删除或更新信息，请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

空间交互研究新视角：多重社会因素的影响

本站小编 Free考研考试/2022-01-01
肖承丽(), 隋雨檠, 肖苏衡, 周仁来()
南京大学社会学院心理学系, 南京 210023
收稿日期:2020-07-03出版日期:2021-05-15发布日期:2021-03-30
通讯作者:肖承丽,周仁来E-mail:xiaocl@nju.edu.cn;rlzhou@nju.edu.cn

基金资助:江苏高校哲学社会科学研究重大项目(2018SJZDA020);载人航天第四批预研项目(030602)

A new perspective on spatial interaction research: The effects of multiple social factors

XIAO Chengli(), SUI Yuqing, XIAO Suheng, ZHOU Renlai()
Department of Psychology, School of Social and Behavior Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
Received:2020-07-03Online:2021-05-15Published:2021-03-30
Contact:XIAO Chengli,ZHOU Renlai E-mail:xiaocl@nju.edu.cn;rlzhou@nju.edu.cn






摘要/Abstract


摘要： 空间交互是人类生存和社交的重要内容, 主要包括语言交流和视角采择两大范畴。对空间交互策略和效率的影响因素的研究, 传统上集中于空间因素, 近年来逐渐开始关注各种社会因素, 包括个体自身的社会认知特质、交互对象的社会属性和空间环境中的社会线索, 并从不同角度提出了理论解释。未来研究应关注社会认知与空间认知的跨领域融合, 考察更加多元的空间交互对象, 最终建立一个整合空间和社会因素的空间交互理论框架。


表1社会因素对空间交互的影响
社会因素 空间语言交流 视角采择
个体自身的
社会认知特质 		认知风格(刘丽虹 等, 2005; Li & Zhang, 2009) 共情能力(Mattan et al. 2016; Nielsen et al. 2015)
空间参考框架偏好(Vukovic & Williams, 2015) 精神病态(Drayton et al. 2018)
自闭症(Pearson et al. 2013)
社交与沟通能力(Clements-Stephens et al. 2013; Shelton et al. 2012)
想象力(Muto et al. 2019)
交互对象的
社会属性 		人/非人属性 人vs. 没有人(Clinton et al. 2018; Tversky & Hard, 2009) 人vs. 木块(Samson et al. 2010; Todd et al. 2017)
人 vs. 机器人(Carlson et al. 2014; Li et al. 2016; Zhao et al. 2016) 人 vs. 箭头(Santiesteban et al. 2014)
人 vs. 箭头 vs. 方块(Nielsen et al. 2015)
人 vs. 台灯(Ward et al. 2019)
内群体成员 vs. 外群体成员(Simpson & Todd, 2017)
虚拟同伴 vs. 真实同伴(Elekes et al. 2016, 2017)
交互对象的能力和状态 合作者的视角(Galati et al. 2013) 交互对象的视线(Cole et al. 2016; Conway et al. 2017; Freundlieb et al. 2018; Furlanetto et al. 2016; Kuhn et al. 2018; Quesque et al. 2018; Samson et al. 2010; Santiesteban et al. 2014; Ward et al. 2020)
合作者的空间能力(Schober, 2009)
合作者与目标物是否存在动作交互(Furlanetto et al. 2013; Mazzarella et al. 2012; Tversky & Hard, 2009; Zhao et al. 2016)
空间环境中的社会线索 空间朝向和合作者朝向的一致性(Galati et al. 2019; Galati & Avraamides, 2015) 同时包含方向线索和社会线索的交互对象(Gunalp et al. 2019)
物体的可供性(Millett et al. 2019) 任务无关他人的存在(Ward et al. 2019)

表1社会因素对空间交互的影响
社会因素 空间语言交流 视角采择
个体自身的
社会认知特质 		认知风格(刘丽虹 等, 2005; Li & Zhang, 2009) 共情能力(Mattan et al. 2016; Nielsen et al. 2015)
空间参考框架偏好(Vukovic & Williams, 2015) 精神病态(Drayton et al. 2018)
自闭症(Pearson et al. 2013)
社交与沟通能力(Clements-Stephens et al. 2013; Shelton et al. 2012)
想象力(Muto et al. 2019)
交互对象的
社会属性 		人/非人属性 人vs. 没有人(Clinton et al. 2018; Tversky & Hard, 2009) 人vs. 木块(Samson et al. 2010; Todd et al. 2017)
人 vs. 机器人(Carlson et al. 2014; Li et al. 2016; Zhao et al. 2016) 人 vs. 箭头(Santiesteban et al. 2014)
人 vs. 箭头 vs. 方块(Nielsen et al. 2015)
人 vs. 台灯(Ward et al. 2019)
内群体成员 vs. 外群体成员(Simpson & Todd, 2017)
虚拟同伴 vs. 真实同伴(Elekes et al. 2016, 2017)
交互对象的能力和状态 合作者的视角(Galati et al. 2013) 交互对象的视线(Cole et al. 2016; Conway et al. 2017; Freundlieb et al. 2018; Furlanetto et al. 2016; Kuhn et al. 2018; Quesque et al. 2018; Samson et al. 2010; Santiesteban et al. 2014; Ward et al. 2020)
合作者的空间能力(Schober, 2009)
合作者与目标物是否存在动作交互(Furlanetto et al. 2013; Mazzarella et al. 2012; Tversky & Hard, 2009; Zhao et al. 2016)
空间环境中的社会线索 空间朝向和合作者朝向的一致性(Galati et al. 2019; Galati & Avraamides, 2015) 同时包含方向线索和社会线索的交互对象(Gunalp et al. 2019)
物体的可供性(Millett et al. 2019) 任务无关他人的存在(Ward et al. 2019)







[1] 刘丽虹, 张积家, 王惠萍. (2005). 习惯的空间术语对空间认知的影响. 心理学报, 37(4),469-475.
[2] 肖承丽, 范丫, 徐刘飞, 周仁来. (2019). 以人为中心的人-机器人自然空间语言交互. 应用心理学, 25(4),319-331.
[3] 张越, 葛贤亮, 田志强, 葛列众. (2018). 基于空间的一级和二级视角转换的行为研究及理论综述. 心理科学, 41(2),504-509.
[4] 赵婧, 王璐, 苏彦捷. (2010). 视觉观点采择的发生发展及其影响因素. 心理发展与教育, 26(1),107-111.
[5] 赵显, 刘力, 张笑笑, 向振东, 付洪岭. (2012). 观点采择: 概念、操纵及其对群际关系的影响. 心理科学进展, 20(12),2079-2088.
[6] Apperly, I. A., & Butterfill, S. A. (2009). Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review, 116(4),953-970.
doi: 10.1037/a0016923URLpmid: 19839692
[7] Burigo, M., & Schultheis, H. (2018). The effects of direction and orientation of located objects on spatial language comprehension. Language and Cognition, 10(2),298-328.
[8] Carlson, L. A. (1999). Selecting a reference frame. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 1,365-379.
[9] Carlson, L. A., Skubic, M., Miller, J., Huo, Z., & Alexenko, T. (2014). Strategies for human-driven robot comprehension of spatial descriptions by older adults in a robot fetch task. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6(3),513-533.
URLpmid: 24948449
[10] Clark, H. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1982). Audience design in meaning and reference. Advances in Psychology, 9,287-299.
[11] Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1),1-39.
[12] Clements-Stephens, A. M., Vasiljevic, K., Murray, A. J., & Shelton, A. L. (2013). The role of potential agents in making spatial perspective taking social. Frontiers In Human Neuroscience, 7,497.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00497URLpmid: 24046735
[13] Clinton, J. A., Magliano, J. P., & Skowronski, J. J. (2018). Gaining perspective on spatial perspective taking. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 30(1),85-97.
[14] Cole, G. G., Atkinson, M., Le, A. T. D., & Smith, D. T. (2016). Do humans spontaneously take the perspective of others? Acta Psychologica, 164,165-168.
URLpmid: 26826864
[15] Conway, J .R., Lee, D., Ojaghi, M., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2017). Submentalizing or mentalizing in a level 1 perspective-taking task: A cloak and goggles test. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(3),454-465.
URLpmid: 27893269
[16] Creem-Regehr, S. H., Gagnon, K. T., Geuss, M. N., & Stefanucci, J. K. (2013). Relating spatial perspective taking to the perception of other's affordances: Providing a foundation for predicting the future behavior of others. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7,596.
URLpmid: 24068992
[17] Drayton, L. A., Santos, L. R., & Baskin-Sommers, A. (2018). Psychopaths fail to automatically take the perspective of others. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(13),3302-3307.
[18] Duran, N. D., Dale, R., & Kreuz, R. J. (2011). Listeners invest in an assumed other’s perspective despite cognitive cost. Cognition, 121(1),22-40.
URLpmid: 21752357
[19] Elekes, F., Varga, M., & Király, I. (2016). Evidence for spontaneous level-2 perspective taking in adults. Consciousness and cognition, 41,93-103.
URLpmid: 26897297
[20] Elekes, F., Varga, M., & Király, I. (2017). Level-2 perspectives computed quickly and spontaneously: Evidence from eight-to 9.5-year-old children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 35(4),609-622.
[21] Erle, T. M., Ruessmann, J. K., & Topolinski, S. (2018). The effects of visuo-spatial perspective-taking on trust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79,34-41.
[22] Fischer, T., & Demiris, Y. (2016,May). Markerless perspective taking for humanoid robots in unconstrained environments. Paper presented at the meeting of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Stockholm, Sweden.
[23] Flavell, J. H., Everett, B. A., Croft, K., & Flavell, E. R. (1981). Young children's knowledge about visual perception: Further evidence for the level 1-level 2 distinction. Developmental Psychology, 17(1),99-103.
[24] Freundlieb, M., Kovács, á. M., & Sebanz, N. (2018). Reading your mind while you are reading—Evidence for spontaneous visuospatial perspective taking during a semantic categorization task. Psychological Science, 29(4),614-622.
URLpmid: 29447070
[25] Furlanetto, T., Becchio, C., Samson, D., & Apperly, I. A. (2016). Altercentric interference in level 1 visual perspective taking reflects the ascription of mental states, not submentalizing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(2),158-163.
URLpmid: 26389611
[26] Furlanetto, T., Cavallo, A., Manera, V., Tversky, B., & Becchio, C. (2013). Through your eyes: Incongruence of gaze and action increases spontaneous perspective taking. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7,455.
[27] Galati, A., & Avraamides, M. N. (2013). Flexible spatial perspective-taking: Conversational partners weigh multiple cues in collaborative tasks. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7,618.
URLpmid: 24133432
[28] Galati, A., & Avraamides, M. N. (2015). Social and representational cues jointly influence spatial perspective-taking. Cognitive Science, 39(4),739-765.
URLpmid: 25243841
[29] Galati, A., Dale, R., & Duran, N. D. (2019). Social and configural effects on the cognitive dynamics of perspective-taking. Journal of Memory and Language, 104,1-24.
[30] Galati, A., Diavastou, A., & Avraamides, M. N. (2018). Signatures of cognitive difficulty in perspective-taking: Is the egocentric perspective always the easiest to adopt? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(4),467-493.
[31] Galati, A., Michael, C., Mello, C., Greenauer, N. M., & Avraamides, M. N. (2013). The conversational partner’s perspective affects spatial memory and descriptions. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(2),140-159.
[32] Galati, A., Panagiotou, E., Tenbrink, T., & Avraamides, M. N. (2018). Dynamic strategy selection in collaborative spatial tasks. Discourse Processes, 55(8),643-665.
[33] Gunalp, P., Moossaian, T., & Hegarty, M. (2019). Spatial perspective taking: Effects of social, directional, and interactive cues. Memory & Cognition, 47,1031-1043.
URLpmid: 30783909
[34] Heyes, C. (2014). Submentalizing: I am not really reading your mind. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(2),131-143.
URLpmid: 26173251
[35] Knowles, M. L. (2014). Social rejection increases perspective taking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55,126-132.
[36] Kuhn, G., Vacaityte, I., D'Souza, A. D. C., Millett, A. C., & Cole, G. G. (2018). Mental states modulate gaze following, but not automatically. Cognition, 180,1-9.
[37] Levelt, W. J. M (1984). Some perceptual limitations on talking about space. In A. J. van Doorn, W. A. van der Grindand, & J. J. Koenderink (Eds.), Limits in perception (pp.323-358). VNU Science Press.
[38] Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press.
[39] Levinson, S. C. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.
[40] Li, J., & Zhang, K. (2009). Regional differences in spatial frame of reference systems for people in different areas of China. Perceptual And Motor Skills, 108(2),587-596.
URLpmid: 19544964
[41] Li, S., Scalise, R., Admoni, H., Rosenthal, S., & Srinivasa, S. S. (2016,August). Spatial references and perspective in natural language instructions for collaborative manipulation. Paper presented at the meeting of the 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, New York, NY.
[42] Li, X., Carlson, L. A., Mou, W., Williams, M. R., & Miller, J.E. (2011). Describing spatial locations from perception and memory: The influence of intrinsic axes on reference object selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(2),222-236.
[43] Mattan, B. D., Rotshtein, P., & Quinn, K. A. (2016). Empathy and visual perspective-taking performance. Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(1-4),170-181.
[44] Mazzarella, E., Hamilton, A., Trojano, L., Mastromauro, B., & Conson, M. (2012). Observation of another's action but not eye gaze triggers allocentric visual perspective. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(12),2447-2460.
URLpmid: 22901326
[45] Millett, A. C., D’Souza, A. D. C., & Cole, G. G. (2019). Attribution of vision and knowledge in “spontaneous perspective taking”. Psychological Research, 84,1758-1765.
URLpmid: 31025107
[46] Muto, H., Matsushita, S., & Morikawa, K. (2019). Object’s symmetry alters spatial perspective-taking processes. Cognition, 191,103987.
URLpmid: 31234116
[47] Nielsen, M. K., Slade, L., Levy, J. P., & Holmes, A. (2015). Inclined to see it your way: Do altercentric intrusion effects in visual perspective taking reflect an intrinsically social process? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(10),1931-1951.
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2015.1023206URLpmid: 25849956
[48] Pearson, A., Ropar, D., & de C Hamilton, A. F. (2013). A review of visual perspective taking in autism spectrum disorder. Frontiers In Human Neuroscience, 7,652.
[49] Pellicano, E., & Rhodes, G. (2003). The role of eye-gaze in understanding other minds. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21(1),33-43.
[50] Pick, H. L., & Lockman, J. J. (1981). From frames of reference to spatial representations. In L. S. Liben, A. H. Patterson, & N. Newcombe (Eds.), Spatial representation and behaviour across the life span: Theory and application (pp.39-60). Academic Press.
[51] Pouliquen-Lardy, L., Milleville-Pennel, I., Guillaume, F., & Mars, F. (2016). Remote collaboration in virtual reality: Asymmetrical effects of task distribution on spatial processing and mental workload. Virtual Reality, 20,213-220.
[52] Quesque, F., Chabanat, E., & Rossetti, Y. (2018). Taking the point of view of the blind: Spontaneous level-2 perspective-taking in irrelevant conditions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79,356-364.
[53] Richard, L., & Waller, D. (2013). Toward a definition of intrinsic axes: The effect of orthogonality and symmetry on the preferred direction of spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(6),1914-1920.
URLpmid: 23751008
[54] Ryskin, R. A., Brown-Schmidt, S., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., Yiu, L. K., & Nguyen, E. T. (2014). Visuospatial perspective-taking in conversation and the role of bilingual experience. Journal of Memory and Language, 74,46-79.
[55] Ryskin, R. A., Wang, R. F., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2016). Listeners use speaker identity to access representations of spatial perspective during online language comprehension. Cognition, 147,75-84.
URLpmid: 26638050
[56] Samson, D., Apperly, I. A., Braithwaite, J. J., Andrews, B.J., & Bodley Scott, S.E. (2010). Seeing it their way: Evidence for rapid and involuntary computation of what other people see. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(5),1255-1266.
[57] Santiesteban, I., Catmur, C., Hopkins, S. C., Bird, G., & Heyes, C. (2014). Avatars and arrows: Implicit mentalizing or domain-general processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(3),929-937.
URLpmid: 24377486
[58] Schober, M. F. (2009). Spatial dialogue between partners with mismatched abilities. In K.R. Coventry, T. Tenbrink, & J. A. Bateman (Eds.), Spatial language and dialogue(pp.23-39). Oxford University Press.
[59] Shelton, A. L., Clements-Stephens, A. M., Lam, W. Y., Pak, D. M., & Murray, A. J. (2012). Should social savvy equal good spatial skills? The interaction of social skills with spatial perspective taking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(2),199-205.
[60] Shelton, A. L., & McNamara, T. P. (2001). Visual memories from nonvisual experiences. Psychological Science, 12(4),343-347.
URLpmid: 11476104
[61] Shelton, A. L., & McNamara, T. P. (2004). Spatial memory and perspective taking. Memory & Cognition, 32,416-426.
URLpmid: 15285125
[62] Simpson, A. J., & Todd, A. R. (2017). Intergroup visual perspective-taking: Shared group membership impairs self-perspective inhibition but may facilitate perspective calculation. Cognition, 166,371-381.
URLpmid: 28605699
[63] Surtees, A., Apperly, I. A., & Samson, D. (2013). Similarities and differences in visual and spatial perspective-taking processes. Cognition, 129(2),426-438.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.06.008URLpmid: 23999408
[64] Surtees, A., Apperly, I. A., & Samson, D. (2016). I’ve got your number: Spontaneous perspective-taking in an interactive task. Cognition, 150,43-52.
URLpmid: 26848735
[65] Surtees, A. D. R., Butterfill, S. A., & Apperly, I. A. (2012). Direct and indirect measures of Level-2 perspective-taking in children and adults. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 30(1),75-86.
[66] Surtees, A., Samson, D., & Apperly, I. A. (2016). Unintentional perspective-taking calculates whether something is seen, but not how it is seen. Cognition, 148,97-105.
URLpmid: 26752604
[67] Todd, A. R., Cameron, C. D., & Simpson, A. J. (2017). Dissociating processes underlying level-1 visual perspective taking in adults. Cognition, 159,97-101.
URLpmid: 27915132
[68] Tosi, A., Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (2020). Speakers' use of agency and visual context in spatial descriptions. Cognition, 194,104070.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104070URLpmid: 31669857
[69] Trafton, J. G., Cassimatis, N. L., Bugajska, M. D., Brock, D. P., Mintz, F. E., & Schultz, A. C. (2005). Enabling effective human-robot interaction using perspective-taking in robots. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 35(4),460-470.
[70] Tversky, B., & Hard, B. M. (2009). Embodied and disembodied cognition: Spatial perspective-taking. Cognition, 110(1),124-129.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.008URLpmid: 19056081
[71] Tversky, B., Lee, P., & Mainwaring, S. (1999). Why do speakers mix perspectives? Spatial Cognition and Computation, 1,399-412.
[72] Vukovic, N., & Williams, J. N. (2015). Individual differences in spatial cognition influence mental simulation of language. Cognition, 142,110-122.
URLpmid: 26036923
[73] Ward, E., Ganis, G., & Bach, P. (2019). Spontaneous vicarious perception of the content of another’s visual perspective. Current Biology, 29(5),874-880.
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2019.01.046URLpmid: 30799242
[74] Ward, E., Ganis, G., McDonough, K. L., & Bach, P. (2020). Perspective taking as virtual navigation? Perceptual simulation of what others see reflects their location in space but not their gaze. Cognition, 199,104241.
URLpmid: 32105910
[75] Zhao, X., Cusimano, C., & Malle, B. F. (2015,July). In search of triggering conditions for spontaneous visual perspective taking. Paper presented at the meeting of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Pasadena, CA.
[76] Zhao, X., Cusimano, C., & Malle, B. F. (2016,March). Do people spontaneously take a robot's visual perspective? Paper presented at the meeting of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Christchurch, New Zealand.
[77] Zwickel, J. (2009). Agency attribution and visuospatial perspective taking. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16,1089-1093.
URLpmid: 19966260




[1]温芳芳, 佐斌, 马书瀚, 谢志杰. 面孔识别的自我群体偏向[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(7): 1164-1171.
[2]陈丝璐, 张光磊, 刘文兴. 伦理导向人力资源管理实践的跨层次作用机制:基于社会情境与社会认知理论[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(11): 1800-1813.
[3]黄勖喆, 褚晓伟, 刘庆奇, 周宗奎, 范翠英. 网络欺负中的旁观者行为[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(7): 1248-1257.
[4]王弘钰, 崔智淞, 邹纯龙, 于佳利, 赵迪. 忠诚还是叛逆?中国组织情境下的员工越轨创新行为[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(6): 975-989.
[5]王协顺, 苏彦捷. 从动作模仿到社会认知：自我-他人控制的作用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(4): 636-645.
[6]李文岐, 张梦圆, 寇彧. 个体的政治倾向及其变化机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(3): 549-559.
[7]杨沈龙, 郭永玉, 喻丰, 饶婷婷, 赵靓, 许丽颖. 系统合理化何以形成——三种不同的解释视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(12): 2238-2248.
[8]叶佩霞;朱睿达;唐红红; 买晓琴; 刘超. 近红外光学成像在社会认知神经科学中的应用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(5): 731-741.
[9]郑怡;尚俊辰; 李伯冉;梁耀文;何嘉梅; 由一林; 蒋重清. 人类嗓音吸引力的影响因素[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(2): 237-246.
[10]岳童, 黄希庭, 刘光远. 催产素影响人类社会认知的性别差异[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(12): 2157-2167.
[11]范伟; 钟毅平; 傅小兰. 自我控制对欺骗的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(7): 997-1008.
[12]潘威; 陈巍; 汪寅; 单春雷. 自闭症碎镜理论之迷思：缘起、问题与前景[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(6): 958-973.
[13]贾磊;祝书荣;张常洁;张庆林. 外显与内隐刻板印象的分布式表征及其激活过程——基于认知神经科学视角的探索[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(10): 1519-1533.
[14]郭永玉;杨沈龙;李静;胡小勇. 社会阶层心理学视角下的公平研究[J]. 心理科学进展, 2015, 23(8): 1299-1311.
[15]左婷婷;胡清芬. 空间认知风格及其与空间能力的关系[J]. 心理科学进展, 2015, 23(6): 959-966.





PDF全文下载地址:

http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=5423
相关话题/空间 社会 心理 科学 语言
  • 领限时大额优惠券,享本站正版考研考试资料!
    大额优惠券
    优惠券领取后72小时内有效，10万种最新考研考试考证类电子打印资料任你选。涵盖全国500余所院校考研专业课、200多种职业资格考试、1100多种经典教材，产品类型包含电子书、题库、全套资料以及视频，无论您是考研复习、考证刷题，还是考前冲刺等，不同类型的产品可满足您学习上的不同需求。 ...
    考试优惠券 本站小编 Free壹佰分学习网 2022-09-19
  • 抑郁症患者的语言使用模式
    黄观澜,周晓璐()上海师范大学教育学院,上海200234收稿日期:2020-06-06出版日期:2021-05-15发布日期:2021-03-30通讯作者:周晓璐E-mail:zhouxiaolu@shnu.edu.cnThelinguisticpatternsofdepressedpatients ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 基于社交媒体数据的心理指标识别建模: 机器学习的方法
    苏悦1,2,刘明明1,3,赵楠1,刘晓倩1,朱廷劭1,2()1中国科学院心理研究所,北京1001012中国科学院大学心理学系,北京1000493联想研究院,北京100094收稿日期:2020-01-14出版日期:2021-04-15发布日期:2021-02-22基金资助:国家社科基金重点项目(17A ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 人际互动中社会学习的计算神经机制
    黎穗卿,陈新玲,翟瑜竹,张怡洁,章植鑫,封春亮()教育部脑认知与教育科学重点实验室(华南师范大学);华南师范大学心理学院;华南师范大学心理应用研究中心;华南师范大学广东省心理健康与认知科学重点实验室,广州510631收稿日期:2020-08-10出版日期:2021-04-15发布日期:2021-02 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 基于游戏的心理测评
    徐俊怡,李中权()南京大学社会学院心理学系,南京210023收稿日期:2020-05-24出版日期:2021-03-15发布日期:2021-01-26通讯作者:李中权E-mail:zqli@nju.edu.cn基金资助:教育部人文社科规划基金项目(20YJA190004);江苏省教育厅高校哲学社会科 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 第二语言学习者形态复杂词的加工机制
    丛凤娇,陈宝国()北京师范大学心理学部,北京100875收稿日期:2020-05-25出版日期:2021-03-15发布日期:2021-01-26通讯作者:陈宝国E-mail:chenbg@bnu.edu.cn基金资助:国家自然科学基金(31970976);北京师范大学博一学科交叉基金项目资助(BN ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 社会互动加工的认知特性及脑机制——第三人称的视角
    程羽慧,袁祥勇(),蒋毅中国科学院心理研究所,脑与认知科学国家重点实验室,脑科学与智能技术卓越创新中心,北京100101;中国科学院大学心理学系,北京100049;北京脑科学与类脑研究中心,北京102206收稿日期:2020-05-14出版日期:2021-03-15发布日期:2021-01-26通讯 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 恐惧管理理论的争议及其对死亡心理研究的启示
    孟祥寒1,李强1,2(),周彦榜1,王进31南开大学社会心理学系,天津3003502南开大学滨海学院,天津3002703天津职业技术师范大学,天津300222收稿日期:2020-02-29出版日期:2021-03-15发布日期:2021-01-26通讯作者:李强E-mail:liqiangp@126 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 亲社会行为中的从众效应
    魏真瑜1(),邓湘树1,赵治瀛21西南财经大学社会发展研究院,成都6111302耶鲁大学医学院,美国收稿日期:2020-03-31出版日期:2021-03-15发布日期:2021-01-26通讯作者:魏真瑜E-mail:weizhenyu@swufe.edu.cn基金资助:西南财经大学中央高校基本科 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 敬畏的心理模型及其认知神经机制
    赵小红1,2,童薇3,陈桃林1,2(),吴冬梅4,张蕾1,2,陈正举1,方晓义3,龚启勇1,2,唐小蓉21四川大学华西医院放射科华西磁共振研究中心,成都6100412四川大学公共管理学院社会学与心理学系,成都6100653北京师范大学心理学部,北京1008754成都市第四人民医院,成都610036收 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 老年人心理韧性与幸福感的关系:一项元分析
    叶静,张戌凡()南京师范大学金陵女子学院,南京210097收稿日期:2020-07-23出版日期:2021-02-15发布日期:2020-12-29通讯作者:张戌凡E-mail:xufanzhang@163.com基金资助:国家自然科学青年基金项目“工会实践对员工工作幸福感的影响:基于工具-情感的双 ...
    中科院心理研究所 本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01

Free考研考试FreeKaoYan.Com
欢迎来到Free考研考试，"为实现人生的Free而奋斗"

© 2020 FreeKaoYan! . All rights reserved.