Please wait a minute...
心理学报  2017, Vol. 49 Issue (8): 995-1008    DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00995
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
大小判断任务中正负号及其异同对 SNARC效应的影响
 韩萌;  毛新瑞;  蔡梦彤;  贾茜;  郭春彦
 (首都师范大学心理系, 北京市“学习与认知”重点实验室, 北京 100048)
 The effect of positive and negative signs on the SNARC effect in the magnitude judgment task
 HAN Meng; MAO Xinrui; CAI Mengtong; JIA Xi; GUO Chunyan
 (Beijing Key Laboratory of “Learning & Cognition”, Department of Psychology, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China)
全文: PDF(1000 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)       背景资料
文章导读  
摘要  SNARC效应(Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes)是指被试对数字做按键反应时, 对于较小的数字, 按左键的速度快于按右键; 对于较大的数字, 按右键的速度快于按左键。本研究以ERP作为测量手段, 采用修正的大小判断任务, 旨在探究数字正负号及其异同对SNARC效应的影响。行为结果发现, 在反应时上, 当目标数字与基线数字正负号相同且基线数字为+5时, 一致条件显著快于不一致条件。ERP结果发现, 当目标数字与基线数字正负号相同时, 无论基线数字为+5还是–5, 在反应选择阶段, 不一致都比一致条件更负且均诱发了P3。当目标数字与基线数字正负号相异时, 若基线数字为+5, 一致比不一致条件在刺激呈现阶段诱发了波幅显著更小的N300; 若基线数字为–5, 一致比不一致条件在反应执行阶段诱发了更正的LPP。无论目标数字与基线数字正负号相同还是相异, 在反应选择阶段, 不一致都比一致条件更负且均诱发了P3, 表明出现了SNARC效应。同时, SNARC效应的出现激活了额叶头皮位置, 负数加工伴随左额叶的激活, 而正数加工伴随右额叶的激活, 溯源分析结果进一步表明SNARC效应定位于额叶与顶叶。这些结果说明负数按实际大小表征在心理数字线上, 支持了负数空间表征的个体发展论假说; 表明符号捷径机制会改变SNARC效应的发生时间; 同时证明了负数与正数的空间表征具有不同的优势半球。
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
韩萌
毛新瑞
蔡梦彤
贾茜
郭春彦
关键词  SNARC效应 符号捷径机制 负数表征 心理数字线 ERP    
Abstract: Based on previous investigations, positive and negative sign is an important factor of SNARC (Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes) effect. Magnitude judgments of different signed numbers are solved by an obvious sign shortcut mechanism. When both numbers are negative, there are arguments between ontogenetic hypothesis and phylogenetic hypothesis. The ontogenetic hypothesis supposes that negative numbers are mapped onto the mental number line according to their numerical value, but phylogenetic hypothesis inserts that the representation of negative numbers depends on their absolute numerical value. Whether the SNARC effect is processed in the stage of response selection or stimulus presentation is also under discussion. Although frontal lobe and parietal lobe are generally considered as the key brain regions of the SNARC effect, hemispheric dominance of this effect still needs exploration. Therefore, our research focused on four points: 1) how sign shortcut mechanism affected the SNARC effect, 2) how negative numbers represented on the mental number line, 3) how the signs of numbers affected the processing stage of the SNARC effect, 4) the key brain regions and hemispheric dominance of the SNARC effect. In the current experiment, we used modified “magnitude judgments” paradigm with ERPs recorded, to investigate how positive and negative signs influence the SNARC effect. Participants were informed the base number and the response mode before the task, then they were instructed to compare the sizes of the target numbers (–9~+9, excluded –5, 0 and +5) and the base number (–5 or +5). Two manners of keying were adopted, including congruent keying and incongruent keying. Congruent keying required participants to make “smaller” responses with the key “F” (left) and make “larger” responses with the key “J” (right). Conversely, incongruent keying required participants to make “smaller” response with the key “J” (right) and make “larger” response with the key “F” (left). Accordingly, the SNARC effect refers to the situation where the reaction times of congruent keying were shorter than those of incongruent keying. Behaviorally, different sign comparisons had higher accuracy rates than same sign comparisons. Besides, when the base number was +5, accuracy rates were higher than the condition where the base number was –5. For reaction times, responses to different sign comparisons were faster than responses to the same sign comparisons. Compared to –5, reaction time was shorter when the base number was +5. Congruent keying reacted faster than incongruent keying. In the same sign comparisons, if the base number was +5, congruent keying was faster than incongruent keying. But if the base number was –5, there was no difference between two keying types. ERP results showed that congruent keying elicited more positive P3 in response selection stage, no matter in different or same sign comparisons, which represented the SNARC effect. When base and target numbers were different signed numbers, the sign shortcut mechanism affected SNARC differently. Specificlly, when the target numbers were negative, congruent keying produced smaller N300 than incongruent keying in the stimulus presentation stage. However, when the target numbers were positive, congruent keying produced more positive LPP in the response execution stage. Traceability analysis showed that SNARC effect activated frontal lobe and parietal lobe. The negative numbers were processed with the activation of left frontal regions but positive numbers were processed with the activation of right frontal regions. Our findings suggest that: the spatial representation of negative numbers supports ontogenetic hypothesis. Positive signs and negative signs can modulate the processing stage of the SNARC effect. The spatial representation of positive and negative numbers depends on different dominant hemisphere.
Key words SNARC effect    sign shortcut mechanism    negative number representation    mental number line    ERP
收稿日期: 2016-11-29      出版日期: 2017-06-25
ZTFLH:     
基金资助: 国家自然科学基金(31671127)资助。
通讯作者: 郭春彦, E-mail: guocy@cnu.edu.cn     E-mail: E-mail: guocy@cnu.edu.cn
引用本文:   
韩萌, 毛新瑞, 蔡梦彤, 贾茜, 郭春彦. 大小判断任务中正负号及其异同对 SNARC效应的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(8): 995-1008.
HAN Meng, MAO Xinrui, CAI Mengtong, JIA Xi, GUO Chunyan.  The effect of positive and negative signs on the SNARC effect in the magnitude judgment task. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(8): 995-1008.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00995      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2017/V49/I8/995
[1] 赵思敏;吴岩;李天虹;郭庆童. 词汇识别中歧义词素语义加工:ERP研究[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(3): 296-306.
[2] 范伟;钟毅平;杨子鹿;李琎;欧阳益; 蔡荣华; 李慧云 ;傅小兰 . 外倾个体的自我参照加工程度效应[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(8): 1002-1012.
[3] 刘芳; 丁锦红; 张钦. 高、低趋近积极情绪对不同注意加工阶段的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(7): 794-803.
[4] 吴岩;莫德圆;王海英; 于溢洋;陈烜之;张明. 语义分类任务中部件位置在汉字识别中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(6): 599-606.
[5] 王协顺;吴岩;赵思敏;倪超;张明. 形旁和声旁在形声字识别中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(2): 130-140.
[6] 李婧; 陈安涛;陈杰;龙长权. 词语型类别属性归纳中分类与属性推理过程的时间特征[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(11): 1410-1422.
[7] 岳鹏飞;杜婉婉;白学军;许远理. 情绪标注对情绪的抑制发生在何时:一项ERPs研究[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(9): 1124-1132.
[8] 毛新瑞;徐慧芳;郭春彦. 双加工再认提取中的情绪记忆增强效应[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(9): 1111-1123.
[9] 闫志英;卢家楣. 情境真实性对悲伤移情调节的ERP证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(8): 971-980.
[10] 王路明. 优势语序还是优势解读?利用ERP考察汉语双论元歧义句的解歧过程[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(7): 869-877.
[11] 高雪梅;翁蕾;周群;赵偲;李芳. 暴力犯的疼痛共情更低:来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(4): 478-487.
[12] 吴岩;王协顺;陈烜之. 汉字识别中部件结合率的作用:ERP研究[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(2): 157-166.
[13] 汪海彬;卢家楣;姚本先;桑青松;陈宁;唐晓晨. 职前教师情绪复杂性对情绪面孔加工的影响 ——来自行为、ERP和眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(1): 50-65.
[14] 蒋军;向玲;张庆林;陈安涛. 冲突适应独立于意识:来自行为和ERP的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(5): 581-592.
[15] 窦炜;曲璐璐;曲琛. 社会比较对合作任务结果评价的影响:来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(3): 405-414.
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