1 南京晓庄学院心理健康研究院, 南京 210017
2 南京林业大学心理健康教育指导中心, 南京 210037
3 南京大学社会学院, 南京 210023
4 华东师范大学教育学部, 上海 200062
5 深圳威高集力物流有限公司, 深圳 518067
收稿日期:
2017-12-20出版日期:
2019-11-25发布日期:
2019-08-19通讯作者:
王沛E-mail:wangpei@163.com基金资助:
* 教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(17YJC840007);江苏省教育科学“十三五”规划课题青年专项重点资助项目(C-a/2016/01/13);江苏高校哲学社会科学研究重点项目(2018SJZDI065)Cognitive control strategies from the perspective of perceptual conflict: An example of stereotyped information and counterstereotyped information
CUI Yichen1,2,3, WANG Pei4(), CUI Yajuan51 Institute of Mental Health, Nanjing Xiaozhuang University, Nanjing 210017, China
2 Mental Health Education Guidance Center, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
3 School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
4 Faculty of Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
5 Shenzhen V-Grow Power Logistics Co., Ltd., Shenzhen 518067, China
Received:
2017-12-20Online:
2019-11-25Published:
2019-08-19Contact:
WANG Pei E-mail:wangpei@163.com摘要/Abstract
摘要: 以刻板化信息与反刻板化信息为例, 采用词义Stroop范式和掩蔽版的目标-启动范式分别将实验任务分成高、低知觉负载或阈上、阈下启动两种水平, 考察冲突信息知觉负载水平及其强度对他人印象形成的认知控制策略的影响。结果发现:(1)冲突信息启动方式与知觉负载的动态变化决定了个体对刻板化信息与反刻板化信息印象形成的认知控制策略。反应性控制耗费的认知资源少, 对刻板一致化信息的印象加工更快捷, 而对刻板冲突化信息的印象加工更缓慢, 且易激活反刻板印象; 而主动性控制耗费的认知资源多, 对刻板一致化信息的印象加工更缓慢, 而对刻板冲突化信息的印象加工更快捷, 且易出现刻板印象偏差。(2)认知控制对刻板化信息与反刻板化信息采取不同的加工模式。刻板化信息与反刻板化信息同时在阈上启动时, 其加工方式受到有意操作系统的主动性控制, 即进行可意识到的、受意识控制的加工; 而当这两类信息同时在阈下启动时, 其加工方式受到自动监控系统的反应性控制, 即进行无意识的、不受意识控制的加工。这些结果表明, 个体通过所知觉到的刻板化信息与反刻板化信息, 能灵活地在两种认知控制系统(有意操作系统vs.自动监控系统)中进行权衡, 调节其权重(即, 要么启动主动性控制, 要么偏向反应性控制), 从而形成最有利于他人的印象加工策略。即便处于知觉阈限之下, 个体仍能通过无意识认知控制的方式对他人印象进行加工。
图/表 8
图1一个试次的任务流程
图1一个试次的任务流程
图2信息知觉与其负载水平对他人印象加工速度的影响
图2信息知觉与其负载水平对他人印象加工速度的影响
表1各组内实验条件下被试的平均反应时(N = 82/单位ms)
知觉负载 | 性别特质词 | 性别属性词 | 信息知觉 | M | SE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 男性特质词 | 女 | 冲突 | 582.45 | 20.69 |
男 | 相容 | 574.48 | 20.87 | ||
女性特质词 | 男 | 冲突 | 578.47 | 20.27 | |
女 | 相容 | 577.18 | 20.52 | ||
高 | 男性特质词 | 女 | 冲突 | 632.09 | 21.44 |
男 | 相容 | 634.52 | 22.08 | ||
女性特质词 | 男 | 冲突 | 623.54 | 22.49 | |
女 | 相容 | 636.25 | 21.62 |
表1各组内实验条件下被试的平均反应时(N = 82/单位ms)
知觉负载 | 性别特质词 | 性别属性词 | 信息知觉 | M | SE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 男性特质词 | 女 | 冲突 | 582.45 | 20.69 |
男 | 相容 | 574.48 | 20.87 | ||
女性特质词 | 男 | 冲突 | 578.47 | 20.27 | |
女 | 相容 | 577.18 | 20.52 | ||
高 | 男性特质词 | 女 | 冲突 | 632.09 | 21.44 |
男 | 相容 | 634.52 | 22.08 | ||
女性特质词 | 男 | 冲突 | 623.54 | 22.49 | |
女 | 相容 | 636.25 | 21.62 |
图3不同负载水平下信息知觉对他人印象加工准确率的影响
图3不同负载水平下信息知觉对他人印象加工准确率的影响
图4一个试次的阈上启动和阈下启动任务流程
图4一个试次的阈上启动和阈下启动任务流程
图5不同冲突信息启动方式下印象加工的情绪效价
图5不同冲突信息启动方式下印象加工的情绪效价
表2各种实验条件下的平均反应时(自然对数)和情绪效价反应比(%)
观测指标 | 印象加工的平均反应时自然对数 | 印象加工的情绪效价反应比(%) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
阈上启动 | 阈下启动 | 阈上启动 | 阈下启动 | |||||
冲突 | 相容 | 冲突 | 相容 | 冲突 | 相容 | 冲突 | 相容 | |
M | 6.345 | 5.938 | 5.762 | 5.789 | 0.371 | 0.544 | 0.691 | 0.685 |
SE | 0.093 | 0.099 | 0.080 | 0.085 | 0.186 | 0.262 | 0.184 | 0.181 |
表2各种实验条件下的平均反应时(自然对数)和情绪效价反应比(%)
观测指标 | 印象加工的平均反应时自然对数 | 印象加工的情绪效价反应比(%) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
阈上启动 | 阈下启动 | 阈上启动 | 阈下启动 | |||||
冲突 | 相容 | 冲突 | 相容 | 冲突 | 相容 | 冲突 | 相容 | |
M | 6.345 | 5.938 | 5.762 | 5.789 | 0.371 | 0.544 | 0.691 | 0.685 |
SE | 0.093 | 0.099 | 0.080 | 0.085 | 0.186 | 0.262 | 0.184 | 0.181 |
图6不同冲突信息启动方式下印象加工的反应时
图6不同冲突信息启动方式下印象加工的反应时
参考文献 52
[1] | Aarts H., Custers R., & Marien H. ( 2008). Preparing and motivating behavior outside of awareness. Science, 319( 5870), 1639-1639. |
[2] | Algom D., Chajut E., & Lev S. ( 2004). A rational look at the emotional Stroop phenomenon: A generic slowdown, not a Stroop effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 133( 3), 323-338. |
[3] | Awh E., Belopolsky A. V., & Theeuwes J. ( 2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16( 8), 437-443. |
[4] | Baars, B. J. ( 2002). The conscious access hypothesis: Origins and recent evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6( 1), 47-52. |
[5] | Bailey K., West R., & Anderson C. A. ( 2010). A negative association between video game experience and proactive cognitive control. Psychophysiology, 47( 1), 34-42. |
[6] | Banse R., Seise J., & Zerbes N. ( 2001). Implicit attitudes towards homosexuality: Reliability, validity, and controllability of the IAT. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 48( 2), 145-160. |
[7] | Bartholow, B. D., & Dickter, C. L. ( 2008). A response conflict account of the effects of stereotypes on racial categorization. Social Cognition, 26( 3), 314-332. |
[8] | Bartholow B. D., Dickter C. L., & Sestir M. A. ( 2006). Stereotype activation and control of race bias: Cognitive control of inhibition and its impairment by alcohol. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90( 2), 272-287. |
[9] | Beer, A., & Brooks , C. ( 2011). Information quality in personality judgment: The value of personal disclosure. Journal of Research in Personality, 45( 2), 175-185. |
[10] | Bijleveld E., Custers R., & Aarts H. ( 2011). Once the money is in sight: Distinctive effects of conscious and unconscious rewards on task performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47( 4), 865-869. |
[11] | Boy, F. Husain M., Singh K. D., & Sumner P. ( 2010). Supplementary motor area activations in unconscious inhibition of voluntary action. Experimental Brain Research, 206( 4), 441-448. |
[12] | Braver, T. S. ( 2012). The variable nature of cognitive control: A dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16( 2), 106-113. |
[13] | Bugg, J. M., & Braver, T. S. ( 2016). Proactive control of irrelevant task rules during cued task switching. Psychological Research, 80( 5), 860-876. |
[14] | Capa R. L., Bustin G. M., Cleeremans A., & Hansenne M. ( 2011). Conscious and unconscious reward cues can affect a critical component of executive control. Experimental Psychology, 58( 5), 370-375. |
[15] | Clow, K. A., & Esses, V. M. ( 2007). Expectancy effects in social stereotyping: Automatic and controlled processing in the neely paradigm. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 39( 3), 161-173. |
[16] | Conrey F. R., Sherman J. W., Gawronski B., Hugenberg K., & Groom C. J. ( 2005). Separating multiple processes in implicit social cognition: The quad model of implicit task performance. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 89( 4), 469-487. |
[17] | Cui Y. C., Wang P., & Tan C. H . ( 2016). The influence of implicit theories of personality on processing strategy of person impressions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48( 12), 1538-1550. |
[ 崔诣晨, 王沛, 谈晨皓 . ( 2016). 内隐人格理论对他人印象加工策略的影响. 心理学报, 48( 12), 1538-1550.] | |
[18] | Cui, Y. C., & Wang, P. ( 2016). The dynamic interactive model of person construal on person perception. Advances in Psychological Science, 26( 4), 678-687. |
[ 崔诣晨, 王沛 . ( 2018). 他人知觉的个体构念动态交互模型. 心理科学进展, 26( 4), 678-687.] | |
[19] | Custers, R., & Aarts, H. ( 2010). The unconscious will: How the pursuit of goals operates outside of conscious awareness. Science, 329( 5987), 47-50. |
[20] | Evans, J., & Coventry, K. ( 2006). A dual-process approach to behavioral addiction: The case of gambling. In R. W. Wiers & A. W. Stacy (Eds.), Handbook of Implicit Cognition & Addiction ( pp. 29-43). Thousands Oaks: Sage. |
[21] | Garavan, H., & Weierstall, K. ( 2012). The neurobiology of reward and cognitive control systems and their role in incentivizing health behavior. Preventive Medicine, 55( 5), S17-S23. |
[22] | Hamilton D. L. , & Trolier, T. K.( 1986) . Stereotypes and stereotyping: An overview of the cognitive approach In J F Dovidio & S L Gaertner (Eds), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp 127-163) Orlando: Academic Press An overview of the cognitive approach. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 127-163). Orlando: Academic Press. |
[23] | Hoza B., Bukowski W. M., & Beery S. ( 2000). Assessing peer network and dyadic loneliness. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29( 1), 119-128. |
[24] | Hugenberg, K., & Sczesny , S. ( 2006). On wonderful women and seeing smiles: Social categorization moderates the happy face response latency advantage. Social Cognition, 24( 5), 516-539. |
[25] | Ito, T. A., & Urland, G. R. ( 2003). Race and gender on the brain: Electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 85( 4), 616-626. |
[26] | Jia L., Dickter C. L., Luo J. L., Xiao X., Yang Q., Lei M., … Zhang Q. ( 2012). Different brain mechanisms between stereotype activation and application: Evidence from an ERP study. International Journal of Psychology, 47( 1), 58-66. |
[27] | Jimura K., Locke H. S., & Braver T. S. ( 2010). Prefrontal cortex mediation of cognitive enhancement in rewarding motivational contexts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107( 19), 8871-8876. |
[28] | Klein O., Clark A. E., & Lyons A. ( 2010). When the social becomes personal: Exploring the role of common ground in stereotype communication. Social Cognition, 28( 3), 329-352. |
[29] | Macrae, C. N., & Quadflieg, B. ( 2010). Person perception. In S. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of Social Psychology( 5th ed., pp. 428-463). New York: McGraw-Hill. |
[30] | Magen, H., & Cohen, A. ( 2007). Modularity beyond perception: Evidence from single task interference paradigms. Cognitive Psychology, 55( 1), 1-36. |
[31] | Matsumoto A., Ichikawa Y., Kanayama N., Ohira H., & Iidaka T. ( 2006). Gamma band activity and its synchronization reflect the dysfunctional emotional processing in alexithymic persons. Psychophysiology, 43( 6), 533-540. |
[32] | Matsumoto, K., & Tanaka, K. ( 2004). Conflict and cognitive control. Science, 303( 5660), 969-970. |
[33] | Mc Culloch K. C., Ferguson M. J., Kawada C. C. K., & Bargh J. A. ( 2008). Taking a closer look: On the operation of nonconscious impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44( 3), 614-623. |
[34] | Melara, R. D., & Algom, B. ( 2003). Driven by information: A tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychological Review, 110( 3), 422-471. |
[35] | Meltzer, M. A., & Nielson, K. A. ( 2010). Memory for emotionally provocative words in alexithymia: A role for stimulus relevance. Consciousness & Cognition, 19( 4), 1062-1068. |
[36] | Ortells J. J., Daza M. T., & Fox E. ( 2003). Semantic activation in the absence of perceptual awareness. Perception & Psychophysics, 65( 8), 1307-1317. |
[37] | Payne, B. K. ( 2005). Conceptualizing control in social cognition: How executive functioning modulates the expression of automatic stereotyping. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 89( 4), 488-503. |
[38] | Payne B. K., Hall D. L., Cameron C. D., & Bishara A. J. ( 2010). A process model of affect misattribution. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36( 10), 1397-1408. |
[39] | Posten, A. C., & Mussweiler, B. ( 2013). When distrust frees your mind: The stereotype-reducing effects of distrust. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 105( 4), 567-584. |
[40] | Quadflieg, S., & Macrae, C. N. ( 2011). Stereotypes and stereotyping: What’s the brain got to do with it? European Review of Social Psychology, 22( 1), 215-273. |
[41] | Radvansky G. A., Copeland D. E., & Hippel W. V. ( 2010). Stereotype activation, inhibition, and aging. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46( 1), 51-60. |
[42] | Richards, Z., & Hewstone , M. ( 2001). Subtyping and subgrouping: Processes for the prevention and promotion of stereotype change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5( 1), 52-73. |
[43] | Rim S. Y., Uleman J. S., & Trope Y. ( 2009). Spontaneous trait inference and construal level theory: Psychological distance increases nonconscious trait thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45( 5), 1088-1097. |
[44] | Robertson, D. A., & Weiss, B. ( 2017). In the eye of the beholder: Can counter-stereotypes change perceptions of older adults’ social status? Psychology and Aging, 32( 6), 531-542. |
[45] | Roelofs A., van Turennout M., & Coles, M. G. H. ( 2006). Anterior cingulate cortex activity can be independent of response conflict in Stroop-like tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103( 37), 13884-13889. |
[46] | Rüsch N., Corrigan P. W., Todd A. R., & Bodenhausen G. V. ( 2011). Automatic stereotyping against people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective and affective disorders. Psychiatry Research, 186( 1), 34-39. |
[47] | Savine, A. C., & Braver, T. S. ( 2010). Motivated cognitive control: Reward incentives modulate preparatory neural activity during task-switching. Journal of Neuroscience, 30( 31), 10294-10305. |
[48] | Sherman J. W., Kruschke J. K., Sherman S. J., Percy E. J., Petrocelli J. V., & Conrey F. R. ( 2009). Attentional processes in stereotype formation: A common model for category accentuation and illusory correlation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 96( 2), 305-323. |
[49] | Skorinko J. L., Sinclair S., & Conklin L. ( 2012). Perspective taking shapes the impact of significant-other representations. Self & Identity, 11(2), 170-184. |
[50] | Spielberg J. M., Miller G. A., Heller W., & Banich M. T. ( 2015). Flexible brain network reconfiguration supporting inhibitory control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112( 32), 10020-10025. |
[51] | The research group “Thesaurus” commonly used in modern Chinese. ( 2008). Commonly used in modern Chinese vocabulary. Beijing: The Commercial Press. |
[ 《现代汉语常用词表》课题组. ( 2008). 现代汉语常用词表. 北京: 商务印书馆.] | |
[52] | van Gaal S., Lamme V. A. F., Fahrenfort J. J., & Ridderinkhof K. R. ( 2011). Dissociable brain mechanisms underlying the conscious and unconscious control of behavior. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23( 1), 91-105. |
相关文章 6
[1] | 王丽君, 索涛, 赵国祥. 未意识到错误影响错误后调整的电生理证据[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(10): 1189-1198. |
[2] | 杨亚平, 徐强, 朱婷婷, 郑旭涛, 董晓晔, 陈庆伟. 不同热情-能力社会群体刻板印象激活效应的行为模式:基于刻板印象内容模型 *[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(10): 1143-1156. |
[3] | 杨亚平;王沛;尹志慧;陈庆伟;冯夏影. 刻板印象激活的无意图性及其大脑神经活动特征[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(4): 488-502. |
[4] | 徐雷;王丽君;赵远方;谭金凤;陈安涛. 阈下奖励调节认知控制的权衡[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(4): 459-466. |
[5] | 张晓斌;佐斌. 基于面孔知觉的刻板印象激活两阶段模型[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(9): 1189-1201. |
[6] | 王,沛,杨亚平,赵,仑. 刻板印象的激活效应: 行为和ERPs证据[J]. 心理学报, 2010, 42(05): 607-617. |
PDF全文下载地址:
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=4533