These results indicated that GCE can be modulated by faces with biological importance. The emotional information conveyed through supraliminally presented face might be suppressed by the top-down control setting, whereas the subliminally presented gazing cue was processed automatically and was escaped from top-down suppression.
In conclusion, these results indicated that the learning- testing experience with proactive interference could enhance the awareness of its effects and allow individuals to adjust their learning and retrieval strategies in order to reduce the effects in a appropriate way.
In summary, these two experiments investigated the development of children's equity sensitivity in distribution condition and influence factors of equality sensitivity. Equity sensitivity of young children was found: 2 to 3 years old children had already possessed equity sensitivity. The stare duration showed an increasing trend with the growth of age from 2 to 3 years and a decreasing tendency after age of 3. It suggests that 3 years to 3 years and 3 months children were obviously sensitive to equity. Children's stare duration to inequitable distribution was longer than in equitable distribution remarkably in distribution situation. Children showed equity sensitivity under both distribution situations which had either 2 or 4 sweetmeats. These results provided converging evidence that young children in the second year of life have already possessed equity sensitivity. Equity sensitivity of 3 years to 3 years and 3 months old children were relatively obvious. Distribution situation, the quantity of distribution resources, and distribution outcomes all have strong impact on the children's equity sensitivity.
This research explored the differences in intertemporal choice between pregnant women and their peer group. Our results revealed that pregnant women had a ‘maternal mind’ which focuses more on future events. This mindset promotes future-orientation and a greater preference for LL options in intertemporal choice.
In summary, the results of three studies reported in the present research demonstrated that one way high−power (vs. low−power) individuals express power is by seeking structured consumption, in other words, consumption boundaries in various forms. The findings theoretically enrich and advance our understanding of the impact of power state on consumer behavior from a novel perspective, and provide further knowledge about the role of control in the influence of power. Given the findings of this research, marketers should be more aware of the match between consumers’ power state and consumption boundary settings.