Effects of two teacher-presentation rates on off-task behavior, answering correctly, and participation

Off-task behavior, correct answering, and participation during beginning reading instruction were recorded for two low-achieving first-grade children during two different rates of teacher presentation. A slow-rate presentation (A) was compared with a fast-rate presentation (B) in an ABABAB design. In slow-rate presentation, there was a delay between the children's response and introduction of the next task. In fast-rate presentation, there was no delay. A new teacher taught during the final AB phases, which allowed for a brief replication. Both teachers were reminded on a fixed-interval 90-sec schedule throughout all phases of the experiment to praise the subjects, thus preventing a confounding of social praise and rate of teacher presentation. Fast-rate presentation was accompanied by a lower per cent occurrence of off-task behavior for both Subjects 1 and 2. For Subject 1, correct answering and participation were more frequent during all three fast-rate phases. For Subject 2, correct answering and participation were more frequent during the fast-rate phases after the first reversal.     

How a high working memory capacity can increase proactive interference

Previous findings suggested that a high working memory capacity (WMC) is potentially associated with a higher susceptibility to proactive interference (PI) if the latter is measured under high cognitive load. To explain such a finding, we propose to consider susceptibility to PI as a net effect of individual executive processes and the intrinsic potential for PI. With the latter, we refer to the amount of information that is activated at a given time and that has the potential to exert PI subsequently. In two studies deploying generalized linear mixed models, susceptibility to PI was modeled as the decline of performance over trials of a complex span task. The results revealed that a higher WMC was associated with a higher susceptibility to PI. Moreover, the number of stimuli recalled in one trial as a proxy variable for the intrinsic potential for PI negatively affected memory performance in the subsequent trial.     

概念内隐记忆中的注意促进效应

Swallow和Jiang (2010)最早发现, 编码时的目标探测会促进同时呈现的背景信息在随后记忆测验中的表现, 并将这一现象称为注意促进效应(Attentional Boost Effect, ABE)。随后研究发现这一现象并不会出现在概念内隐测验中, 由此提出目标探测主要促进的是背景信息的知觉加工, 而非语义加工。本研究通过3个实验, 操纵了对背景信息的编码加工类型(知觉加工或概念加工)。结果发现, 当与目标探测同时进行的是对背景信息的概念加工任务, 则ABE会出现在随后的概念内隐测验中。反之, 当对背景信息进行的是知觉加工任务时, 则ABE会出现在随后的知觉内隐测验而不是概念内隐测验中。这些结果表明, 目标探测既可能促进背景信息的知觉加工, 也可能促进背景信息的语义加工, 但只有在目标探测下背景信息的编码加工与随后内隐测验中所依赖的提取加工具有一致性, 才会产生ABE。     

基本需要在导师排斥感知与研究生心理健康的关系中的作用

为探讨导师排斥感知对研究生心理健康的影响及作用机制,本研究采用导师排斥感知问卷、基本需要问卷、生活满意度量表、简版流调中心抑郁量表及攻击问卷,对北京市六所本科院校的864名在校硕士和博士研究生进行问卷调查。结果发现：（1）导师排斥感知正向预测研究生的抑郁和攻击性,负向预测其生活满意度;（2）基本需要在导师排斥感知与研究生的生活满意度、抑郁之间起着完全中介作用,在导师排斥感知与攻击性之间起部分中介作用。结果表明,研究生导师排斥感知越强,基本需要的满足水平越低,进而导致研究生的抑郁水平越高、攻击性越强、生活满意度越低。即研究生感知的导师排斥感越强,其心理健康水平越低。     

右侧颞顶联合区及道德加工脑网络的功能连接预测社会性框架效应：来自静息态功能磁共振的证据

社会性框架效应指个体进行社会性决策时, 描述方式(即框架)对其选择倾向的影响。采用“伤害/帮助框架”范式, 本研究在行为上发现了显著的框架效应：被试在伤害框架下比帮助框架下, 更倾向于选择利他选项, 这可能是由于伤害框架凸显了伤害他人的后果及有意性, 从而提高了道德冲突水平。在神经活动上发现(1)静息态下, 右侧颞顶联合区(TPJ)的低频振荡振幅(ALFF)与框架效应强度存在显著正相关; (2)道德加工相关脑区构成的局部脑网络内部的功能连接强度(FC)能够有效预测框架效应强度。本研究首次利用静息态功能连接探讨个体的社会性决策受到语言表述方式影响的神经机制, 为进一步揭示社会决策中的个体差异提供了神经学证据。     

汉语母语者视听言语知觉发展趋势研究

6~12岁儿童、13~18岁青少年和20~30岁成人被试各30名,运用McGurk效应研究范式对汉语母语者视听言语知觉的发展趋势进行探讨。所有被试需要接受纯听和视听两种条件下的测试,其任务是出声报告自己听到的刺激。结果发现：（1）三个年龄阶段汉语母语者被试在安静听力环境下的单音节加工中都受到了视觉线索的影响,表现出了McGurk效应;（2）三个年龄阶段汉语母语者被试McGurk效应的强度存在显著差异,其受视觉言语影响的程度表现出随年龄增长而增强的发展趋势;（3）13岁以后汉语被试在视听一致下对视觉线索的依赖没有显著增强,但是在视听冲突下视觉言语的影响仍然在逐渐增强。     

父母教养方式影响学前儿童社会适应的追踪研究:自我控制的中介作用

采用追踪设计对439名儿童的父母进行问卷调查,旨在考察父母教养方式对学前儿童社会适应的影响及可能的中介机制。在第一年时,父母分别报告了自己的教养方式和儿童的社会适应;在第二年时,父母分别报告了儿童的自我控制和社会适应。研究结果表明：（1）父母权威型教养方式得分越高,孩子的社会适应越好,而父母专制型和放任型教养方式得分越高,孩子的社会适应越差;（2）自我控制能力高的孩子的亲社会行为更多,问题行为更少;（3）自我控制在母亲专制型教养方式与儿童违纪攻击和敏感合作间起完全中介作用,自我控制在父亲放任型教养方式与儿童违纪攻击和害羞焦虑间起完全中介作用。     

The role of drivers’ social interactions in their driving behavior: Empirical evidence and implications for car-following and traffic flow

Models for describing the microscopic driving behavior rarely consider the “social effects” on drivers’ driving decisions. However, social effect can be generated due to interactions with surrounding vehicles and affect drivers’ driving behavior, e.g., the interactions result in imitating the behavior of peer drivers. Therefore, social environment and peer influence can impact the drivers’ instantaneous behavior and shift the individuals’ driving state. This study aims to explore empirical evidence for existence of a social effect, i.e., when a fast-moving vehicle passes a subject vehicle, does the driver mimic the behavior of passing vehicle? High-resolution Basic Safety Message data set (N = 151,380,578) from the Safety Pilot Model Deployment program in Ann Arbor, Michigan, is used to explore the issue. The data relates to positions, speeds, and accelerations of 63 host vehicles traveling in connected vehicles with detailed information on surrounding environment at a frequency of 10 Hz. Rigorous random parameter logit models are estimated to capture the heterogeneity among the observations and to explore if the correlates of social effect can vary both positively and negatively. Results show that subject drivers do mimic the behavior of passing vehicles –in 16 percent of passing events (N = 18,099 total passings occurred in freeways), subject vehicle drivers are observed to follow the passing vehicles accelerating. We found that only 1.2 percent of drivers normally sped up (10 km/hr in 10 s) during their trips, when they were not passed by other vehicles. However, if passed by a high speed vehicle the percentage of drivers who sped up is 16.0 percent. The speed change of at least 10 km/hr within 10 s duration is considered as accelerating threshold. Furthermore, the acceleration of subject vehicle is more likely if the speed of subject driver is higher and more surrounding vehicles are present. Interestingly, if the difference with passing vehicle speed is high, the likelihood of subject driver’s acceleration is lower, consistent with expectation that if such differences are too high, the subject driver may be minimally affected. The study provides new evidence that drivers’ social interactions can change traffic flow and implications of the study results are discussed.     

人们何以能够“舍生取义”?基于保护性价值观认知神经机制的解释

保护性价值观是一种拒绝与其他任何价值相互交易, 尤其拒绝与经济价值进行交易的观念。近些年来的认知神经科学研究证据表明, 人们之所以可以为了坚守保护性价值观, 表现出“舍生取义”的行为(如对抗利益诱惑甚至放弃生命), 一方面在于保护性价值观是以一种道义主义的绝对规则方式进行表征和建构的, 这使得人们较少进行利弊权衡; 另一方面, 由于保护性价值观与自我和道德认同过程紧密相关, 使得其被主观赋予了最高价值。未来研究中, 可以在借鉴保护性价值观的研究范式基础上, 开展对中国人核心价值观的实证研究探讨, 关注其文化差异问题, 并进行正确价值观的干预和正确引导的应用实践研究。     

社会评价影响错误后调整效应

现有研究主要采用结果评价或结果反馈的方式考察评价对错误后调整效应的影响,但是任务前的社会评价怎样影响错误后调整效应尚不清楚。本研究采用社会评价任务,以错误后反应时和错误后正确率为指标,在两个实验中考察正性和负性评价对错误后调整效应的影响。结果发现,实验1和实验2中正性和负性评价条件下错误后减慢效应差异均不显著,说明正性和负性评价对错误后调整的作用是一致的,且不受实验任务的影响。在实验1中通过和无评价条件比较发现,评价条件下的正确后反应显著慢于无评价条件,但是评价条件下的错误后反应与无评价条件无差异,说明社会评价加速了个体错误后调整。而且在实验2中发现高低自我效能组个体错误后调整效应差异不显著,说明当前结果不受个体自我效能感的影响。因此,当前研究说明任务前的社会评价促进了个体错误后行为调整,但是错误后调整效应不受社会评价效价的影响。