刻板印象威胁下价值肯定对任务表现的缓冲作用

本研究考察了在多重威胁框架下,价值肯定干预对女大学生在刻板印象威胁下的认知任务表现的作用,并比较了群体价值肯定和自我价值肯定的影响差异.实验1发现在群体目标刻板印象威胁下,群体价值肯定降低了受威胁个体的任务表现水平,被试在任务中表现出更大的Stroop干扰效应;实验2发现在自我目标刻板印象威胁下,群体价值肯定和自我价值...     

视觉工作记忆参与融景知觉

融景知觉现象是指观察者任意时刻虽然只能观察到部分刺激模式,却能基于部分刺激模式形成完整知觉。完成融景知觉的关键在于需要将时间序列上的信息进行整合。根据视知觉与视觉工作记忆动态交互模型,完成信息整合需视觉工作记忆的参与。然而以往研究均关注融景现象的知觉加工特性,尚未涉及视觉工作记忆在该现象中的作用机制。笔者采用双任务范式,要求被试完成规则或不规则刺激模式的融景知觉,同时操纵工作记忆负荷,以考察记忆负荷对融景知觉的影响。结果发现,高记忆负荷显著降低不规则刺激的融景知觉绩效(实验一);且该效应并非由记忆负荷对融景刺激维持阶段的影响所致(实验二)。上述结果说明,至少对不规则图形的融景知觉需要视觉工作记忆参与。     

Effects of Response Blocking and Programmed Stimulus Control on Motor Stereotypy: A Pilot Study

We evaluated response blocking with programmed stimulus control, wearing tennis wrist bands, to reduce motor stereotypy in a student with autism. Response blocking was effective and subsequent analysis revealed that wearing the tennis wrist bands alone maintained low frequency stereotypy. Results suggest that controlling effects from a procedure such as response blocking can be transferred to a programmed stimulus in the absence of physical intervention.     

Transfer of response codes from choice-response to go/no-go tasks

The present study investigated the conditions for observing the Simon effect in go/no-go tasks. The Simon effect denotes faster and more accurate responses when irrelevant stimulus location and response location correspond than when they do not correspond. In four experiments, participants performed both in a choice-response task (CRT) and in a go/no-go task, and we varied the order and the similarity of the tasks. In the CRT, participants pressed a left key to one stimulus colour and a right key to another stimulus colour; in the go/no-go task, participants pressed one (e.g., left) key to one stimulus colour and refrained from responding to the other stimulus colour. As expected, Simon effects were consistently observed in the CRT. In contrast, Simon effects in the go/no-go task were only observed when it followed the CRT and when the mapping of stimulus colours to response locations was preserved between tasks (i.e., in Experiment 4). Results suggest that transfer of a particular S–R rule including response location from the CRT to the go/no-go task was responsible for the Simon effect in the latter task. In general, results are consistent with a response-discrimination account of the Simon effect.