Form follows function: Learning about function helps children learn about shape

Object functions help young children to organize new artifact categories. However, the scope of their influence is unknown. We explore whether functions highlight property dimensions that are relevant to artifact categories in general. Specifically, using a longitudinal training procedure, we assessed whether experience with functions highlights shape as important for categorization. Seventeen-month-olds were provided experience with novel categories of similarly shaped objects. In Study 1, the function group learned about the objects’ shape-based functions; a control group did not. In Study 2, 17-month-olds were trained on the same categories, but the objects’ shapes and functions were no longer causally related. Only the function group in Study 1 subsequently used shape reliably when categorizing novel objects. These results suggest that function is instrumental in establishing a ‘shape bias’ in early categorization and that it does so via conceptually based processes.     

听觉后见之明偏差的实验研究

后见之明偏差是一种人类认知自我中心。后见之明偏差的研究具有重大的理论价值和应用价值,尤其是其应用价值更不容低估。研究1采用回忆型和假定型研究范式考察听觉领域是否存在后见之明偏差;研究2采用回忆型研究范式,从需要角度考察奖励性动机对去除听觉后见之明偏差的作用。研究发现:听觉领域存在后见之明偏差;两种研究范式的后见之明偏差不存在差异;奖励性动机并不能消除听觉后见之明偏差。     

病理性网络使用者对情绪信息的注意偏向研究

探究病理性网络使用者在注意偏向上是否存在情绪干扰。采用情绪图-词Stroop范式对病理性网络使用者与正常网络使用者进行比较研究。结果表明(1)病理性网络使用者与正常网络使用者相比,有对情绪词语有更加突出的反应延迟特点,表现出了明显的情绪干扰。(2)病理性网络使用者与正常网络使用者相比,具有更多的负性认知偏向。(3)病理性网络使用者与正常网络使用者相比,在图词不一致的情况下有更多的反应延迟存在。     

对威胁刺激的注意偏向：注意定向加速还是注意解除困难？

对威胁刺激的注意偏向普遍存在。注意定向加速和注意解除困难在不同阶段对注意偏向产生影响。威胁刺激属性、呈现时间以及被试特征是重要的调节因素。以杏仁核为核心的杏仁核?前扣带回网络可能是注意定向加速的神经基础, 而以眶额叶为中心的前额叶皮层可能是注意解除的神经基础。未来还需要就注意定向加速与注意解除困难的关系、注意偏向的调节机制以及其神经基础做更深入的研究。     

判断与决策中的规划谬误

规划谬误是指人们在估计未来任务的完成时间时, 倾向于过度乐观, 低估任务完成时间的一种现象。规划谬误的心理机制主要包括规划谬误理论和记忆偏差理论。规划谬误的影响因素主要有认知因素、动机因素、个体的经验水平、目标任务的性质等。规划谬误的应对策略主要有与过去的经验相联系、从第三人称视角进行估计、任务分解及时间分配。未来的研究主要从规划谬误与策略性误解、乐观偏差、过分自信的关系, 规划谬误的产生根源、规划谬误的跨文化研究、规划谬误的研究范围及应用领域等方面进一步探讨。     

共同方法变异的影响及其统计控制途径的模型分析

共同方法变异(common method variance, CMV)指两个变量之间变异的重叠是因为使用同类测量工具而导致, 而不是代表潜在构念之间的真实关系。虽然以往研究显示CMV不一定导致研究结果的偏差, 在实际研究中应当加以考量。特别是在使用测量方法的研究中, 如果数据来源越单一, 测量方法越类似, CMV效应使研究结果产生偏差的可能性越大。CMV效应的控制方法包括过程控制法和统计控制法。在统计控制法的选择和使用上, 需要重点考虑该方法是否分离了三大变异(特质变异、方法变异和误差变异), CMV效应是在测量构念层面还是题目层面, CMV效应是加法效应还是乘法效应。控制潜在方法因子途径是统计控制方法中最重要的一类方法, 理解其模型是正确使用这类方法的前提。未来研究应当关注多个研究的CMV效应和侧重评估某个理论研究中CMV所引起的潜在的效度威胁。     

技能和风格：理性思维的两种测量途径

本文通过总结前人关于理性思维的个体差异的研究, 介绍和区分了两种有关理性思维的测量途径, 并讨论了二者之间的内在关系。理性思维可以分成技能和风格两种形式。前者常用评价性的、情境测试方式进行评估, 后者常用描述性的、自陈量表方式进行测量。通过分析认知能力对这两种理性思维的影响, 本文提出一个认知能力与理性思维技能和思维风格关系的理论模型, 为后续在理性思维测量方法上的研究提供一种理论指导。     

Spatial-attention and emotional evocation: line bisection performance and visual art emotional evocation

Lesion studies demonstrate that the right temporal-parietal region (RTP) is important for mediating spatial attention. The RTP is also involved in emotional experiences that can be evoked by art. Normal people vary in their ability to allocate spatial attention, thus, people who can better allocate attention might also be more influenced by the emotional messages of the paintings (evocative impact). Seventeen healthy participants bisected an unlabeled 100mm line and their performance on this task was used to create two groups, individuals who were more (mALB) and less accurate (lALB). These participants also judged 10 paintings on five qualities, Evocative Impact, Aesthetics, Novelty, Technique, and Closure by marking a 100mm line from 1 (low degree) to 10 (high degree). An ANOVA indicated differences in accuracy on the line bisection (LB) between the two groups. Additional ANOVAs, using the quality ratings as the dependent measure, revealed that the mALB group scored the Evocative Impact greater than the lALB group. These results suggest that the differences in attentional bias between the two groups, as indicated by their LB performance, might influence their evocative impact or reactions and also be a 'barometer' of other RTP functions, including emotional processing.     

Preserved metamemorial ability in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease: shifting response bias

Patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) display a greater tendency to endorse unstudied items as "old" on memory tests than healthy older adults. This liberal response bias may result in mistaken beliefs about the completion of common tasks. This research attempted to determine whether it was possible to shift the response bias of mild AD patients to be more conservative on a recognition memory test through behavioral intervention. Patients with mild AD and matched controls were evaluated with two almost identical paradigms, separated by about one week. For each session, 30 words were studied and 60 words (half studied, half novel) were shown at test. During one session participants were told that 30% of words were old, and at the other session that 70% were old. We found that both groups were able to shift their response bias between the two conditions. That patients with mild AD were able to successfully shift their response bias demonstrates that--despite their overall liberal response bias and poor memory relative to controls--one component of metamemorial ability is preserved in patients with mild AD.     

Perceptual-attentional and motor-intentional bias in near and far space

Spatial bias demonstrated in tasks such as line-bisection may stem from perceptual-attentional (PA) "where" and motor-intentional (MI) "aiming" influences. We tested normal participants' line bisection performance in the presence of an asymmetric visual distracter with a video apparatus designed to dissociate PA from MI bias. An experimenter stood as a distractor to the left or right of a video monitor positioned in either near or far space, where participants viewed lines and a laser point they directed under (1) natural and (2) mirror-reversed conditions. Each trial started with the pointer positioned at either the top left or top right corner of the screen, and alternated thereafter. Data analysis indicated that participants made primarily PA leftward errors in near space, but not in far space. Furthermore, PA, but not MI, bias increased bilaterally in the direction of distraction. In contrast, MI, but not PA, bias was shifted bilaterally in the direction of startside. Results support the conclusion that a primarily PA left sided bias in near space is consistent with right hemisphere spatial attentional dominance. A bottom-up visual distractor specifically affected PA "where" spatial bias while top-down motor cuing influenced MI "aiming" bias.