负性情境诱导下抑郁个体的情绪Stroop效应：ERPs研究

运用ERPs技术探讨了正常和抑郁个体在中性和负性情境诱导下的情绪Stroop效应。结果发现正常被试在负性情境下对中性词判断的错误率比在中性情境下更高,对负性词加工的P1波幅减小、N1增大,出现了Stroop效应;抑郁被试在两种情境下对负性词加工的P1和 N1波幅没有差异。研究结果提示,抑郁个体在负性情境下出现注意脱离困难和资源不足,难以解决情绪冲突任务,支持了注意脱离损伤假说,并进一步说明抑郁个体的情绪选择性注意加工会受到心境一致性状态的影响,因过多的注意资源卷入从而出现负性情绪调节不良。实验结果为探讨抑郁个体对负性情绪的注意加工和调节过程提供了来自电生理的证据。     

Promoting Honesty: The Influence of Stories on Children's Lie‐Telling Behaviours and Moral Understanding

Moral stories are a means of communicating the consequences of our actions and emphasizing virtuous behaviour, such as honesty. However, the effect of these stories on children's lie‐telling has yet to be thoroughly explored. The current study investigated the influence of moral stories on children's willingness to lie for another individual. Children were read one of three stories prior to being questioned about an accidental wrongdoing: (1) a positive story, which emphasized the benefits of being honest; (2) a negative story, which outlined the potential costs of lying; and (3) a neutral story, which was unrelated to truth‐telling or lie‐telling. Initially, most children withheld information about the event. Older children were better able to maintain their lies throughout the interview. However, when asked direct questions, children in the positive story condition were more likely to tell the truth than those in the negative and neutral conditions. No significant differences were found between the negative and neutral story conditions. The present study also investigated the relationship between children's conceptual understanding and behaviour. The findings revealed that children's knowledge of truths and lies increased with age. Children who lied had significantly higher conceptual scores than those who did not lie. Furthermore, the type of story children were read had a significant impact on their evaluations of true and false statements. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effect of Mood on Problem Finding in Scientific Creativity

This study examined the influence of different mood states on Creative Science Problem Finding (CSPF). CSPF was measured in terms of Fluency, Flexibility, and Originality. Imagery techniques were used to induce positive or negative mood states in participants, with results suggesting that positive mood led to a significant increase in CSPF performance compared with neutral mood, especially for the dimensions of fluency and flexibility. No difference was found between negative mood and neutral mood. Results provide evidence that anger had no impact on CSPF performance compared with neutral mood. However, fear appeared to inhibit the performance of CSPF. The interaction between specific moods and CSPF provide evidence that moods influenced CSPF with open instructions more than with closed instructions.     

Sufficiency and Necessity Assumptions in Causal Structure Induction

Research on human causal induction has shown that people have general prior assumptions about causal strength and about how causes interact with the background. We propose that these prior assumptions about the parameters of causal systems do not only manifest themselves in estimations of causal strength or the selection of causes but also when deciding between alternative causal structures. In three experiments, we requested subjects to choose which of two observable variables was the cause and which the effect. We found strong evidence that learners have interindividually variable but intraindividually stable priors about causal parameters that express a preference for causal determinism (sufficiency or necessity; Experiment 1). These priors predict which structure subjects preferentially select. The priors can be manipulated experimentally (Experiment 2) and appear to be domain‐general (Experiment 3). Heuristic strategies of structure induction are suggested that can be viewed as simplified implementations of the priors.     

Sensitivity,Induction, and Miracles

Sosa, Pritchard, and Vogel have all argued that there are cases in which one knows something inductively but does not believe it sensitively, and that sensitivity therefore cannot be necessary for knowledge. I defend sensitivity by showing that inductive knowledge is sensitive.     

Adaptive non-interventional heuristics for covariation detection in causal induction: model comparison and rational analysis

In this article, 41 models of covariation detection from 2 × 2 contingency tables were evaluated against past data in the literature and against data from new experiments. A new model was also included based on a limiting case of the normative phi-coefficient under an extreme rarity assumption, which has been shown to be an important factor in covariation detection (McKenzie & Mikkelsen, 2007) and data selection (Hattori, 2002; Oaksford & Chater, 1994, 2003). The results were supportive of the new model. To investigate its explanatory adequacy, a rational analysis using two computer simulations was conducted. These simulations revealed the environmental conditions and the memory restrictions under which the new model best approximates the normative model of covariation detection in these tasks. They thus demonstrated the adaptive rationality of the new model.     

促排卵治疗及其风险的探讨

促排卵药物在临床中的广泛应用,给不孕患者带来了希望,另一方面促排卵带来的风险也越来越引起人们的重视,如卵巢过度刺激综合征(OHSS)、妊娠并发症、出生缺陷和肿瘤等。因此,用哲学的观点客观地看待促排卵的成效与风险之间的关系有助于临床医生进一步提高促排卵安全性的认识,做出正确的决策。     

归类不确定时人们的推理方式研究

该研究采用集中呈现样例的研究范式,探讨了归类不确定情况下,人们的推理方式。实验1控制特征联结频次,考察人们的推理方式是否是基于类别的推理。实验2控制类别中特征的基本概率,考察人们推理方式是否是基于特征联结的推理。实验结果表明,特征推理前不预先归类直接推理时,人们的推理根据目标特征与预测特征联结的频次进行,是基于特征联结的推理;特征推理前预先要求被试归类时,人们的特征推理是基于类别的推理。     

The role of mechanism and covariation information in causal belief updating

The present study is aimed at identifying how prior causal beliefs and covariation information contribute to belief updating when evidence, either compatible or contradictory with those beliefs, is provided. Participants were presented with a cover story with which it was intended to activate or generate a causal belief. Variables related to the prior belief (the type of information, the strength of the cause-effect causal link, and how confident the participant was that the link existed) were assessed. Subsequently, participants were presented with covariational information and were asked to update their beliefs in light of the new evidence. Information reliability, prior belief's causal influence magnitude, and the cause-effect level of contingency portrayed by the new information--but not the type of the prior belief--are shown to directly determine belief updating.