轻度认知功能障碍患者工作记忆中 脑电能量及皮质联络功能的变化特征

探讨轻度认知功能障碍患者（MCI）工作记忆状态下脑电能量及皮质联络功能的变化特征。被试为从社区选取的35名轻度认知功能障碍患者和34名健康志愿者。采用简单计算回忆方法,结果发现工作记忆加工过程中会引起4.0~18.0Hz范围内功率值的改变,且MCI组高于正常对照组;MCI患者在中央、顶、颞叶的半球间相干系数均显著高于正常对照组。研究结果提示MCI患者可能存在中央、顶、颞叶皮层的功能减退,工作记忆状态下通过代偿机制仍能维持加工的有效性     

用不同外部表征方式集中呈现信息条件下的因果力判断

在分别用文字陈述、表格和图形三种外部表征方式集中呈现因果信息的条件下,用直接估计因果力大小的实验范式考察单一因果关系因果力估计的特点,检验概率对比模型,效力PC理论和pCI规则。让287名大学生被试估计不同化学药物影响动物基因变异的能力。结果发现,对单一因果关系因果力估计具有以下4个特点：⑴不对称性：在预防原因条件下的因果力估计较多符合效力PC理论,而在产生原因条件下的因果力估计一般符合概率对比模型;⑵文字陈述、表格和图形三种信息外部表征方式,不影响产生原因条件下的因果力估计,但影响预防原因条件下的因果力估计。在预防原因条件下,与文字陈述和表格表征相比,图形表征会促使更多被试按效力PC理论来做因果力估计;⑶没有被试使用pCI规则;⑷被试估计因果力所使用的规则存在明显的个体差异。     

After MacIntyre

In his influential book After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre identifies Kierkegaard's view of ethics with that of Kant. Both Kant and Kierkegaard, according to MacIntyre, accept the modern paradigm of moral activity for which freedom of the will is the ultimate basis. Ronald M. Green, in Kierkegaard and Kant: The Hidden Debt, accepts and deepens this alignment between the two thinkers. Green argues that Kierkegaard deliberately obscured his debt to Kant by a systematic “misattribution” of his ideas to other thinkers, and to classical philosophy in particular. This essay argues that MacIntyre and Green are mistaken in identifying Kierkegaard with the Kantian tradition of moral autonomy and that they overlook his debt to the classical conception of virtue. In casting Kierkegaard in the role of the quintessential exponent of a modern conception of freedom, they have perhaps overlooked one of the greatest critics of moral autonomy who has ever lived.     

Bad is freer than good: Positive–negative asymmetry in attributions of free will

Recent findings support the idea that the belief in free will serves as the basis for moral responsibility, thus promoting the punishment of immoral agents. We theorized that free will extends beyond morality to serve as the basis for accountability and the capacity for change more broadly, not only for others but also for the self. Five experiments showed that people attributed higher freedom of will to negative than to positive valence, regardless of morality or intent, for both self and others. In recalling everyday life situations and in classical decision making paradigms, negative actions, negatives outcomes, and negative framing were attributed higher free will than positive ones. Free will attributions were mainly driven by action or outcome valence, but not intent. These findings show consistent support for the idea that free will underlies laypersons’ sense-making for accountability and change under negative circumstances.     

Perception of managers’ influence depending on status,power, and company performance

This research examines others’ perception of the influence of managers working in successful or unsuccessful companies who possess or lack status (to be respected by others) and power (control of valued resources). Study 1 shows that high‐status managers were judged as more influential in the firm than their low‐status peers, regardless of the company's situation. Study 2 finds that in a context of economic uncertainty, a manager with high status and power is perceived to be more capable of affecting the firm. The effect of power seems to be secondary since when a manager has low status, having high power does not significantly benefit the influence attributed to him or her. Furthermore, dominance (assertive behavior), not warmth, mediated the relationship between status and the attributed influence. Overall, these findings confirm that status is a very potent source of social influence, status and power are distinct constructs with different effects, and dominance rather than warmth is a key personal dimension linked to successful leadership.     

团队权力分布差异对团队冲突的影响：程序公平和合法性的作用

近年来团队权力分布差异与团队冲突间关系受到了学界较大关注, 但相关研究结果仍存在分歧。通过对70个工作团队的调查, 探讨了团队权力分布差异对团队冲突(任务冲突、关系冲突)作用的边界条件。结果发现, 程序公平调节了两者间关系：当程序公平较高时, 团队权力分布差异与任务冲突、关系冲突负相关; 当程序公平较低时, 团队权力分布差异与任务冲突、关系冲突正相关。此外, 被中介的调节模型分析显示, 团队合法性感知中介了程序公平的上述调节作用。     

The hand of God or the hand of Maradona? Believing in free will increases perceived intentionality of others’ behavior

The question of whether free will actually exists has been debated in philosophy for centuries. However, how belief in free will shapes the perception of our social environment still remains open. Here we investigate whether belief in free will affects how much intentionality we attribute to other people. Study 1a and 1b demonstrate a weak positive relation between the strength of belief in free will and the perceived intentionality of soccer players committing handball. This pattern even holds for behavior that is objectively not intentional (i.e., when the player touches the ball accidentally). Going one step further, in Study 2 we find a weak correlation between belief in free will and perceiving intentions in very abstract geometrical shapes. These findings suggest that whether individuals believe in free will or not changes the way they interpret others’ behavior, which may have important societal consequences.     

How Power States Influence the Persuasiveness of Top‐Dog versus Underdog Appeals

Although both top‐dog and underdog positioning appeals are widely used in marketing and advertising, little is known about which strategy is more effective in persuading consumers. By introducing a sense of power, a social variable that is inherently relevant to the nature of the top‐dog versus underdog classification, we propose that consumers' responses to these two appeals are influenced by their psychological experience of power. Specifically, low‐power consumers will respond to top‐dog appeals more favorably because associating with top dogs facilitates power restoration. In contrast, high‐power consumers will respond to underdog appeals more favorably because supporting underdogs facilitates power expression. In four experimental studies, we provide consistent support for our main predictions as well as the underlying processes. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate the differential effect of consumers' power states on their attitudes toward top‐dog versus underdog appeals. Providing process evidence, Studies 3 and 4 identify boundary conditions under which the basic effect was eliminated. These findings contribute to the persuasion literature and power research and provide important implications for positioning strategy and advertisement development.     

权力对延迟选择的影响

本研究旨在考察权力对延迟选择的影响, 并探讨决策难度在其中的调节作用以及决策过程的中介作用。两个实验均先操纵个体的权力状态, 然后再请被试完成随后的延迟选择任务。结果发现, 决策难度可调节权力对延迟选择的影响, 当决策困难时, 高权力者具有更低的延迟倾向, 当决策容易时, 权力的影响消失。决策过程的加工变异性可中介权力对延迟选择的影响。结果表明, 低权力者比高权力者具有更高的延迟倾向(尤其当决策困难时), 不同权力水平者在决策过程上的差异或可部分解释此种现象。     

权力和地位对自利行为的影响及其机制

权力和地位对自利行为的影响不同。权力能够降低认知性观点采择水平,进而使个体更加关注自身利益;地位能够提升认知性观点采择水平,进而使个体推测他人思想与感受,考虑他人利益。然而,权力和地位通过认知性观点采择对自利行为的影响可能受到情境性质的调节。今后的研究应该对这些关系和解释进行验证,探索共情性关心的中介作用,以及权力和地位影响认知性观点采择的调节变量;探究权力和地位拥有者对群体内、外他人的自利行为差异;探讨权力和地位的交互作用对自利行为的影响。