.g., comfort), consistent with the idea that people with less attribute knowledge are more likely to construct preferences, thereby increasing loss aversion. Additionally, older consumers were more loss averse across different loss aversion measures and studies. We discuss implications for several accounts of loss aversion, including accounts rooted in status quo bias, emotion, or ownership. In addition to discovering loss aversion moderators, we cast doubt on recent claims that loss aversion is a fallacy or is fully explained by status quo bias, risk aversion, or the educated laboratory samples often used to study loss aversion.     

Face detection in 2‐ to 6‐month‐old infants is influenced by gaze direction and species

Humans detect faces efficiently from a young age. Face detection is critical for infants to identify and learn from relevant social stimuli in their environments. Faces with eye contact are an especially salient stimulus, and attention to the eyes in infancy is linked to the emergence of later sociality. Despite the importance of both of these early social skills—attending to faces and attending to the eyes—surprisingly little is known about how they interact. We used eye tracking to explore whether eye contact influences infants' face detection. Longitudinally, we examined 2‐, 4‐, and 6‐month‐olds' (N = 65) visual scanning of complex image arrays with human and animal faces varying in eye contact and head orientation. Across all ages, infants displayed superior detection of faces with eye contact; however, this effect varied as a function of species and head orientation. Infants were more attentive to human than animal faces and were more sensitive to eye and head orientation for human faces compared to animal faces. Unexpectedly, human faces with both averted heads and eyes received the most attention. This pattern may reflect the early emergence of gaze following—the ability to look where another individual looks—which begins to develop around this age. Infants may be especially interested in averted gaze faces, providing early scaffolding for joint attention. This study represents the first investigation to document infants' attention patterns to faces systematically varying in their attentional states. Together, these findings suggest that infants develop early, specialized functional conspecific face detection.     

Maximizing data quality and shortening survey time: Three-form planned missing data survey design

Simulation studies have shown the three-form planned missing data design efficiently collects high quality data while reducing participant burden. This methodology is rarely used in sport and exercise psychology. Therefore, we conducted a re-sampling study with existing sport and exercise psychology survey data to test how three-form planned missing data survey design implemented with different item distribution approaches effect constructs’ internal measurement structure and validity. Results supported the efficacy of the three-form planned missing data survey design for cross-sectional data collection. Sample sizes of at least 300 (i.e., 100 per form) are recommended for having unbiased parameter estimates. It is also recommended items be distributed across survey forms to have representation of each facet of a construct on every form, and that a select few of these items be included across all survey forms. Further guidelines for three-form surveys based upon the results of this resampling study are provided.     

元认知中自信心对联合决策的预测作用

元认知通常指个体对自身认知活动的主观判断, 自信心作为其指标之一, 对个体认识和调节自己的行为有重要作用。研究表明自信心指标在联合研究过程中常见的任务类型涉及基础和高级心理加工过程, 此外, 自信心对联合决策的预测逐渐向基于计算模型的探索性参数变化。最后, 自信心的神经生理研究发现了前额叶皮层及其相关脑区和后顶叶皮层的重要性。今后应注重探索可能的预测参数和模型, 优化自信心对联合决策的预测作用。     

面孔识别的自我群体偏向

面孔认知研究表明, 人们识别和再认自己所属群体(如种族、性别、年龄)面孔的成绩显著好于识别其他群体面孔的成绩。近年来围绕面孔识别的这种自我群体偏向进行了实验研究, 研究者提出了知觉经验说和社会认知论两种理论来解释其认知加工机制, 而类别化-个性化模型和双路径模型则是将两种理论分别加以整合提出的新解释。研究者还对面孔识别自我群体偏向的神经机制进行了研究, 探讨了评价者、评价对象和评价任务等因素对自我群体偏向的影响。提升面孔识别自我群体偏向研究的生态效度, 构建整合性理论模型以及加强跨文化和本土研究是未来研究的重要方向。     

健康领域的跨期决策与健康行为

健康领域的跨期决策关系着个体和国民的健康和福祉。目前学界对该领域的研究主要停留在参考传统金钱领域的相关理论模型和方法的阶段, 但健康跨期决策具有领域特异性, 沿袭金钱领域理论模型和方法, 导致该领域在研究方法和结果上存在较大的不一致性。健康跨期决策的行为后果是该领域关注重点, 多数研究均报告个体的低时间折扣率、高未来时间取向与其健康保护行为正相关, 与健康风险行为呈负相关。该领域也关注健康跨期决策的影响机制, 如决策对象和决策主体的核心特征等因素。未来研究亟需发展适用于健康领域的跨期决策模型和研究范式, 明确健康行为与跨期决策偏好的关系, 深入探讨健康跨期决策的内在选择机制, 并在健康行为干预和医疗卫生政策应用方面进行更多的尝试和探索。     

睡眠剥夺对风险决策的影响机制探讨

许多行业的决策者必须在睡眠不足的状态下做出选择与判断。睡眠剥夺是睡眠不足的实验室模型, 被证明能显著影响风险决策, 但内在机制不明。基于前人研究基础提出假设模型, 即睡眠剥夺通过影响个体的反馈加工、风险感知、抑制控制、决策理性, 进而影响风险决策。拟通过实验室研究与现场研究, 采用简单赌博任务、概率折扣任务、双选择Oddball任务等研究范式, 对比睡眠剥夺前后被试在执行上述实验任务时的行为差异, 同时比较执行控制网络、奖赏网络等脑功能网络连接强度, 以及任务诱发的FRN等脑电成分在睡眠剥夺前后的变化, 进而论证上述反应被试反馈加工等心理过程的行为-脑电-脑成像指标的变化与睡眠剥夺后被试风险决策变化的关系。研究结果将科学地解释睡眠剥夺影响风险决策的内在机制, 为进一步探讨如何规避睡眠不足导致的决策失误提供理论与实证依据。     

逻辑训练对不同理性思维方式大学生三段论推理的影响

采用理性—经验思维方式量表对105名大学生进行测量,选出高、低理性思维方式各35名大学生进行实验,探讨了逻辑训练对不同理性思维方式大学生三段论推理的影响。结果表明：(1)高理性思维方式个体三段论推理的平均反应时快于低理性思维方式个体;非冲突类型题目推理的平均正确率高于冲突类型题目;逻辑训练可以提高个体三段论推理的平均反应时和正确率;(2)逻辑训练后非冲突任务类型题目的平均正确率高于冲突任务类型题目;(3)逻辑训练对低理性思维方式个体冲突任务类型题目平均正确率的提高效果更明显。这意味着逻辑训练可以显著提升个体的推理成绩,但不能完全消除信念偏差对推理的影响,而且逻辑训练对低理性思维方式个体推理成绩的提升效果更加明显。