Subjects: Psychology >> Developmental Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Pain perception in infants is of great significance to the growth and development of infants, which has aroused increasing interests of researchers. Pain is essentially an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience that is acquired through early injury-related experiences. From the perspective of psychology, it is meaningful to systematically demonstrate the effects of pain perception on infant growth and development on the basis of understanding the concept of infant pain, its neurophysiological mechanism and evaluation tools. Subsequent research should continue to improve the measurement tools of pain perception in infants, and to investigate the differences in pain responses among different cultures and groups.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Individuals, enterprises and countries need to make decisions involving different time nodes in real life. Such decisions are commonly measured by "intertemporal preference" in the field of behavioral decision-making. Actually, the most important and crucial kind of intertemporal decision making relevant to survival and development are intertemporal choice with double-dated mix outcomes. However, existing intertemporal preferences measure by paradigms with pure gain outcomes was found to be poor predictors of far-sighted behavior in real life. Besides, mature theoretical models of intertemporal choice could not satisfactorily explain people's real intertemporal preferences. To better describe and explain people's intertemporal preferences with double-dated mixed outcomes, the present project intends to: 1) synthesize indicators of intertemporal choice with double-dated mixed outcomes by using two different logics, providing predictive indicators for model comparison; 2) develop a new ecological paradigm of measuring intertemporal choice with double-dated outcomes, aiming to provide a more ecological and predictive measurement for the development of following research; 3) adopt the Mouselab and eye-tracking technique to test which model could more satisfactorily explain intertemporal preference with double-dated outcomes, the utility-based model or the attribute-based model.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Fear of positive evaluation (FPE) is a key trait to effectively distinguish social anxiety from depressive symptom. It is defined as an emotional response involving fear of and distress about positive evaluation from others. Its role of social anxiety manifests in that it leads individuals with social anxiety to deny the positive evaluation, avoid attention from others, and be in negative mood by themselves. Furthermore, it aggravates individual's cognitive bias, and suppress positive emotions through Disqualification of Positive Social Outcomes (DPSO) and the Interpretation Bias (IB), thereby maintaining and exacerbating the symptoms relating to social anxiety. Future research not only should more consider the application of FPE in education and consultation, but also should pay more attention to its special characters in Chinese modest culture background.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： Studies have shown that choline is a substance that is closely related to memory. Previous studies focused on the effect of cholinergic drugs on explicit memory, and those results revealed that explicit memory is sensitive to most cholinergic drugs. However, relatively few studies have discussed the effect of cholinergic drugs on implicit memory. Furthermore, whether the effect of cholinergic drugs on implicit memory is consistent with explicit memory is still uncertain.The effect of cholinergic drugs on memory was investigated by drawing a comparison between the participants with nicotine condition and those without. We used lexical decision and lexical recognition tasks to test implicit and explicit memory, respectively. In experiment 1, 30 subjects participated in two occasions, 2 days apart. They participated once in memory tasks after receiving 12 mg/ml body weight of nicotine and once after receiving 0 mg/ml placebo. Experiment 2 examined whether receiving treatment before encoding or before the retrieval phase would moderate the cholinergic effect in explicit and implicit memory. In experiment 2, 19 subjects participated in two experimental occasions, 2 days apart, as follows: after receiving 12 mg/ml body weight of nicotine before the encoding phase; after receiving nicotine before the retrieval phase. In addition, we adopted event-related potential (ERP) technology to observe the affected ERPs. Participants were instructed to response to corresponding items by pressing keyboard. The Reaction Time and Accuracy data on retrieval phase of the two memory tasks were recorded and analyzed.Implicit and explicit memory performance declined under nicotine condition in both experiments. It reflected that receiving nicotine not only impacted explicit memory but also implicit memory. Furthermore, nicotine effects are moderated by the level of processing at the encoding phase. Such impact only occurred on the deep processing level. Moreover, memory retrieval after receiving nicotine was affected. These effects were more remarkable on implicit memory retrieval than on explicit memory. The results of ERP data also showed that related ERPs of memory were affected by nicotine.In conclusion, results from the current study revealed that effects of cholinergic drugs were similar on implicit and explicit memory. The rest of the segregated results might have been due to the discrepancy of memory tasks rather than the differences in physiological mechanisms of the two memory types. Implicit memory and explicit memory might not belong to two extremely independent memory systems, because there are some covariant effects existing between them.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： The attentional boost effect (ABE) was first discovered by Swallow in 2010, which means that when subjects perform coding and target detection tasks simultaneously, the memory performance of background information presented in target items is better than those presented in distracted items. Previous studies believe that this promotion effect is mainly due to the fact that target detection enhances the perceptual processing of background information; however, many experimental results contrary to this perceptual processing enhancement hypothesis indicate that “target detection does not necessarily promote the perceptual processing of background information.”Can target detection promote semantic processing? If so, why is ABE not found in the implicit test task of concepts that rely on semantic information? We speculate that this may be related to the encoding tasks used in these experiments. In reading words aloud, subjects may only perform perceptual coding but not conceptual coding. If the time-selective attention mechanism promotes cognitive processing simultaneously with target detection, ABE should appear in implicit conceptual tests when conceptual processing of words is performed simultaneously with target detection.This study adopts the classic ABE paradigm of Swallow and Jiang ( 2010) and further controls the different processing types of memory materials in the encoding stage to explore whether target detection promotes semantic processing of simultaneously presented background materials. In Experiment 1, lexical materials were used, and subjects were asked to read words aloud while performing target detection tasks in the encoding stage. Perceptual (true and false word judgment) and conceptual priming tests (semantic judgment) were then completed. The experimental design was a 2 × 2 in-subject design. Results showed that the ABE effect only appeared under the perceptual priming test condition, and the priming amount under the target condition was significantly greater than those under the distraction condition, while under the conceptual condition, the priming amounts under the target and distraction conditions were not significantly different. Based on Experiment 1, Experiments 2 and 3 used vocabulary and picture materials, respectively, to further control the processing types of memory materials in the coding stage, including perceptual (vocabulary structure judgment, presence of white in pictures) and semantic coding (vocabulary, picture pleasure judgment). A conceptual implicit test (semantic judgment) was then conducted to investigate whether the two coding methods have different effects on ABE in subsequent conceptual implicit tests to verify whether target detection promotes semantic processing of background materials presented simultaneously. The experimental design was a 2 × 2 in-subject design. Experiments 2 and 3 revealed that the ABE effect only appeared under the condition of semantic encoding but not under the condition of perceptual encoding.Results showed that in the dual-task processing, target detection can promote not only the perceptual processing of background information but also the semantic processing of background information. The promotion effect of target detection on background information is related to the processing of the background information. If the encoding process of background information under target detection is consistent with the extraction process that relies on in subsequent implicit tests, ABE will be generated.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： Prospective memory is the memory for executing future intentional behavior at a proper time or occasion. Successful execution of prospective memory includes both a prospective and a retrospective component. The prospective component refers to remembering to do something when a prospective cue is encountered, and the retrospective component is the retrieval of the content of the intention to be executed. Both the prospective and retrospective components are indispensable for the successful execution of prospective memory tasks. Low achieving pupils in math with normal intelligence performed poorly on prospective memory tasks relative to high achieving math pupils. Because a failure of prospective memory may underlie academic failure in low achieving pupils in math, it is important to identify the causes of poor prospective memory performance. This study addresses the question of whether implementation intention encoding improves prospective memory performance in low achieving pupils in math and whether its effects are localized to the prospective and/or the retrospective component? In this study, two experiments were conducted to explore the above questions. Experiment 1 used a prospective memory task that disassociated the prospective component and retrospective component. Thirty-eight (38) pupils were recruited. The study adopted a mixed design of 2 (ability group: low math achieving pupils, high math achieving pupils) × 2 (cognitive load of ongoing tasks: high, low) with the latter as a within-subjects variable. Experiment 2 investigated whether encoding conditions improved low math achieving pupils’ prospective memory. Sixty (60) low achieving pupils in math were recruited. The study adopted a mixed design of 2 (cognitive load of ongoing tasks: high, low) × 2 (encoding method: standard encoding, implementation intention encoding) with the latter as a between-subjects variable. The results of Experiment 1 showed that accuracy rates of prospective and retrospective components of low achieving pupils in math were significantly lower than that of high achieving pupils in math. In addition, pupils with low math achievement yielded significantly lower accuracy rates on the high cognitive load condition than that in the low cognitive load condition. No significant interaction emerged between ability group and cognitive load. The results of Experiment 2 replicated the above findings that significantly lower accuracy rates occurred in the high cognitive load than the low cognitive load condition. The results also showed that the accuracy rates for the prospective and retrospective components were significantly higher for the implementation intention encoding condition than those in the standard encoding condition. Additionally, the interaction between cognitive load and the encoding method was not significant. The results indicated that low achieving pupils in math performed worse on measures of prospective memory than high achieving pupils in math. The results also showed that regardless of cognitive load, implementation intention encoding improved the performance of low math achieving pupils' prospective memory performance by enhancing both the prospective and retrospective components.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： The attentional boost effect (ABE) represents a phenomenon in which, in some dual tasks, increasing attention to a brief target in a detection task can enhance memory for unrelated items that are presented at the same time (relative to distractor-paired items). The ABE was different from the dual-task interference phenomenon found in previous studies, and to explain the ABE, Swallow and Jiang proposed a dual-task interaction model. This model claimed that the ABE was mainly triggered by the decision that an item is a target, which can lead to the transient but widespread perceptual enhancement of information by inducing a temporal selection mechanism. However, in ABE studies, the target detection tasks always coincide with Go responses that require action. One recent study found that action can enhance memory for unrelated items, which was called action-induced memory enhancement (AIME). Therefore, it is unclear whether the ABE is induced by the action or the target decision. To address this question, in the present study, the verbal paradigm of the ABE was modified and designed with a NoGo-target detection condition (NoGo-targets vs. Go-distractors) to separate target items from action responses, and a traditional Go-target detection condition (Go-targets vs. NoGo-distractors) was used for comparison. If the ABE is mainly triggered by the target decision, then NoGo-target detection could trigger the cross-conditional ABE (relative to NoGo-distractor items). In contrast, if the ABE is mainly triggered by the action, the NoGo-target items will not have any memory advantage. The present study included four experiments, and 137 valid data points were collected, including 33 valid data points in Experiment 1, 35 valid data points in Experiment 2, 36 valid data points in Experiment 3, and 33 valid data points in Experiment 4. The only difference among the four experiments was that the ratio of target-to-distractor items was different during the dual-task encoding phase. In Experiment 1, the ratio of target-to-distractor items was the same as that in the classic ABE verbal paradigm (1:5) to explore the role of AIME in the ABE. In Experiments 2 and 3, the ratio of target-to-distractor items was set to 1:1 and 1:2 to explore the role of the AIME and target decision in the ABE with different action frequencies. In Experiment 4, blank words (words without detection stimuli) were added in the detection phase to separate the action frequency (2/3) from the target frequency (relative to distractors; Go-targets: 4/5; NoGo-targets: 1/5) and verify the dynamic trade-off model of the target decision and action reaction proposed in the present study. Each experiment contained two conditions, namely, NoGo-target detection and Go-target detection, and each condition consisted of two phases, namely, a dual-task encoding phase and a recognition phase. During the dual-task encoding phase, a series of memory stimuli (words) and detection stimuli (coloured circles presented, 1 cm below the words) were presented at the same time, and the participants were asked to simultaneously perform the memory and detection tasks. During the recognition phase, only memory stimuli were presented, and the participants were required to judge the stimuli as old or new. The only difference between the NoGo-target condition and Go-target condition was reflected in the instructions for the detection task: in the Go-target condition, the participants were asked to press the space bar as quickly as possible when they saw the target circles (e.g., a red circle with Go-response) but did not need to respond when they saw other-coloured circles (i.e., distractor circles with NoGo-responses); in contrast, in the NoGo-target condition, the participants were required to press the space bar as quickly as possible for all circles (i.e., distractor circles with Go-responses) but withhold a button press for the target circle (e.g., a red circle with NoGo-response). The results showed that NoGo-target detection enhanced memory performance for target items (relative to Go-distractor/NoGo-distractor items) in the four experiments. First, it was found that the NoGo-target items were better remembered than the Go-distractor items and NoGo-distractor items in Experiment 1 (1:5 ratio), and performance with the Go-distractor items was worse than that with the NoGo-distractor items, showing that the ABE was triggered by the target decision without an action response and that actions had inhibitory effects at high frequencies. Second, it was found that the NoGo-target items were better recognized than the NoGo-distractor items but not better than the Go-distractor items in Experiment 2 (1:1 ratio), and the AIME was found with the Go-distractor items, showing that the boosting effect from the target decision on background information is robust, but the AIME affected the generation of the ABE within the NoGo-target condition. Third, it was found that NoGo-target items were better remembered than Go-distractor items and NoGo-distractor items in Experiment 3 (1:2 ratio), and there was no difference in memory performance between the Go-distractor items and the NoGo-distractor items, indicating that action frequency affected the generation of the ABE by adjusting the AIME. Finally, it was found that at 2/3 of the action frequency, both the Go-target detection with high target frequency and the NoGo-target detection with low target frequency triggered the ABE, and the memory performance was similar between the Go-distractor items and the NoGo-distractor items, indicating again that action frequency affected the generation of the ABE by adjusting the AIME, verifying the hypothesis of the dynamic trade-off model. Overall, the results of all four experiments found memory advantages with the NoGo-target items, but the generation of the ABE was affected by the frequency of action responses, indicating that the boosting effect from the target decision is robust in the ABE, and the action and the target decision work together in the generation of the ABE. Accordingly, we propose the dynamic trade-off model, arguing that the AIME at different frequencies dynamically trade-off against the boosting effect of target decisions and thus influence the ABE.
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment