EEG phase synchronization during semantic unification relates to individual differences in children’s vocabulary skill

As we listen to speech, our ability to understand what was said requires us to retrieve and bind together individual word meanings into a coherent discourse representation. This so‐called semantic unification is a fundamental cognitive skill, and its development relies on the integration of neural activity throughout widely distributed functional brain networks. In this proof‐of‐concept study, we examine, for the first time, how these functional brain networks develop in children. Twenty‐six children (ages 4–17) listened to well‐formed sentences and sentences containing a semantic violation, while EEG was recorded. Children with stronger vocabulary showed N400 effects that were more concentrated to centroparietal electrodes and greater EEG phase synchrony (phase lag index; PLI) between right centroparietal and bilateral frontocentral electrodes in the delta frequency band (1–3 Hz) 1.27–1.53 s after listening to well‐formed sentences compared to sentences containing a semantic violation. These effects related specifically to individual differences in receptive vocabulary, perhaps pointing to greater recruitment of functional brain networks important for top‐down semantic unification with development. Less skilled children showed greater delta phase synchrony for violation sentences 3.41–3.64 s after critical word onset. This later effect was partly driven by individual differences in nonverbal reasoning, perhaps pointing to non‐verbal compensatory processing to extract meaning from speech in children with less developed vocabulary. We suggest that functional brain network communication, as measured by momentary changes in the phase synchrony of EEG oscillations, develops throughout the school years to support language comprehension in different ways depending on children's verbal and nonverbal skill levels.     

西方心理学中两种文化的对立及其思考

西方心理学中科学文化与人文文化的对立由来已久,构成了西方心理学的发展史。两 种文化的冲突表现在心理学科学观、人性观、本体论和方法论四个方面,这种冲突造成了西方心理学目前的困境。作者认为,西方心理学中两种文化冲突的存在揭示了大力发展理论心理学的必要性和紧迫性,也是心理学统一的前提,并对心理学的本土化有可资借鉴的经验。     

有关西方心理学分裂与整合问题的再思考

在心理学的分裂与整合问题上 ,西方心理学家一直争论不休。该文认为 ,心理学的确存在着分裂的危机 ,因为心理学至今没有一个共同的基础和出发点 ,且心理学的分化导致了心理学机构解体的危机。但是心理学内部各种矛盾冲突的观点是可比的 ,可公约的 ,因此整合是有希望的。在迈向整合的过程中 ,主要存在着两个障碍 ,其一是客观主义 ,客观主义力主以自然科学为楷模 ,通过严格客观方法的应用 ,实现心理学的大一统。客观主义由于压抑了不同的声音 ,阻碍了对话 ,给心理学的整合造成障碍。其二是相对主义 ,相对主义在“怎么都行”原则的指导下 ,认为任何一种理论观点和思想方法相对于它所产生的背景都是正确的、合理的 ,没有任何外在于话语群体的标准作为最终的尺度。相对主义的观点导致了理论观点和思想方法的无原则多元化 ,使得西方心理学分裂危机进一步加深。该文主张心理学的整合应该是在一个共同基础上的多元化的整合 ,即允许多元化和多样性成分的存在 ,但不同成分之间是互补的 ,而不是冲突的     

论西方心理学发展中的几种对立倾向

论述了西方心理学发展中存在的三种对立倾向：１．应用心理学（主要指临床心理学）与学术心理学,其对立的根源在于两种科学观和两种文化观的冲突;２．趋向团结、整合,形成统一的心理学的力量和发展方向的向心倾向与分化、分离、多样化、多元化,使心理学丧失核心或处于破碎状态的力量和发展方向的离心倾向;３．主张心理学应正视离心力的危害,强调寻求统一的理论框架的统合观点与认为心理学的统合既不可能也无必要的非统合观点。作者认为,应辩证地看待离心力的意义,在实现心理学统一的步调上不能操之过急。     

左侧额下回在句子语义整合加工中的作用

语义整合帮助人们在阅读理解中将小信息块整合成一个完整、连贯的句子意义表达, 是阅读理解中非常重要的认知过程。通过对比40多篇句子加工相关的脑机制研究, 发现左侧额下回在fMRI研究中是参与语义整合加工激活概率最高的区域, 而颞叶及后部是MEG研究中激活概率最高的区域。另外, 左侧额下回是如何参与语义整合、它在内隐和外显语义整合中的机制是否相同、以及这种整合加工与一般的控制性加工、词汇启动的关系都是研究者广泛关注的问题。本文对上述问题进行了详细的综述和讨论。     

Toward the Unification of Molecular and Molar Analyses

Three categories of behavior analysis may be called molecular, molar, and unified. Molecular analyses focus on how manual shaping segments moment-to-moment behaving into new, unified, hierarchically organized patterns. Manual shaping is largely atheoretical, qualitative, and practical. Molar analyses aggregate behaviors and then compute a numerical average for the aggregate. Typical molar analyses involve average rate of, or average time allocated to, the aggregated behaviors. Some molar analyses have no known relation to any behavior stream. Molar analyses are usually quantitative and often theoretical. Unified analyses combine automated shaping of moment-to-moment behaving and molar aggregates of the shaped patterns. Unified controlling relations suggest that molar controlling relations like matching confound shaping and strengthening effects of reinforcement. If a molecular analysis is about how reinforcement organizes individual behavior moment by moment, and a molar analysis is about how reinforcement encourages more or less of an activity aggregated over time, then a unified analysis handles both kinds of analyses. Only theories engendered by computer simulation appear to be able to unify all three categories of behavior analysis.