删除或更新信息,请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

语言加工过程中的观点采择及其认知机制

本站小编 Free考研考试/2022-01-01

隋雪, 史汉文, 李雨桐()
辽宁师范大学心理学院, 大连 116029
收稿日期:2020-09-25出版日期:2021-06-15发布日期:2021-04-25
通讯作者:李雨桐E-mail:dearliyutong@163.com

基金资助:教育部人文社会科学规划基金项目(19YJA190005);国家自然科学基金面上项目(31971036);博士后部分研究工作(243514)

Perspective taking and its cognitive mechanism in language processing

SUI Xue, SHI Hanwen, LI Yutong()
School of Psychology, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China
Received:2020-09-25Online:2021-06-15Published:2021-04-25
Contact:LI Yutong E-mail:dearliyutong@163.com






摘要/Abstract


摘要: 观点采择是指个体从他人或他人所处情境出发, 想象或推测他人观点与态度的心理过程。对相关研究综述发现: (1)观点采择是否存在自我中心偏向依然存在争论; (2)观点采择自我中心偏向不是始终存在的, 其原因可能是个体受到时间压力和特定类型任务的要求; (3)他人存在影响观点采择自我中心偏向, 并且这种影响是自动化的, 不受任务类型的影响; (4)观点采择的认知机制主要包括交互对齐、记忆提取和概率计算。未来研究需要: (1)整合已实现的计算模型; (2)进一步探究观点采择能力与心理理论的关系; (3)探究观点采择中私有信息的作用; (4)提高观点采择研究的生态效度; (5)采用不同的技术手段进行汇聚性验证。


[1] Barr, D. J., & Keysar, B. (2002). Anchoring comprehension in linguistic precedents. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(2), 391-418.
doi: 10.1006/jmla.2001.2815URL
[2] Ba?náková, J., Weber, K., Petersson, K. M., van Berkum, J., & Hagoort, P. (2014). Beyond the language given: The neural correlates of inferring speaker meaning. Cerebral Cortex, 24(10), 2572-2578.
doi: 10.1093/cercor/bht112URL
[3] Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(6), 1482-1493.
doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1482URL
[4] Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(2), 171-190.
pmid: 20161117
[5] Brown-Schmidt, S., & Duff, M. C. (2016). Memory and common ground processes in language use. Topics in Cognitive Science, 8(4), 722-736.
doi: 10.1111/tops.12224pmid: 27797165
[6] Brown-Schmidt, S., Gunlogson, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation. Cognition, 107(3), 1122-1134.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.005pmid: 18164700
[7] Brown-Schmidt, S., & Heller, D. (2018). Perspective-taking during conversation. In: Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp.551-574). Oxford University Press.
[8] Caruso, E. M., Epley, N., & Bazerman, M. H. (2006). The costs and benefits of undoing egocentric responsibility assessments in groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 857-871.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.857URL
[9] Casado, P., Martín-Loeches, M., León, I., Hernández-Gutiérrez, D., Espuny, J., Munoz, F., ... de Vega, M. (2018). When syntax meets action: Brain potential evidence of overlapping between language and motor sequencing. Cortex, 100, 40-51.
doi: S0010-9452(17)30375-1pmid: 29212607
[10] Castillo, L., Smith, K., & Branigan, H. P. (2019). Interaction promotes the adaptation of referential conventions to the communicative context. Cognitive Science, 43(8), e12780.
[11] Cracco, E., Bardi, L., Desmet, C., Genschow, O., Rigoni, D., de Coster, L., ... Brass, M. (2018). Automatic imitation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(5), 453-500.
doi: 10.1037/bul0000143pmid: 29517262
[12] Egorova, N., Pulvermüller, F., & Shtyrov, Y. (2014). Neural dynamics of speech act comprehension: An MEG study of naming and requesting. Brain Topography, 27(3), 375-392.
doi: 10.1007/s10548-013-0329-3URL
[13] Elekes, F., Varga, M., & Király, I. (2016). Evidence for spontaneous level-2 perspective taking in adults. Consciousness and Cognition, 41, 93-103.
doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2016.02.010URL
[14] Feng, W., Wu, Y., Jan, C., Yu, H., Jiang, X., & Zhou, X. (2017). Effects of contextual relevance on pragmatic inference during conversation: An fMRI study. Brain and Language, 171, 52-61.
doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2017.04.005URL
[15] Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. D. (2007). The ‘good enough' approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(1-2),71-83.
doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2006.00001.xURL
[16] 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.
doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.17.1.99URL
[17] Forbes, P. A., & Hamilton, A. F. D. C. (2017). Moving higher and higher: imitators' movements are sensitive to observed trajectories regardless of action rationality. Experimental Brain Research, 235(9), 2741-2753.
doi: 10.1007/s00221-017-5006-4pmid: 28623389
[18] Frank, M. C., & Goodman, N. D. (2012). Predicting pragmatic reasoning in language games. Science, 336(6084), 998-998.
doi: 10.1126/science.1218633URL
[19] Galinsky, A. D., Ku, G., & Wang, C. S. (2005). Perspective- taking and self-other overlap: Fostering social bonds and facilitating social coordination. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 109-124.
[20] Genesee, F., Nicoladis, E., & Paradis, J. (1995). Language differentiation in early bilingual development. Journal of Child Language, 22(3), 611-631.
pmid: 8789516
[21] Geurts, B. (2018). Convention and common ground. Mind & Language, 33(2), 115-129.
[22] Goodman, N. D., & Frank, M. C. (2016). Pragmatic language interpretation as probabilistic inference. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(11), 818-829.
doi: S1364-6613(16)30122-Xpmid: 27692852
[23] Gorman, K. S., Gegg-Harrison, W., Marsh, C. R., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2013). What's learned together stays together: Speakers' choice of referring expression reflects shared experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 843-853.
doi: 10.1037/a0029467URL
[24] Hagoort, P., Hald, L., Bastiaansen, M., & Petersson, K. M. (2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304(5669), 438-441.
doi: 10.1126/science.1095455URL
[25] Hall, J. K. (2019). The contributions of conversation analysis and interactional linguistics to a usage-based understanding of language: Expanding the transdisciplinary framework. The Modern Language Journal, 103(S1), 80-94.
doi: 10.1111/modl.12535URL
[26] Hanna, J. E., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2004). Pragmatic effects on reference resolution in a collaborative task: Evidence from eye movements. Cognitive Science, 28(1), 105-115.
doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2801_5URL
[27] Hanna, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Trueswell, J. C. (2003). The effects of common ground and perspective on domains of referential interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(1), 43-61.
doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00022-6URL
[28] Heller, D. (2020). The production and comprehension of referring expressions: Definite description. Language and Linguistics Compass, 14(5), e12370.
[29] Heller, D., Gorman, K. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2012). To name or to describe: shared knowledge affects referential form. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(2), 290-305.
doi: 10.1111/tops.2012.4.issue-2URL
[30] Heller, D., Grodner, D., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). The role of perspective in identifying domains of reference. Cognition, 108(3), 831-836.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.008URL
[31] Heller, D., Parisien, C., & Stevenson, S. (2016). Perspective- taking behavior as the probabilistic weighing of multiple domains. Cognition, 149, 104-120.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.12.008URL
[32] Hinchcliffe, C., Jiménez-Ortega, L., Mu?oz, F., Hernández- Gutiérrez, D., Casado, P., Sánchez-García, J., & Martín- Loeches, M. (2020). Language comprehension in the social brain: Electrophysiological brain signals of social presence effects during syntactic and semantic sentence processing. Cortex, 130, 413-425.
doi: S0010-9452(20)30148-9pmid: 32540159
[33] Horton, W. S. (2005). Conversational common ground and memory processes in language production. Discourse Processes, 40(1), 1-35.
doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp4001_1URL
[34] Horton, W. S., & Gerrig, R. J. (2005). The impact of memory demands on audience design during language production. Cognition, 96(2), 127-142.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.07.001URL
[35] Horton, W. S., & Gerrig, R. J. (2016). Revisiting the memory- based processing approach to common ground. Topics in Cognitive Science, 8(4), 780-795.
doi: 10.1111/tops.2016.8.issue-4URL
[36] Horton, W. S., & Keysar, B. (1996). When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition, 59(1), 91-117.
pmid: 8857472
[37] Isaacs, E. A., & Clark, H. H. (1987). References in conversation between experts and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116(1), 26-37.
doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.116.1.26URL
[38] Jouravlev, O., Schwartz, R., Ayyash, D., Mineroff, Z., Gibson, E., & Fedorenko, E. (2019). Tracking colisteners' knowledge states during language comprehension. Psychological Science, 30(1), 3-19.
doi: 10.1177/0956797618807674pmid: 30444681
[39] Kennette, L. N., & Wurm, L. H. (2016). On the disambiguation of meaning and the effect of cognitive load. Current Psychology, 35(3), 295-308.
doi: 10.1007/s12144-014-9294-6URL
[40] Keysar, B., Barr, D. J., Balin, J. A., & Brauner, J. S. (2000). Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. Psychological Science, 11(1), 32-38.
pmid: 11228840
[41] Keysar, B., Barr, D. J., Balin, J. A., & Paek, T. S. (1998). Definite reference and mutual knowledge: Process models of common ground in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 39(1), 1-20.
doi: 10.1006/jmla.1998.2563URL
[42] Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89(1), 25-41.
pmid: 12893123
[43] Knutsen, D., & Le Bigot, L. (2012). Managing dialogue: How information availability affects collaborative reference production. Journal of Memory and Language, 67(3), 326-341.
doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.06.001URL
[44] Knutsen, D., & Le Bigot, L. (2014). Capturing egocentric biases in reference reuse during collaborative dialogue. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21(6), 1590-1599.
doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0620-7URL
[45] Knutsen, D., & Le Bigot, L. (2017). Conceptual match as a determinant of reference reuse in dialogue. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(3), 350-368.
doi: 10.1037/xlm0000313URL
[46] Krauss, R. M., & Weinheimer, S. (1964). Changes in reference phrases as a function of frequency of usage in social interaction: A preliminary study. Psychonomic Science, 1(1-12),113-114.
doi: 10.3758/BF03342758URL
[47] Kronmüller, E., & Barr, D. J. (2007). Perspective-free pragmatics: Broken precedents and the recovery-from- preemption hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(3), 436-455.
doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.05.002URL
[48] Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621-647.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123URL
[49] Lane, L. W., & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Speaker-external versus speaker-internal forces on utterance form: Do cognitive demands override threats to referential success? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(6), 1466-1481.
doi: 10.1037/a0013353URL
[50] Lane, L. W., Groisman, M., & Ferreira, V. S. (2006). Don't talk about pink elephants!: Speakers' control over leaking private information during language production. Psychological Science, 17(4), 273-277.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01697.xURL
[51] Lazaridou, A., Hermann, K. M., Tuyls, K., & Clark, S. (2018). Emergence of linguistic communication from referential games with symbolic and pixel input. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.03984.
[52] Martin, A. K., Perceval, G., Davies, I., Su, P., Huang, J., & Meinzer, M. (2019). Visual perspective taking in young and older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(11), 2006-2026.
doi: 10.1037/xge0000584URL
[53] Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[54] Mozuraitis, M., Stevenson, S., & Heller, D. (2018). Modeling reference production as the probabilistic combination of multiple perspectives. Cognitive Science, 42(S4), 974- 1008.
[55] Nadig, A. S., & Sedivy, J. C. (2002). Evidence of perspective- taking constraints in children's on-line reference resolution. Psychological Science, 13(4), 329-336.
doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2002.00460.xURL
[56] Ostrand, R., & Ferreira, V. S. (2019). Repeat after us: Syntactic alignment is not partner-specific. Journal of Memory and Language, 108, 104037.
doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2019.104037URL
[57] Paek, E. J., & Yoon, S. O. (2020). Partner-specific communication deficits in individuals with Alzheimer's disease. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 1-15.
[58] Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. London: Routlege & Kegan Paul.
[59] Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169-190.
pmid: 15595235
[60] Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(4), 329-347.
doi: 10.1017/S0140525X12001495pmid: 23789620
[61] Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279-301.
doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-XURL
[62] Ross, M., & Sicoly, F. (1979). Egocentric biases in availability and attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(3), 322-336.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.322URL
[63] Rubio-Fernández, P., Mollica, F., Ali, M. O., & Gibson, E. (2019). How do you know that? Automatic belief inferences in passing conversation. Cognition, 193, 104011.
doi: S0010-0277(19)30184-2pmid: 31255905
[64] Rueschemeyer, S.-A., Gardner, T., & Stoner, C. (2015). The Social N400 effect: how the presence of other listeners affects language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(1), 128-134.
doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0654-xURL
[65] Ryskin, R. A., Benjamin, A. S., Tullis, J., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2015). Perspective-taking in comprehension, production, and memory: An individual differences approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(5), 898-915.
doi: 10.1037/xge0000093URL
[66] 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.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.11.011URL
[67] Schmitz, L., Vesper, C., Sebanz, N., & Knoblich, G. (2017). Co-representation of others' task constraints in joint action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(8), 1480-1493.
doi: 10.1037/xhp0000403URL
[68] Scott, R. M., & Baillargeon, R. (2017). Early false-belief understanding. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(4), 237-249.
doi: S1364-6613(17)30018-9pmid: 28259555
[69] Sebanz, N., Bekkering, H., & Knoblich, G. (2006). Joint action: bodies and minds moving together. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(2), 70-76.
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.009URL
[70] Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2003). Representing others' actions: just like one's own? Cognition, 88(3), B11-B21.
[71] Sikos, L., Tomlinson, S. B., Heins, C., & Grodner, D. J. (2019). What do you know? ERP evidence for immediate use of common ground during online reference resolution. Cognition, 182, 275-285.
doi: S0010-0277(18)30271-3pmid: 30388433
[72] Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268(5217), 1632-1634.
doi: 10.1126/science.7777863URL
[73] Todd, A. R., Simpson, A. J., & Cameron, C. D. (2019). Time pressure disrupts level-2, but not level-1, visual perspective calculation: A process-dissociation analysis. Cognition, 189, 41-54.
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.03.002URL
[74] Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124URL
[75] Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458.
doi: 10.1126/science.7455683URL
[76] van Ackeren, M.J., Casasanto, D., Bekkering, H., Hagoort, P., & Rueschemeyer, S.-A. (2012). Pragmatics in action: indirect requests engage theory of mind areas and the cortical motor network. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(11), 2237-2247.
pmid: 22849399
[77] Vanlangendonck, F., Willems, R. M., Menenti, L., & Hagoort, P. (2016). An early influence of common ground during speech planning. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(6), 741-750.
doi: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1148747URL
[78] Wagner, A., Abramova, O., Krasnova, H., & Buxmann, P. (2018). When you share, you should care: Examining the role of perspective-taking on social networking sites. European Conference on Information Systems.
[79] Wu, S., & Keysar, B. (2007). The effect of information overlap on communication effectiveness. Cognitive Science, 31(1), 169-181.
doi: 10.1080/03640210709336989URL
[80] Yik, M., Wong, K. F. E., & Zeng, K. J. (2019). Anchoring- and-adjustment during affect inferences. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2567.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02567URL
[81] Yoon, S. O., Benjamin, A. S., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2016). The historical context in conversation: Lexical differentiation and memory for the discourse history. Cognition, 154, 102-117.
doi: S0010-0277(16)30127-5pmid: 27258780
[82] Yoon, S. O., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2019). Audience design in multiparty conversation. Cognitive Science, 43(8), e12774.
[83] Zhan, M., Levy, R., & Kehler, A. (2020). Pronoun interpretation in Mandarin Chinese follows principles of Bayesian inference. PloS One, 15(8), e0237012.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237012URL




[1]张晶晶, 梁啸岳, 陈伊笛, 陈庆荣. 音乐句法加工的认知机制与音乐结构的影响模式[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(6): 883-892.
[2]韩海宾, 许萍萍, 屈青青, 程茜, 李兴珊. 语言加工过程中的视听跨通道整合[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(3): 475-489.
[3]王逸璐, 谢晓非. 帮助情境中的预测偏差:成因与应对[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(1): 117-127.
[4]陈琳, 田晓明, 段锦云. 建议采纳的认知机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(1): 149-159.
[5]黄欢, 刘博, 周晨琛, 姬鸣. 前瞻记忆意图后效中执行错误的机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(9): 1600-1607.
[6]杜玮玮, 宋婷, 李富洪. 双价效应及其认知机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(11): 1969-1975.
[7]范伟, 杨博, 刘娟, 傅小兰. 自我欺骗:为了调节个体心理状态[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(8): 1349-1359.
[8]金剑;李晔;陈冬明;郭凯娇. 权力和地位对自利行为的影响及其机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(5): 878-886.
[9]南 云. 音乐学习对语言加工的促进作用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(11): 1844-1853.
[10]杨营凯; 刘衍玲;. 抑郁反刍的认知神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(7): 1042-1049.
[11]李爱梅;孙海龙;熊冠星;王笑天;李斌. “时间贫穷”对跨期决策和前瞻行为的影响及其认知机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2016, 24(6): 874-884.
[12]刘雷;苏缇;彭娟;郭逸群;冯廷勇. 延迟折扣的认知与神经机制:特质性与状态性研究取向[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(7): 1047-1061.
[13]徐同洁;温芳芳;浮东琴;佐斌;肖任飞. 人际沟通中的语言偏向及影响因素[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(7): 1188-1197.
[14]滕召军;刘衍玲;刘勇;翟瑞. 乐观偏差的认知神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(1): 57-66.
[15]潘彦谷;刘衍玲;冉光明;雷浩;马建苓;滕召军. 动物和人类的利他本性:共情的进化[J]. 心理科学进展, 2013, 21(7): 1229-1238.





PDF全文下载地址:

http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=5457
相关话题/心理 科学 语言 神经 音乐

  • 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。 ...
    本站小编 Free壹佰分学习网 2022-09-19
  • 人们如何设想未来:未来情景思维对个体心理和行为的影响
    卢蕾安,王春生,任俊()浙江师范大学教育与人类发展学院心理系,金华321004收稿日期:2020-07-09出版日期:2021-06-15发布日期:2021-04-25通讯作者:任俊E-mail:drinren@163.com基金资助:国家社会科学基金“十三五”规划教育学一般课题“基于积极心理学理念 ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 姓名对个体心理与行为的实际影响:证据和理论
    包寒吴霜,蔡华俭()中国科学院心理研究所人格与社会心理研究中心,北京100101中国科学院大学心理学系,北京100049收稿日期:2020-09-02出版日期:2021-06-15发布日期:2021-04-25通讯作者:蔡华俭E-mail:caihj@psych.ac.cn基金资助:国家社会科学基金 ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 傅斯年的心理学探索及其贡献
    陈彦垒(),胡志坚聊城大学教育科学学院,山东聊城252059收稿日期:2020-08-13出版日期:2021-06-15发布日期:2021-04-25通讯作者:陈彦垒E-mail:chenyanlei@lcu.edu.cn基金资助:聊城市社科规划专项(ZXYB202002019)FuSsu-nien ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 群体面孔情绪感知的神经机制
    何蔚祺(),李帅霞,赵东方辽宁师范大学脑与认知神经科学研究中心;辽宁省脑与认知神经科学重点实验室,大连116029收稿日期:2020-09-01出版日期:2021-05-15发布日期:2021-03-30通讯作者:何蔚祺E-mail:weiqi79920686@sina.com基金资助:国家自然科学 ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 语言经验对概率词切分的影响
    于文勃1,王璐1,程幸悦1,王天琳2,张晶晶3,梁丹丹1()1南京师范大学文学院,南京2100972纽约州立大学奥尔巴尼分校教育学院,纽约122223南京师范大学心理学院,南京210097收稿日期:2020-06-28出版日期:2021-05-15发布日期:2021-03-30通讯作者:梁丹丹E-m ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 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 ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 拖延行为的发展认知机制及神经基础
    冯廷勇,王雪珂,苏缇()西南大学心理学部,重庆400715收稿日期:2020-06-12出版日期:2021-04-15发布日期:2021-02-22基金资助:国家自然科学基金面上项目(31971026);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(SWU2009104);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目( ...
    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 ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01
  • 抑制引起的遗忘及其神经机制
    关旭旭,王红波()河南大学认知、脑与健康研究所;河南大学心理与行为研究所;河南大学教育科学学院,开封475004收稿日期:2020-05-06出版日期:2021-04-15发布日期:2021-02-22基金资助:教育部人文社会科学研究项目(20YJC190019)Neuralmechanismsof ...
    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 ...
    本站小编 Free考研考试 2022-01-01