ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (5): 481-496.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00481

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

反馈对自我欺骗的影响:来自ERP的证据

范伟1,2, 任梦梦1,2, 张文洁2,3, 钟毅平1,2()   

  1. 1湖南师范大学教育科学学院心理系
    2认知与人类行为湖南省重点实验室, 长沙 410081
    3湖南师范大学教育科学学院学前教育系, 长沙 410081
  • 收稿日期:2020-09-09 出版日期:2022-05-25 发布日期:2022-05-07
  • 通讯作者: 钟毅平 E-mail:ypzhong@hunnu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家社会科学基金后期资助项目(21FSHB002)

The impact of feedback on self-deception: Evidence from ERP

FAN Wei1,2, REN Mengmeng1,2, ZHANG Wenjie2,3, ZHONG Yiping1,2()   

  1. 1Department of Psychology, Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, China
    2Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan Province, Changsha 410081, China
    3Department of Preschool Education, Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, China
  • Received:2020-09-09 Online:2022-05-25 Published:2022-05-07
  • Contact: ZHONG Yiping E-mail:ypzhong@hunnu.edu.cn

摘要:

本研究主要探讨反馈类型和反馈效价对自我欺骗的影响。实验1采用前瞻范式探究不同效价的模糊反馈对自我欺骗的影响, 结果发现, 相比于无答案提示组, 有答案提示组的被试在积极模糊反馈的条件下显著地提高测试2第二阶段的预测分数(自我欺骗的程度加重)。实验2探究不同效价的精确反馈对自我欺骗的影响, 结果发现, 相对于无答案提示组, 有答案提示组的被试在消极精确反馈条件下显著地降低测试2第二阶段的预测分数。实验3采用ERP技术探究反馈类型和反馈效价影响自我欺骗的内在机制, 结果发现, 模糊反馈条件下的自我欺骗诱发较大的P2成分、诱发较小的N1和N400成分; 以及发现自我欺骗在额区的效应较大。总之, 这些研究结果表明可能积极反馈促进个体的自我欺骗产生, 消极反馈削弱个体自我欺骗的产生; 积极模糊反馈能够进一步促进了个体自我欺骗的产生。这些研究结果还表明自我欺骗产生的背后机制可能是自我膨胀。

关键词: 自我欺骗, 反馈类型, 反馈效价, 前瞻范式, 事件相关电位

Abstract:

Self-deception is a motivation to see the world in a way that benefits oneself. Previously, researchers have explored self-deception from a single research perspective. The focus on singular variables have made it impossible to understand an individual’s processing of self-deception from a holistic perspective. Researchers of self-deception not only need to seek stable research results but also need to continuously adopt a more comprehensive research perspective to explore self-deception.
This study mainly explored the influence of feedback types and feedback valence on self-deception. Experiment 1 used the forward-looking paradigm to explore the influence of fuzzy feedback with differing valences on self-deception. The scores (measures of self-deception) in the first stage of test 2 in the answer prompt group and the no-answer prompt group were significantly different. The prediction scores in the second stage of test 2 were also significantly different, and compared with the participants in the no-answer prompt group, the participants in the answer prompt group increased their prediction scores in the second stage of test 2 under conditions involving positive fuzzy feedback. Experiment 2 explored the impact of precise feedback with differing valences on self-deception. The scores for the two groups of participants in the first stage of test 2 were significantly different. Compared with the no-answer prompt group, the answer prompt group received accurate feedback; however, these conditions did not produce higher prediction scores in the second stage of test 2. Experiment 3 used ERP technology to explore the internal mechanisms related to different types of feedback and the feedback valence that had differential effects on self-deception. The participants engaged in more self-deception in conditions with fuzzy feedback; self-deception in conditions with fuzzy feedback induced a larger P2 component and induced smaller N1 and N400 components. Finally, it was found that the frontal area had the greatest effects on self-deception.
In short, the results of this research showed that positive feedback promoted the generation of individuals' self-deception, while negative feedback weakened the generation of individuals' self-deception; positive fuzzy feedback further promoted the generation of individuals' self-deception. The results of this research also indicated that the mechanism underlying self-deception may be self-inflation.

Key words: self-deception, feedback type, feedback valence, forward-looking paradigm, event-related potential

中图分类号: