网络成瘾者不同情绪状态下的认知加工特征

取在校大学生454人，通过《青少年病理性互联网使用量表》（Adolescent Pathological Internet Use Scale, APIUS)，筛查出网络成瘾者31名为实验组，随机抽取样本中其他非成瘾大学生31人为对照组。使用词首－词尾对应三重意义组合图片60个为实验材料，用人物图片为情绪启动刺激，研究被试在不同情绪状态下的认知选择，记录被试选择词组性质和反应时间。研究发现，所有被试对积极词语的选择最多，对消极词语的选择最少，表现出“趋乐避苦”的认知选择倾向；成瘾组被试对积极词语的选择比对照组少，但是对消极词语选择比对照组多。悲伤启动情况下，成瘾组被试对积极词语的选择比对照组少，但是对消极词语的选择则比对照组多。成瘾组被试对积极信息的选择速度比对照组慢，但是对中性信息和消极信息的选择速度则比对照组快。愉快情绪启动下，成瘾组被试的反应时间比对照组短，在悲伤情绪启动下，成瘾组被试的反应时间比对照组长。悲伤情绪启动下，成瘾组被试对积极词语的反应时间比对照组慢，但是对消极词语的反应时间比对照组快。这些研究结果对网络成瘾的治疗有重要的参考价值。

The Cognitive Characteristics of Pathological Internet Users in Different Emotional Modes

PIU(Pathological Internet Use) or the Internet Addiction Disorder(IAD),the problematic Internet Use, the incidence of which is about 6%~14%. It’s a mental barrier among young people that has received public attention. STROOP paradigm was adopted in the initial research of the cognitive characteristics of PIU. It was found that the RT of PIU subjects on Internet-related words and emotional words were longer than normal group. They can speculate if there may be cognitive processing and emotional processing through RT. However, these paradigms couldn’t ensure the basic characteristics of the cognitive and emotional processing. A total of 454 college students were chosen according to the Adolescent Pathological Internet Use Scale (APIUS), of which 31 were PIU students as the subjects of this experiment. Another 31 students were selected randomly from the non-PIU subjects as the control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in gender and age. The experimental materials were 60 pictures connected with words. Each first character had 3 alternative last characters ranging from positive, neutral to negative to form 2-character word. The positions of the last character were random in the experiment. The subjects were required to choose the proper character. Their choices and the RT are recorded. The research adopted a 3（positive, negative or neutral）×2(priming types: happy, sad, non-priming)×2 (PIU and non-PIU ) mixed design. The group with PIU/non-PIU was the between-subjects design, others were the within-subjects designs. There was a significant difference among the three sorts of words, For all the subjects，65.34% of the words they chose were positive words, 21.1% were neutral words, 13.5% were negative words. The PIU subjects chose less positive words but more negative words than the non-PIU group. the subjects with or without PIU chose positive words more (there was a significant difference), and negative words less (there was a significant difference in the non-PIU group, but not in the PIU subjects). There was a significant difference in the chosen of positive words between PIU group and the non-PIU group in the sad priming. In different priming types, however, there was only a nearly significant difference for negative words between the two groups. There was a significant difference among the RT of different type of words: the RT of negative words was the longest; the RT of positive words was the shortest. The RT for the positive words of PIU subjects was longer than the non-PIU group, but shorter for the neutral words and negative words and the difference was significant. For the two groups, the RT in the happy priming was the longest, that in the no-priming one was the second, and that in the sad priming was shortest. But only in the condition of happy priming, the PIU subjects chose more quickly than those from another group, there was a significant difference but not in other priming conditions. In the sad priming condition, the RT for the positive words of PIU subjects were longer than neutral and negative words. In other priming conditions, there was no significant difference between the RT of two groups. All the subjects chose the positive words most and the negative least, which showed a cognitive choose tendency of which is “happy approach and pain avoidance”. The PIU group chose less positive words but more negative words than the non-PIU group,. In the happy priming condition, the choice of negative words was increased for all the subjects ,but in sad priming condition , the choice of positive words was increased. In the condition of sadness priming, PIU students chose less positive words and more negative words than non-PIU students. All the subjects chose positive words most quickly, and negative words most slowly. Compared with the non-PIU students, PIU students chose positive words more slowly, negative words and the neutral words more quickly. The RT of both groups was longest in the condition of happy priming, least in the sadness priming. In the condition of the happy priming, the RT of PIU subjects were shorter than non-PIU subjects, but the opposite in the sadness condition. In the condition of sad priming, the PIU student spent more time choosing the positive words and less time choosing the negative words than another group.