心理科学进展 ›› 2026, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (9): 1663-1683.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2026.1663 cstr: 32111.14.2026.1663
赵佩琼1,2, 董岩鑫1, 陈冠初1, 文生俊3, 尹军4, 陈巍1,2, 董达1,2
收稿日期:2025-09-12
出版日期:2026-09-15
发布日期:2026-07-20
基金资助:ZHAO Peiqiong1,2, DONG Yanxin1, CHEN Guanchu1, WEN Junsheng3, YIN Jun4, CHEN Wei1,2, DONG Da1,2
Received:2025-09-12
Online:2026-09-15
Published:2026-07-20
摘要: 生命在演化过程中是否被内嵌了生命性感知的认知机制,是当前生物运动研究的核心问题之一。“生命检测器假说”(life detector hypothesis, LDH)仅关注动态线索。鉴于静态线索同样能引发生命性感知,本文提出并论证“生命性检测器假说” (animacy detectors hypothesis, ADH) , 即认知主体拥有一个内嵌的核心认知模块,包含对生命体特征敏感的感官过滤器,可同时处理动态与静态线索,将外部对象感知为具有生命性特征的对象,为高级的社会认知及其发展提供认知基础。个体发生学、比较心理学、进化生物学、主体间因素(如经验、发育、意识水平与跨模态之间的相互作用)及环境因素(社会互动及重力环境)的证据支持生命性检测器内嵌的可能性,但仍面临生命性偏好质疑等的挑战。未来研究应关注内嵌性机制的获得方式、加工过程、多感官信息的作用及脑认知机制。此外,神经发育障碍儿童的生命性感知受损,或可成为潜在的生物学标志。
中图分类号:
赵佩琼, 董岩鑫, 陈冠初, 文生俊, 尹军, 陈巍, 董达. (2026). 生命性检测器:生命性感知的内嵌性. 心理科学进展 , 34(9), 1663-1683.
ZHAO Peiqiong, DONG Yanxin, CHEN Guanchu, WEN Junsheng, YIN Jun, CHEN Wei, DONG Da. (2026). The animacy detectors: The embeddedness of animacy perception. Advances in Psychological Science, 34(9), 1663-1683.
| [1] 陈巍, 董达, 郭本禹. (2026). 理论心理学: 认知科学的视角. 华东师范大学出版社. [2] 董达, 陈巍. (2025). 人不是物: 社会认知的稽古维新.心理学报, 57(1), 173-189. [3] 黄梅, 杨格晴, 王莹, 蒋毅. (2023). 基于动态线索感知生命性的认知神经机制.心理科学进展, 31(8), 1460-1476. [4] 刘佳, 胡金生, 江宏君, 刘莹. (2021). 孤独症谱系障碍者基于运动线索的生命知觉.心理科学, 44(4), 1012-1017. [5] Abdai, J. (2025). Perception of animate motion in dogs.Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1522489. [6] Abdai J., Uccheddu S., Gácsi M., & Miklósi Á. (2022). Exploring the advantages of using artificial agents to investigate animacy perception in cats and dogs.Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 17(6), 065009. [7] Aflalo T., Chivukula S., Zhang C., Rosario E. R., Pouratian N., & Andersen R. A. (2022). Cognition through internal models: Mirror neurons as one manifestation of a broader mechanism [Preprint]. BioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/ 2022.09.06.506071 [8] Altman M. N., Khislavsky A. L., Coverdale M. E., & Gilger J. W. (2016). Adaptive attention: How preference for animacy impacts change detection.Evolution and Human Behavior, 37(4), 303-314. [9] Bailey, R. L., & Lang, A. (2022). The importance of being animate: Information selection as a function of dynamic human-environment interactions.Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 923808. [10] Barber O., Somogyi E., McBride E. A., & Proops L. (2023). Exploring the role of aliveness in children's responses to a dog, biomimetic robot, and toy dog.Computers in Human Behavior, 142, 107660. [11] Behrmann, M., & Avidan, G. (2022). Face perception: Computational insights from phylogeny.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(4), 350-363. [12] Ben-Ami S., Gupta P., Yadav M., Shah P., Talwar G., Paswan S., … Sinha P. (2022). Human (but not animal) motion can be recognized at first sight-After treatment for congenital blindness.Neuropsychologia, 174, 108307. [13] Bertenthal, B. I., & Pinto, J. (1994). Global processing of biological motions.Psychological Science, 5(4), 221-225. [14] Bliss L., Vasas V., Freeland L., Roach R., Ferrè E.R., & Versace E. (2023). A spontaneous gravity prior: Newborn chicks prefer stimuli that move against gravity.Biology Letters, 19(2), 20220502. [15] Boch M., Wagner I. C., Karl S., Huber L., & Lamm C. (2023). Functionally analogous body- and animacy- responsive areas are present in the dog (Canis familiaris) and human occipito-temporal lobe.Communications Biology, 6(1), 645. [16] Bonin P., Gelin M., & Bugaiska A. (2014). Animates are better remembered than inanimates: Further evidence from word and picture stimuli.Memory & Cognition, 42(3), 370-382. [17] Bulkin, D. A., & Groh, J. M. (2006). Seeing sounds: Visual and auditory interactions in the brain.Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16(4), 415-419. [18] Carey, S. (2011). Précis of ‘the origin of concepts.The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(3), 113-162. [19] Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford University Press.. [20] Carey, S., & Spelke, E. (1996). Science and core knowledge.Philosophy of Science, 63(4), 515-533. [21] Chang, D. H., & Troje, N. F. (2008). Perception of animacy and direction from local biological motion signals.Journal of Vision, 8(5), 1-10. [22] Chang D. H. F., Ban B., Ikegaya Y., Fujita I., & Troje N. F. (2018). Cortical and subcortical responses to biological motion.NeuroImage, 174, 87-96. [23] Chang D. H. F., Troje N. F., Ikegaya Y., Fujita I., & Ban H. (2021). Spatiotemporal dynamics of responses to biological motion in the human brain.Cortex, 136, 124-139. [24] Cheng Y., Yuan X., & Jiang Y. (2023). Eye pupil signals life motion perception. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 86(2), 579-586. [25] Chiandetti, C., & Vallortigara, G. (2011). Chicks like consonant music.Psychological Science, 22(10), 1270-1273. [26] Cox J. A., Cox T. W., & Aimola, D. A. M. (2022). Are animates special? Exploring the effects of selective attention and animacy on visual statistical learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(9), 1746-1762. [27] Cox J. A., Wu Y., & Aimola Davies, A. M. (2024). Does animacy affect visual statistical learning? Revisiting the effects of selective attention and animacy on visual statistical learning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77(3), 492-510. [28] De Agrò M., Rößler D. C., Kim K., & Shamble P. S. (2021). Perception of biological motion by jumping spiders.PLoS Biology, 19(7), e3001172. [29] De Agrò M., Winsor A. M., Walsh W., Shamble P., & Jakob E. (2025). Biological point-light displays scanning by the principal eyes of a jumping spider [Preprint]. BioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.06.23.661007 [30] Deng W., Sargent B., Havens K., Vanderbilt D., Rosales M., Pulido J. C., .. Smith B. A. (2023). Correlation between performance and quantity/variability of leg exploration in a contingency learning task during infancy.Infant Behavior and Development, 70, 101788. [31] Di Giorgio E., Lunghi M., Simion F., & Vallortigara G. (2017). Visual cues of motion that trigger animacy perception at birth: The case of self-propulsion.Developmental Science, 20(4), 10. [32] Di Giorgio E., Lunghi M., Vallortigara G., & Simion F. (2021). Newborns’ sensitivity to speed changes as a building block for animacy perception.Scientific Reports, 11(1), 542. [33] Di Giorgio E., Rosa-Salva O., Frasnelli E., Calcagnì A., Lunghi M., Scattoni M. L., .. Vallortigara G. (2021). Abnormal visual attention to simple social stimuli in 4-month-old infants at high risk for Autism.Scientific Reports, 11(1), 15785. [34] Duarte J. V., Abreu R., & Castelo-Branco M. (2022). A two-stage framework for neural processing of biological motion.NeuroImage, 259(5), 119403. [35] Farkas E. B., Hernández-Pérez R., Cuaya L. V., Rojas- Hortelano E., Gácsi M., & Andics A. (2024). Comparative fMRI reveals differences in the functional organization of the visual cortex for animacy perception in dogs and humans [Preprint]. BioRxiv. https://doi.org/10. 7554/eLife.104525.1 [36] Farroni T., Menon E., & Johnson M. H. (2006). Factors influencing newborns' preference for faces with eye contact.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 95(4), 298-308. [37] Gilad-Gutnick S., Kurian G., Gupta P., Tiwari K., Shah P., Raja S., .. Sinha P. (2019). Development of facial expression recognition following extended blindness: The importance of motion.Journal of Vision, 19(10), 21a. [38] Ghanouni P., Memari A. H., Shayestehfar M., Moshayedi P., Gharibzadeh S., & Ziaee V. (2015). Biological motion perception is affected by age and cognitive style in children aged 8-15.Neurology Research International, 2015, 594042. [39] Hagen T., Espeseth T., & Laeng B. (2018). Chasing animals with split attention: Are animals prioritized in visual tracking?I-Perception, 9(5), 2041669518795932. [40] Han Q., Wang Y., Jiang Y., & Bao M. (2021). The relevance to social interaction modulates bistable biological-motion perception.Cognition, 209, 104584. [41] Han Y., Han W., Li L., Zhang T., & Wang Y. (2023). Identifying critical kinematic features of animate motion and contribution to animacy perception.iScience, 26(9), 107658. [42] Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior.The American Journal of Psychology, 57(2), 243-259. [43] Hirai, M., & Senju, A. (2020). The two-process theory of biological motion processing.Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 111(19), 114-124. [44] Hume, D. (2007). The natural history of religion (T. H. Green & T. H. Grose, Eds.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1779) [45] Ichwansyah R., Onda K., Egawa J., Matsuo T., Suzuki T., Someya T., .. Kawasaki K. (2024). Animacy processing by distributed and interconnected networks in the temporal cortex of monkeys.Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 18, 1478439. [46] Ioannucci, S., & Vetter, P. (2025). Semantic audio-visual congruence modulates visual sensitivity to biological motion across awareness levels.Cognition, 262, 106181. [47] Jacobs A., Pinto J., & Shiffrar M. (2004). Experience, context, and the visual perception of human movement.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30(5), 822-835. [48] Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis.Perception & Psychophysics, 14(2), 201-211. [49] Johnson, M. H. (2005). Subcortical face processing.Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(10), 766-774. [50] Johnson, M. H. (2006). Biological motion: A perceptual life detector?Current Biology, 16(10), R376-R377. [51] Jörges, B., & López-Moliner, J. (2017). Gravity as a strong prior: Implications for perception and action.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 203. [52] Kobylkov D., Rosa-Salva O., Zanon M., & Vallortigara G. (2024). Innate face-selectivity in the brain of young domestic chicks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121(40), e2410404121. [53] Kominsky J. F., Li Y., & Carey S. (2022). Infants' attributions of insides and animacy in causal interactions.Cognitive Science, 46(1), e13087. [54] Kuraoka, K., & Nakamura, K. (2025). Differential and temporally dynamic involvement of primate amygdala nuclei in face reality and reward information processing.Journal of Neuroscience, 45(49), e0093242025. [55] Larsch, J., & Baier, H. (2018). Biological motion as an innate perceptual mechanism driving social affiliation.Current Biology, 28(22), 3523-3532. [56] Lemaire, B. S. (2020). No evidence of spontaneous preference for slowly moving objects in visually naïve chicks.Scientific Reports, 10(1), 6277. [57] Lemaire, B. S., & Vallortigara, G. (2023). Life is in motion (through a chick’s eye).Animal Cognition, 26(1), 129-140. [58] Lisboa I. C., Basso D. M., Santos J. A., & Pereira A. F. (2022). Three-months-old' preferences for biological motion configuration and its subsequent decline.Brain Sciences, 12(5), 566. [59] Lorenzi E., Mayer U., Rosa-Salva O., & Vallortigara G. (2017). Dynamic features of animate motion activate septal and preoptic areas in visually naïve chicks (Gallus gallus).Neuroscience, 354, 54-68. [60] Lorenzi E., Nadalin G., Morandi-Raikova A., Mayer U., & Vallortigara G. (2024). Noncortical coding of biological motion in newborn chicks’ brain. Cerebral Cortex, 34(6), bhae262. [61] Lorenzi E.,& Vallortigara, G. (2021). Evolutionary and neural bases of the sense of animacy. In A. B. Kaufman, J. Call & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of animal cognition (pp. 295-321). Cambridge University Press. [62] Lu X., Hu Z., Xin Y., Yang T., Wang Y., Zhang P., Liu N., & Jiang Y. (2024). Detecting biological motion signals in human and monkey superior colliculus: A subcortical- cortical pathway for biological motion perception.Nature Communications, 15(1), 9606. [63] Lunghi, M., & Di Giorgio, E. (2024). I like the way you move: How animate motion affects visual attention in early human infancy.Frontiers in Neuroscience, 18, 1459550. [64] Ma X., Yuan X., Liu J., Shen L., Yu Y., Zhou W., .. Jiang Y. (2022). Gravity-dependent animacy perception in zebrafish.Research, 2022, 9829016. [65] Maldarelli G., Dissegna A., Ravignani A., & Chiandetti C. (2024). Chicks produce consonant, sometimes jazzy, sounds.Biology Letters, 20(9), 20240374. [66] Matsuda G., Ishiguro H., & Hiraki K. (2015). Infant discrimination of humanoid robots.Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1397. [67] Mayer U., Rosa-Salva O., Loveland J. L., & Vallortigara G. (2019). Selective response of the nucleus taeniae of the amygdala to a naturalistic social stimulus in visually naive domestic chicks.Scientific Reports, 9(1), 9849. [68] McKyton A., Ben-Zion I., & Zohary E. (2018). Lack of automatic imitation in newly sighted individuals.Psychological Science, 29(2), 304-310. [69] Mezrai N., Arduini L., Dickel L., Chiao C. C., & Darmaillacq A. S. (2020). Awareness of danger inside the egg: Evidence of innate and learned predator recognition in cuttlefish embryos.Learning & Behavior, 48(4), 401-410. [70] Michotte, A. (1950). The emotions regarded as functional connections. In M. Reymert (Ed.), Feelings and emotions: The Mooseheart symposium (pp.114-125). New York: McGraw-Hill. Reprinted in Thinès, G., Costall, A., and Butterworth, G. (Eds.), Michotte's experimental phenomenology of perception (pp. 103-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum,1991. [71] Mitra S., Namazifard S., Bellini D. M., Sarne A. L., Halder B., Eisenbrandt M. R., .. Dewell R. B. (2026). To jump or not to jump: Comparing effects of phenotypic plasticity on the visual responses and escape behavior of locusts and grasshoppers.Journal of Neurophysiology, 135(1), 312-323. [72] Morton, J., & Johnson, M. H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition.Psychological Review, 98(2), 164-181. [73] Mudrik L., Faivre N., & Koch C. (2014). Information integration without awareness.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(9), 488-496. [74] Nakayasu, T., & Watanabe, E. (2014). Biological motion stimuli are attractive to medaka fish.Animal Cognition, 17(3), 559-575. [75] Nes, A. (2023). Perception needs modular stimulus-control.Synthese, 201, 188. [76] New J., Cosmides L., & Tooby J. (2007). Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(42), 16598-16603. [77] Norman J. F., Payton S. M., Long J. R., & Hawkes L. M. (2004). Aging and the perception of biological motion.Psychology and Aging, 19(1), 219-225. [78] Norman J. F., Ramirez A. B., Bryant E. N., Adcock P., Parekh H., Brase A. M., & Peterson R. D. (2024). Aging and the visual perception of rigid and nonrigid motion.Scientific Reports, 14(1), 27657. [79] Orlov T., Raveh M., McKyton A., Ben-Zion I., & Zohary E. (2021). Learning to perceive shape from temporal integration following late emergence from blindness. Current Biology, 31(14), 3162-3167.e5. [80] Papeo L., Goupil N., & Soto-Faraco S. (2019). Visual search for people among people.Psychological Science, 30(10), 1483-1496. [81] Pavlova M., Krägeloh-Mann I., Sokolov A., & Birbaumer N. (2001). Recognition of point-light biological motion displays by young children.Perception, 30(8), 925-933. [82] Peristeri E., Andreou M., Ketseridou S. N., Machairas I., Papadopoulou V., Stravoravdi A. S., Bamidis P. D., & Frantzidis C. A. (2023). Animacy processing in autism: Event-related potentials reflect social functioning skills.Brain Sciences, 13(12), 1656. [83] Poom, L. (2025). Dynamics of visual reversals from ambiguous spinning biological-motion and rigid structure-from-motion.I-Perception, 16(3), 1-22. [84] Portugal A. M., Viktorsson C., Taylor M. J., Mason L., Tammimies K., Ronald A., & Falck-Ytter T. (2024). Infants' looking preferences for social versus non-social objects reflect genetic variation.Nature Human Behaviour, 8(1), 115-124. [85] Pratt J., Radulescu P. V., Guo R. M., & Abrams R. A. (2010). It’s alive! Animate motion captures visual attention.Psychological Science, 21(11), 1724-1730. [86] Rajendran S. S., Bottari D., Shareef I., Pitchaimuthu K., Sourav S., Troje N. F., Kekunnaya R., & Röder B. (2020). Biological action identification does not require early visual input for development. eNeuro, 7(5), ENEURO.0534-19.2020. [87] Rosa-Salva O., Grassi M., Lorenzi E., Regolin L., & Vallortigara G. (2016). Spontaneous preference for visual cues of animacy in naïve domestic chicks: The case of speed changes.Cognition, 157, 49-60. [88] Rosa-Salva O., Hernik M., Broseghini A., & Vallortigara G. (2018). Visually-naïve chicks prefer agents that move as if constrained by a bilateral body-plan.Cognition, 173, 106-114. [89] Rosa-Salva O., Hernik M., Fabbroni M., Lorenzi E., & Vallortigara G. (2023). Naïve chicks do not prefer objects with stable body orientation, though they may prefer behavioural variability.Animal Cognition, 26(4), 1177-1189. [90] Rosa-Salva O., Mayer U., & Vallortigara G. (2015). Roots of a social brain: Developmental models of emerging animacy-detection mechanisms.Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 50, 150-168. [91] Rosa-Salva O., Mayer U., Versace E., Hébert M., Lemaire B. S., & Vallortigara G. (2021). Sensitive periods for social development: Interactions between predisposed and learned mechanisms.Cognition, 213, 104552. [92] Scholl, B. J., & Gao, T. (2013). Perceiving animacy and intentionality: Visual processing or higher-level judgment? In M. D. Rutherford & V. A. Kuhlmeier (Eds.), Social perception: Detection and interpretation of animacy, agency, and intention (pp. 197-229). Boston Review. [93] Scholl, B. J., & Tremoulet, P. D. (2000). Perceptual causality and animacy.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(8), 299-309. [94] Shen L., Lu X., Wang Y., & Jiang Y. (2023). Audiovisual correspondence facilitates the visual search for biological motion.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 30(6), 2272-2281. [95] Shen L., Yang X., Jiang Y., & Wang Y. (2025). Understanding biological motion through the lens of animate motion processing.Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1630742. [96] Shultz, S., & McCarthy, G. (2014). Perceived animacy influences the processing of human-like surface features in the fusiform gyrus.Neuropsychologia, 60(1), 115-120. [97] Simion F., Di Giorgio E., Leo I., & Bardi L. (2011). The processing of social stimuli in early infancy: From faces to biological motion perception.Progress in Brain Research, 189, 173-193. [98] Simion F., Regolin L., & Bulf H. (2008). A predisposition for biological motion in the newborn baby.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(2), 809-813. [99] Sommer K., Redshaw J., Slaughter V., Wiles J., & Nielsen M. (2021). The early ontogeny of infants’ imitation of on screen humans and robots.Infant Behavior and Development, 64, 101614. [100] Sommer K., Slaughter V., Wiles J., Owen K., Chiba A. A., Forster D., .. Nielsen M. (2021). Can a robot teach me that? Children’s ability to imitate robots.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 203, 105040. [101] Sugita, Y. (2008). Face perception in monkeys reared with no exposure to faces.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(1), 394-398. [102] Tian J., Yang F., Wang Y., Wang L., Wang N., Jiang Y., & Yang L. (2024). Atypical local and global biological motion perception in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. eLife, 12, RP90313. [103] Triantafyllidis A., Alexiadis A., Votis K., & Tzovaras D. (2023). Social robot interventions for child healthcare: A systematic review of the literature.Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 3, 100108. [104] Troje N. F.,& Chang, D. H. F. (2013). Shape-independent processing of biological motion. In K. L. Johnson & M. Shiffrar (Eds.), People watching: Social, perceptual, and neurophysiological studies of body perception (pp. 82-100). Oxford University Press. [105] Troje, N. F., & Chang, D. H. F. (2023). Life detection from biological motion.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 32(1), 26-32. [106] Troje, N. F., & Westhoff, C. (2006). The inversion effect in biological motion perception: Evidence for a “life detector”?Current Biology, 16(8), 821-824. [107] Troje N. F., Westhoff C., & Lavrov M. (2005). Person identification from biological motion: Effects of structural and kinematic cues.Perception & psychophysics, 67(4), 667-675. [108] Vallortigara, G. (2012). Aristotle and the chicken: Animacy and the origins of beliefs. In A. Fasolo (eds.), The theory of evolution and its impact(pp. 189-199). Springer, Milano. [109] Vallortigara, G. (2021). Born knowing: Imprinting and the origins of knowledge. MIT Press. [110] Vallortigara, G., & Regolin, L. (2006). Gravity bias in the interpretation of biological motion by inexperienced chicks. Current Biology, 16(8), PR279-R280. [111] Vallortigara G., Regolin L., & Marconato F. (2005). Visually inexperienced chicks exhibit spontaneous preference for biological motion patterns.PLoS Biology, 3(7), e208. [112] Versace E., Fracasso I., Baldan G., Dalle Zotte A., & Vallortigara G. (2017). Newborn chicks show inherited variability in early social predispositions for hen-like stimuli.Scientific Reports, 7, 40296. [113] Vestner T., Tipper S. P., Hartley T., Over H., & Rueschemeyer S. A. (2019). Bound together: Social binding leads to faster processing, spatial distortion, and enhanced memory of interacting partners.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(7), 1251-1268. [114] Völter, C. J., & Huber, L. (2022). Pupil size changes reveal dogs’ sensitivity to motion cues.iScience, 25(9), 104801. [115] Vuilleumier P., Armony J. L., Driver J., & Dolan R. J. (2003). Distinct spatial frequency sensitivities for processing faces and emotional expressions.Nature Neuroscience, 6(6), 624-631. [116] Wang L., Wang Y., Xu Q., Liu D., Ji H., Yu Y., Hu Z., Yuan P., & Jiang Y. (2020). Heritability of reflexive social attention triggered by eye gaze and walking direction: Common and unique genetic underpinnings.Psychological Medicine, 50(3), 475-483. [117] Wang Y., Wang L., Xu Q., Liu D., Chen L., Troje N. F., He S., & Jiang Y. (2018). Heritable aspects of biological motion perception and its covariation with autistic traits.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(8), 1937-1942. [118] Wang Y., Zhang X., Wang C., Huang W., Xu Q., Liu D., Zhou W., Chen S., & Jiang Y. (2022). Modulation of biological motion perception in humans by gravity.Nature Communications, 13(1), 2765. [119] Yang G., Wang Y., & Jiang Y. (2024). Social perception of animacy: Preferential attentional orienting to animals links with autistic traits.Cognition, 251, 105900. [120] Zohary E., Zion I. B., Schreiber C., & McKyton A. (2018). Impairment of “vision for action” functions in the newly sighted, following early-onset and prolonged visual deprivation.Journal of Vision, 18(10), 183-183. |
| [1] | 王勇, 董达, 陈巍. 最小他心:基于生命性感知的发生学考察[J]. 心理科学进展, 2026, 34(7): 1208-1218. |
| [2] | 申莉, 李硕, 王莹, 蒋毅. 节律性生物运动信息视听整合的层级式皮层编码机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(suppl.): 155-155. |
| [3] | 张姝佳, 王莉, 蒋毅. 社会性线索的视觉表象诱发自动化注意定向效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(suppl.): 100-100. |
| [4] | 邱余波, 潘嘉蔚, 吴静岚, 高在峰. 通过社会注意线索转移工作记忆中的注意焦点[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(suppl.): 76-76. |
| [5] | 盛槿滺, 高在峰. 时间间隔对感知人人社会交互的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(suppl.): 37-37. |
| [6] | 高芷晗, 王蕊, 蒋毅. 基于局部生物运动方向的适应后效[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(suppl.): 24-24. |
| [7] | 黄梅, 杨格晴, 王莹, 蒋毅. 基于动态线索感知生命性的认知神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(8): 1460-1476. |
| [8] | 彭玉佳, 王愉茜, 路迪. 基于生物运动的社交焦虑者情绪加工与社会意图理解负向偏差机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(6): 905-914. |
| [9] | 潘静, 张慧远, 陈东濠, 徐宏格. 动、静态视觉信息在真实世界视觉搜索中的作用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(8): 1219-1231. |
| [10] | 丰婷婷, 韩文浩, 汤琴, 刘精璇, 张弢. FST神经元对生物运动特征信息的编码[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(suppl.): 149-149. |
| [11] | 陈东濠, 王健, 潘静. 运动速度对生物运动识别的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(suppl.): 83-83. |
| [12] | 袁甜, 王莉, 蒋毅. 快乐强于悲伤:情绪信息调节生物运动线索诱发的注意效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(suppl.): 35-35. |
| [13] | 纪皓月, 蒋毅, 王莉. 社会性注意的视觉适应:社会与非社会线索的知觉对社会注意效应的不同影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(suppl.): 33-33. |
| [14] | 蒋毅;王莉. 生物运动加工特异性:整体结构和局部运动的作用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2011, 19(3): 301-311. |
| [15] | 孙宇浩,傅小兰. 核心知识系统及其对相关研究的启示[J]. 心理科学进展, 2003, 11(1): 12-21. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||