Please wait a minute...
心理学报
  论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
情绪概念加工与情绪面孔知觉的相互影响
刘文娟1,2;沈曼琼1;李莹1;王瑞明1
(1华南师范大学心理应用研究中心/心理学院, 广州 510631) (2中国科学院心理研究所, 北京 100101)
The interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception
LIU Wenjuan1,2; SHEN Manqiong1; LI Ying1; WANG Ruiming1
(1 Center for Studies of Psychological Application, School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China)
(2 Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)
全文: PDF(364 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

通过3个实验探讨情绪概念加工与情绪面孔知觉是否存在相互影响, 以及加工深度对两者关系的影响。实验1采用情绪面孔启动范式, 探讨较深的情绪概念加工层面对情绪概念与情绪面孔的关系的影响。实验2更改概念任务, 探讨较浅的概念加工层面对两者关系的影响。实验3缩短启动面孔呈现时间, 探讨较浅的面孔知觉层面对两者关系的影响。通过研究主要得出以下结论:(1)情绪概念加工与情绪面孔知觉确实存在相互影响; (2)概念加工深度影响两者关系的方向性, 在较深的概念加工层面, 两者的关系是双向的, 在较浅的概念加工层面, 两者的关系是单向的; (3)知觉加工深度也影响两者关系的方向性, 在较深的知觉加工层面, 两者的关系是双向的, 在较浅的知觉加工层面, 没有发现两者的相互影响。本研究为抽象概念的具身表征提供了实证支持。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
刘文娟
沈曼琼
李莹
王瑞明
关键词 具身认知概念表征情绪面孔知觉情绪概念加工深度    
Abstract
There are two theories concerning conceptual representation: One is the Amodal Symbol Systems and the other is Modal Symbol Systems. The former one holds that the representation of a concept is amodal and consists of abstract symbols. The abstract symbols are independent from the sensorimotor experience. The latter one is based on embodied cognition and holds that conceptual representation is built on sensorimotor simulation. There are interaction between conceptual processing and perceptual processing. The sensorimotor experience has great influence on the representation of concrete and abstract concepts. The representation of concrete concepts has attained many supports from a mass of studies. However, abstract concepts cannot be associated with sensorimotor experience directly and the representation of abstract concepts is still under-explored. One of the critical questions concerning abstract conception is whether the relationship between conceptual processing and perceptual processing is symmetric or asymmetric. In our experiments, we use emotional concepts and emotional faces to address this question.
All the experiments were carried out using E-prime1.0. In experiment 1, emotional faces were presented to the participants and they were told to judge the valence of the faces. Participants also judged the target emotional face that following the emotional words. The results showed that there was interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception on the deep semantic level. The relationship between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception was symmetric. In order to further explore the influence of semantic depth on emotional concept processing and emotional face perception, we changed the valence judgment task to pseudo-words judgment task in Experiment 2 so as to ensure that readers would only engage in shallow semantic processing in this task. We found then that concept processing affected the processing of emotional face, but not vice versa. Their relationship was asymmetric.
According to the two experiment results, we can conclude that the depth of semantic processing affected the relationship between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception. These results, along with others in the literature, indicate that conceptual processing uses sensorimotor representation, and that the depth of semantic processing affects the relationship between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception. In experiment 3, we further explored the depth of perceptual processing on this relationship. We changed face duration in experiment 3 and we found that when emotional face duration was shortened, emotional face perception did not affect emotion concept processing, and vice versa. There was no interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception. Thus, our results suggested that the depth of perceptual processing also had an influence on the relationship between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception.

In summary, the interaction between emotional concept and emotional face perception existed in the deep semantic level and deep perceptual processing level. The depth of semantic processing and perceptual processing affected the relationship between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception.

Key wordsembodied cognition    conceptual representation    emotional face perception    emotional concepts    processing depth.
收稿日期: 2015-01-23      出版日期: 2016-02-25
基金资助:

国家自然科学基金项目(31571142)、教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目(13JJD190006)、全国优秀博士学位论文作者专项资金(201204)资助。

通讯作者: 王瑞明, E-mail: wruiming@163.com   
引用本文:   
刘文娟;沈曼琼;李莹;王瑞明. 情绪概念加工与情绪面孔知觉的相互影响[J]. 心理学报, 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2016.00163.
LIU Wenjuan; SHEN Manqiong; LI Ying; WANG Ruiming. The interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(2): 163-173.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2016.00163      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2016/V48/I2/163
[1] 黎晓丹; 杜建政; 叶浩生. 中国礼文化的具身隐喻效应:蜷缩的身体使人更卑微[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(6): 746-756.
[2] 苏得权;曾红;陈骐; 叶浩生. 用药动作线索诱发海洛因戒断者的镜像神经活动:一项fMRI研究[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(12): 1499-1506.
[3] 刘思耘;周宗奎;李娜. 网络使用经验对动作动词加工的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(8): 992-1003.
[4] 杨惠兰;何先友;赵雪汝;张维. 权力的概念隐喻表征:来自大小与颜色隐喻的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(7): 939-949.
[5] 黎晓丹;叶浩生. 中国古代儒道思想中的具身认知观[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(5): 702-710.
[6] 唐佩佩;叶浩生;杜建政. 权力概念与空间大小:具身隐喻的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(4): 514-521.
[7] 叶浩生. “具身”涵义的理论辨析[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(7): 1032-1042.
[8] 李惠娟;张积家;张瑞芯. 上下意象图式对羌族亲属词认知的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(4): 481-491.
[9] 麦穗妍;陈俊. 非熟练潮-粤双言者的语义通达:来自听觉词加工的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(2): 227-237.
[10] 武向慈;王恩国. 权力概念加工对视觉空间注意定向的影响:一个ERP证据[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(12): 1871-1879.
[11] 沈曼琼;谢久书;张昆;李莹;曾楚轩;王瑞明. 二语情绪概念理解中的空间隐喻[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(11): 1671-1681.
[12] 叶浩生. 认知与身体: 理论心理学的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(4): 481-488.
[13] 苏得权;钟元;曾红;叶浩生. 汉语动作成语语义理解激活脑区及其具身效应:来自fMRI的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(11): 1187-1199.
[14] 司继伟;周超;张传花;仲蕾蕾. 不同加工深度非符号数量信息的SNARC效应:眼动证据[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(1): 11-22.
[15] 张丽;陈雪梅;王琦;李红. 身体形式和社会环境对SNARC效应的影响:基于具身认知观的理解[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(10): 1309-1317.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn