ADHD的抑制缺陷和厌恶延迟—来自双通道理论的解释

行为抑制理论认为抑制功能的落后是ADHD的核心缺损所在,Sonuga-Barke的厌恶延迟理论认为ADHD起因是厌恶延迟而非抑制缺损,但该理论并不能解释ADHD的全部症状,Sonuga-Barke将厌恶延迟理论作了修正,提出了双通道模型。该模型认为ADHD的抑制缺陷和厌恶延迟同时存在,相互独立,模型的认知发展通道关注抑制控制缺陷对ADHD的影响,而动机发展通道则认为ADHD儿童是因奖励回路紊乱而引起异常的厌恶延迟的动机风格。本文介绍了双通道理论及相关的研究及其应用于ADHD诊断和干预的价值和局限性。     

头部朝向在社会性注意转移中的作用

注视指向是非常重要的社会性注意线索,但是在日常情境中,注视指向往往伴随着头部朝向信息,而且两者都包含空间指向信息.已有研究发现头部朝向会影响注视指向知觉的速度和准确性,为注视指向提供参照系,进而会影响注视指向诱发的社会性注意.头部朝向和注视指向加工的神经机制也存在着广泛的重合.因此,除眼睛注视以外,头部朝向也是建构和完善基于心理模型的社会性注意机制的一个关键因素.未来的研究应关注头部朝向与眼睛注视指向共同影响注意转移的作用机制,并且从功能整合的角度开展神经机制研究.     

味觉厌恶性条件反射建立后脑内c-Fos的表达

以新异味觉刺激糖精水的摄入为条件刺激,以腹腔注射环磷酰胺(CY,免疫抑制剂)或氯化锂(LiCl)为非条件刺激,分别使大鼠建立味觉厌恶性条件反射.在条件刺激日,糖精水在学习组大鼠下列脑区中诱发出密集的Fos表达下丘脑、杏仁核、边缘皮质等,而非学习组在这些区域中却没有或只有少量表达.另外,在丘脑前背侧核、扣带回、下丘脑外侧核、穹隆下器、压部后颗粒皮质、视上核,CY组的Fos表达明显多于LiCl组;而在伏核、杏仁基底外侧核、腹外侧隔核,LiCl组的Fos表达明显多于CY组,这种差异可能是两种药物的不同药理性质所致.     

Seductive eyes: attractiveness and direct gaze increase desire for associated objects

Recent research in neuroscience shows that observing attractive faces with direct gaze is more rewarding than observing attractive faces with averted gaze. On the basis of this research, it was hypothesized that object evaluations can be enhanced by associating them with attractive faces displaying direct gaze. In a conditioning paradigm, novel objects were associated with either attractive or unattractive female faces, either displaying direct or averted gaze. An affective priming task showed more positive automatic evaluations of objects that were paired with attractive faces with direct gaze than attractive faces with averted gaze and unattractive faces, irrespective of gaze direction. Participants' self-reported desire for the objects matched the affective priming data. The results are discussed against the background of recent findings on affective consequences of gaze cueing.     

On loss aversion in capuchin monkeys

Chen, Lakshminarayanan, and Santos (2006) claim to show in three choice experiments that monkeys react rationally to price and wealth shocks, but, when faced with gambles, display hallmark, human-like biases that include loss aversion. We present three experiments with monkeys and humans consistent with a reinterpretation of their data that attributes their results not to loss aversion, but to differences between choice alternatives in delay of reinforcement.     

Conditioned taste aversion is enhanced when the unconditioned stimulus is presented in a different context

Using a conditioned taste aversion procedure with rats as the subjects, two experiments examined the effect of presenting a conditioned stimulus (CS saccharin solution) in one context followed by an unconditioned stimulus (US LiCl) in a different context. Experiment 1 showed that animals which received the above-mentioned procedure (Group D) showed a more marked conditioned aversion to the CS than animals which were given both the CS and the US in the same context (Group S). Experiment 2 found that in both Group D and Group S, aversion to the CS increased when the subjects were exposed to the conditioned context after the conditioning. These findings supported the argument that the strength of the CS-US association acquired during conditioning is compared with that of the context-US to determine the magnitude of aversion revealed to the CS.     

损失规避的产生根源

损失规避是指由损失引发的负效用大于由等量收益引发的正效用的现象, 其产生根源能够从神经经济学和进化心理学两个方向进行解释。损失规避的脑机制分为两个系统：主观价值评价系统主要包括纹状体和前额皮层, 与主观价值的评估有关; 情绪唤醒系统主要包括杏仁核和脑岛, 与厌恶等消极情绪有关。在进化心理学的视角下, 通过回顾有关动物决策行为的研究来探索损失规避行为的进化历史, 并结合相关进化理论总结该行为产生的进化原因。未来可探索与行为损失规避相关的神经递质, 进一步研究损失规避的产生根源。     

Power Politics and the Balance of Risk: Hypotheses on Great Power Intervention in the Periphery

Great powers frequently initiate risky diplomatic and military interventions in the periphery—regions that do not directly threaten the security of a great power's homeland. Such risky interventions are driven by leaders' aversion to losses in their state's relative power, international status, or prestige. These leaders often persist in such courses of action even when they incur mounting political, economic, and military costs. More surprisingly, they undertake risky strategies toward other great powers in an effort to continue these failing interventions. Hypotheses concerning such interventions are derived from the prospect theory and defensive realist literatures.     

Impact of regulatory focus on ambiguity aversion

Although prior research has shown that some people prefer a risky to an ambiguous option, this study further proposes that people's regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) might influence their ambiguity aversion. Three experiments have tested whether people with promotion focus showed less ambiguity aversion than those with prevention focus: The first experiment revealed that, compared with chronically promotion‐focused individuals, prevention‐focused subjects preferred a risky to an ambiguous option. In the second experiment, priming of the subjects' goal orientations led to similar results. Experiment 3 demonstrated that participants showed less ambiguity aversion for the expected performance of an investment product representative of promotion (e.g., a stock fund) rather than one representative of prevention (e.g., a bond fund). In other words, people showed less preference for a bond fund when the probability distribution of its expected performance was unknown than when it was known, whereas they showed less preference difference between known and unknown probability distributions for the expected performance of a stock fund. This study has integrated research pertaining to regulatory focus and ambiguity aversion, and the results have confirmed that the impact of regulatory focus on ambiguity aversion is robust across different methods and decision tasks. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.