风险回避行为中的“红色图形效应”

以往研究发现,风险回避领域存在着一种经典的"图形效应"(即图形会比数字激发出个体更强的风险回避行为)。但以往研究通常只采用灰色或黑色来呈现风险信息。基于近来关于红色效应的探讨,本研究试图将颜色因素引入到图形效应中以探讨不同颜色下的图形效应特点。结果发现,相比于蓝色,红色能激发出个体更强的风险回避行为,且颜色对图形效应具有调节作用,即与蓝色相比,红色条件下出现了增强的图形效应,即"红色图形效应"。有关结果说明,红色作为一种危险警示颜色可以激发出个体更强的风险回避行为,且会诱发更大的图形效应。     

视觉单通道还是视听双通道?——通道效应的元分析

多媒体学习中的通道效应认为,学习者对"画面+声音解说"组成的视听双通道材料的识记或理解效果要好于"画面+视觉文本"组成的视觉单通道材料,而逆转通道效应则发现了与之相反的结果。针对以往研究缺陷,重新采用元分析技术,以保持测验和迁移测验作为结果变量,考察通道效应的稳定性。经文献检索、纳入与排除后,共获91篇符合元分析的文献。经数据事先合并处理后,保持测验上生成94个独立效应量(8088人),迁移测验上生成83个独立效应量(6664人)。主效应检验发现:视听双通道在保持测验(d=0.24)和迁移测验(d=0.25)上均显著高于视觉单通道;调节效应检验发现:呈现步调、画面动态性和材料时长在保持测验和迁移测验上均对通道效应起到调节作用,通道效应主要在系统步调(d_(保持)=0.43,d_(迁移)=0.44)、动态画面(d_(保持)=0.50,d_(迁移)=0.59)及短时材料(d_(保持)=0.38,d_(迁移)=0.33)条件下出现;所有结果均未发现逆转通道效应。结论认为:相比视觉单通道,当图文信息以视听双通道呈现时更有利于促进学习者对多媒体学习材料的识记和理解,支持了多媒体学习认知理论;呈现步调、画面动态性以及材料时长是通道效应的重要边界条件。     

联合Simon效应:现状、影响因素与理论解释

联合Simon效应是一种空间刺激–反应相容性效应,它出现在当两个参与者完成Simon任务的互补成分时。该效应被认为是反映自我–他人整合程度的一个有效指标。影响此现象的因素主要包括社会和非社会因素。社会促进理论、共同表征理论、空间反应编码理论和参照编码理论对该效应作出了解释。未来关于联合Simon效应的研究需深入探讨其影响因素以及脑机制,并进一步完善理论解释。     

越难读意味着学得越好?学习过程中的不流畅效应

教育心理学领域的不流畅效应认为,学习难读材料要比学习易读材料的效果更好。已有研究主要通过操纵学习材料中的文本、画面或声音属性考察知觉流畅性在学习过程中的作用,并发现不流畅材料可能有助于缓解过度自信现象,但不一定能提高学习效果,不流畅效应的稳健性受到质疑。合理难度理论与不流畅理论均认为,知觉不流畅所引发的额外认知负荷促进了学习;相反,认知负荷理论认为这种额外认知负荷会阻碍学习。对现有研究进行元分析,结果表明,知觉不流畅既降低了学习判断的自信心(d=-0.54),也不利于提高学习效果(d=-0.36),一定程度上支持认知负荷理论。未来研究需关注知觉流畅性本身的操纵、界限及系统性评定,并探讨不流畅效应的边界条件等。     

Understanding the underlying mechanism of the spacing effect in verbal learning: a case for encoding variability and study-phase retrieval

The spacing effect refers to the mnemonic benefit of spacing repeated study events across time compared to massing (i.e. cramming) repeated study events. Due to the robustness of this finding, substantial research has been devoted to uncovering the spacing effect’s underlying mechanism. Specification of such a mechanism has been guided by consistent findings across methodologies and several experimental manipulations that serve as boundary conditions. Past reviews of the spacing effect literature have generally considered subsets of these factors but never an exhaustive set. Thus, the current review considers more comprehensively six consistent findings in the extant spacing effect literature pertaining to human memory to better discriminate among the previously proposed theories. Review of the literature provides substantial evidence indicating the need for an encoding variability mechanism [e.g. Glenberg, A. M. (1976). Monotonic and nonmonotonic lag effects in paired-associate and recognition memory paradigms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 1–16] in addition to a reminding mechanism [e.g. Benjamin, A. S., &; Tullis, J. G. (2010). What makes distributed practice effective? Cognitive Psychology, 61, 228–247].     

Enactment supports unitisation of action components and enhances the contribution of familiarity to associative recognition

Memory for actions is usually better following subject-performed tasks (SPT) than verbal tasks (VT). We hypothesised that enactment unitises the components of actions such that familiarity can support associative recognition following SPT. To examine this hypothesis, participants studied verb–object pairs in a SPT or VT condition. During testing, they discriminated between intact, recombined and new items and made Remember/Know judgments; additionally, their EEGs were recorded. Associative recognition was better following SPT than VT. Early frontal event-related potentials (ERPs) were graded according to the item status following SPT, but no such effects were found after VT. Similarly, the late parietal ERPs were graded following SPT, whereas these effects were smaller and did not differ between intact and recombined items following VT. We conclude that enactment unitised the action and object so that familiarity could contribute to associative recognition and that recollection became sensitive to the amount of the matching associative information.     

Is more choice always worse? Age differences in the overchoice effect

Current research on the overchoice effect has been mainly conducted from an adult point of view and with adult subjects. This study investigates whether children, adolescents, and seniors suffer the same negative consequences as adults when facing an overabundance of choice. Findings showed that the overchoice effect did not equally extend to all age groups. While adolescents were affected by the phenomenon in a very similar way as adults, children and seniors suffered fewer negative consequences of an overabundance of choice. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Mechanisms for the object-based negative compatibility effect: voluntary versus involuntary inhibition

This study investigates whether the object-based negative compatibility effect (NCE) originates from involuntary or voluntary inhibition. We hypothesised that both supraliminally presented primes (the prime is a mug with its handle pointing either left or right) and experimental instructions (i.e., ignoring the prime) in previous studies might induce participants to develop a voluntarily inhibitory strategy that is responsible for the object-based NCE. To test this hypothesis, we conducted 3 experiments. Experiment 1 confirmed a suitable paradigm. Experiment 2 altered participants’ strategies by varying the frequency of compatible trials across blocks. The results revealed a significant NCE for the low-frequency condition, which suggested that voluntary strategy might be primarily responsible for the object-based NCE. Experiment 3 combined a free-choice target with an object-based NCE paradigm. The results showed equivalent frequencies and mean response times between the free-choice responses that corresponded to or were opposite from the orientations of the mug handle. Combined with the results of response time quartiles, which revealed NCEs in fast responses (Q1–Q3) but no compatibility effect in slow (Q4) responses, we concluded that the object-based NCE might be primarily based on voluntary inhibition. Moreover, this inhibition might take effect earlier than that of the arrow-based NCE.     

The moderating role of objective and subjective numeracy in attribute framing

Previous research has found that objective numeracy moderates framing effects: People who are less numerate were found to be more susceptible to goal‐framing and attribute‐framing effects than people who are highly numerate. This study examined the possibility that subjective numeracy likewise moderates attribute framing in contexts where participants are presented with percentages of success or failure. The results show that compared with highly numerate participants, less numerate participants were more susceptible to the effect of attribute framing. Interestingly, this moderating effect was revealed only when using objective numeracy measures, and not when subjective numeracy measures were used. Future research is suggested to replicate these findings, to establish the generalizability of numeracy as a moderator of other cognitive biases, and to examine several possible theoretical explanations for the differential moderation of attribute‐framing bias.     

Enhanced encoding of the co-actor's target stimuli during a shared non-motor task

Task co-representation has been proposed to rely on the motor brain areas’ capacity to represent others’ action plans similarly to one's own. The joint memory (JM) effect suggests that working in parallel with others influences the depth of incidental encoding: Other-relevant items are better encoded than non-task-relevant items. Using this paradigm, we investigated whether task co-representation could also emerge for non-motor tasks. In Experiment 1, we found enhanced recall performance to stimuli relevant to the co-actor also when the participants’ task required non-motor responses (counting the target words) instead of key-presses. This suggests that the JM effect did not depend on simulating the co-actor's motor responses. In Experiment 2, direct visual access to the co-actor and his actions was found to be unnecessary to evoke the JM effect in case of the non-motor, but not in case of the motor task. Prior knowledge of the co-actor's target category is sufficient to evoke deeper incidental encoding. Overall, these findings indicate that the capacity of task co-representation extends beyond the realm of motor tasks: Simulating the other's motor actions is not necessary in this process.