应激条件下的双重学习系统

心理学、神经科学和行为经济学中许多研究一致认为, 人的行为由双重学习系统控制, 分别是反射性系统和反思性系统。前者是自动化的习惯系统, 反应快速, 不需要消耗认知资源, 后者是反应较为缓慢的认知系统, 需要消耗更多认知资源, 但也更加灵活, 可以有效应对外界环境的变化。这两种学习系统并行存在而又相互竞争, 共同影响人的心理和行为。究竟是哪种学习系统对人的特定行为起着主导作用, 又有哪些因素导致该系统对行为的支配, 是近年来普遍受到关注的问题。过去研究者们采用导航学习、概率分类学习或工具性学习及其计算模型, 从行为和大脑层面探讨双重学习系统在急性和慢性应激下的变化。通过回顾和分析这些研究, 我们总结出应激导致个体向习惯行为转变的生理机制, 即去甲肾上腺素和糖皮质激素在杏仁核的参与下与受体结合协同作用于双系统相关的脑区, 并从该角度出发重新梳理和解释毒品成瘾的形成。未来需要重点关注个体基因差异与应激影响学习的关系, 并采用多种研究手段以更好地揭示其背后的神经和内分泌机制。     

具身知觉符号理论视角下的情绪启动效应

从知觉符号理论出发对情绪启动效应进行解读,启动刺激与目标刺激涉及的知觉符号相似性、框架相似性及模态激活延续性是情绪启动效应产生的可能机制和影响因素。在此基础上总结归纳出情绪启动的知觉符号匹配假说,并建构情绪启动效应认知加工模型,对现有情绪启动理论进行整合和拓展,以促进情绪启动刺激材料的拓展、提高研究生态效度; 促进情绪启动效应操作的有效性,进而提高其应用价值。情绪启动研究亦能反哺于知觉符号理论,促进其发展。     

Self-care for academics: a poetic invitation to reflect and resist

In newspapers and blogs, on Twitter, and in academic papers, stories of struggling academics abound. Substance abuse, depression, failed relationships, and chronic illness are the casualties of a neoliberal university sector that values quantity over quality and demands ever more for ever less. Within the academic literature a growing counter-movement has called for resistance, collective action, and slow scholarship. Much of this work, however, has focused on strategies that can be applied within academia. Little has been written about the activities that academics do outside the university; activities that have no purpose other than enjoyment, rest, and renewal; activities that represent the valuing of the self as a human being, rather than a means of production; activities that could best be defined as self-care. Using reflective practice to construct a poem comprising three voices, this paper explores those activities. This poetic representation is an effort to create time and space for the authors, and a manifesto to encourage other academics to demand and protect the time, space, and reflective practice that are essential to both personal wellbeing and quality research and education.     

Thinking with,and about,patients too scared to think: Can non‐interpretive maneuvers stimulate refl ective thought?

Patients incapable of higher-order (symbolic) thinking can often not tolerate evidence of the analyst's separate existence, particularly when that 'otherness' becomes evident in the process of the analyst's refl ecting upon and interpreting how the patient experiences or represents the analyst. The patient's intolerance of the analyst's efforts to think (refl ect upon and interpret) renders the usual psychoanalytic maneuvers employed to stimulate refl ective thought ineffective with such patients. Such patients have to learn to tolerate multiple perspectives before they can allow the analyst, or themselves, to think in the other's presence. The author presents two clinical vignettes that illustrate how the analyst's efforts to think about the patient were experienced by the patient as both intolerably distancing and as rejecting of an aspect of the patient's subjective reality. Working psychoanalytically with such patients requires the analyst to forgo the use of narrow interpretations that elucidate unconscious meanings and motives in favor of alternate technical maneuvers capable of facilitating the development of symbolic thinking and refl ective thought (insightfulness). These maneuvers include a demonstration of the analyst's willingness and ability to withstand (rather than 'interpret away') how he is being psychically represented by the patient, without becoming destroyed by, or lost within, the patient's characterization of him. Beside modeling a tolerance of alternate perspectives of one's self, other non-interpretive maneuvers that help facilitate the development of self-refl ective thought include: stimulating the patient's curiosity about the workings of his own mind by identifying incompletely understood behaviors or reactions worthy of greater psychological understanding, and insinuating doubt about the adequacy of the patient's explanations of such phenomena.     

A Contextual Approach to Political Theory

This article explores the advantages of using a range of actual cases in doing political theory. This sort of approach clarifies what is at stake in alternative theoretical formulations, draws attention to the wisdom that may be embedded in existing practices, and encourages theorists to confront challenges they might otherwise overlook and to think through the implications of their accounts more fully.