积极认知重评对负性信息传播的调控及多维证据

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.01471

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

积极认知重评的情绪调节功能已被广为证实, 但该策略对情绪相关行为是否具有类似的调节作用并不清楚。考虑到虚假舆情信息的传播管控在网络安全领域的重要性, 本研究通过两个实验, 从行为和电生理层面考察积极认知重评在全貌未知(对发生原因不了解)负性信息传播中的调控作用及其作用机制。结果表明：(1)被试在进行积极认知重评后对全貌未知负性信息的负性情绪体验降低, 道德判断标准放宽, 转发行为减少。(2)积极认知重评降低了被试观看负性信息时其情绪注意相关的枕颞区早期后部负波(Early Posterior Negativity, EPN)波幅。中介分析进一步揭示, EPN在积极认知重评减少被试转发意愿和转发行为中发挥中介作用。该结果提示, 积极认知重评策略能通过降低个体对情绪信息的注意偏向, 从而有效减少个体对全貌未知负性信息的转发行为。

关键词: 信息传播, 积极认知重评, 负性情绪, EPN波

Abstract:

The surge in popularity of social media platforms, such as Sina Weibo, has made retweet a significant means of online information dissemination, yet concurrently led to the rampant spread of false information, resulting in frequent network contingencies. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms, influencing factors, and possible interventions for the dissemination of negative information with unknown contexts is imperative. Despite this importance, few studies have examined the role of emotional regulation in curbing the spread of such information from the perspective of individual retweet behavior. This study addresses this gap by conducting two experiments that explore the effects and underlying mechanisms of emotions and emotion regulation strategies, specifically positive cognitive reappraisal (considering positive aspects of the event), on the propagation of such ambiguous information at both behavioral and electrophysiological levels.

Utilizing a mixed factorial design with 2 (Information Type: Neutral vs Negative) × 2 (Regulation Strategy: Positive Cognitive Reappraisal vs Observation), participants were divided into Reappraisal and Observation groups (control group). In the experimental procedure, a fixation point was initially presented, followed by randomly displayed emotionally-laden event images (neutral faces combined with neutral/negative information), which had been pre-assessed. Participants were instructed to either simply immerse themselves in observing the images (Observation group) or to engage in both observation and positive cognitive reappraisal (Reappraisal group), after which they rated their emotional experiences, moral judgments, retweet willingness and retweet behavior. Experiment 1 included 71 participants (mean age 20.16 ± 1.85 years); the Reappraisal group consisted of 35 participants (14 males, 22 females), while the Observation group comprised 36 participants (11 males, 24 females). Experiment 2 involved 44 participants (mean age 20.04 ± 1.83 years), with 22 in each group. Building upon Experiment 1, this second experiment incorporated event-related potentials (ERPs); following the presentation of emotional event images, isolated face stimuli matching the previously viewed information were shown. Participants engaged in reappraisal (Reappraisal group) or reflected on their emotions (Observation group) when viewing these faces, before proceeding to subsequent ratings. During the stages where face presentation, emotional experience, moral judgment, retweet willingness and retweet behavior were scored, EEG data were collected.

Findings revealed that(1) information type significantly influences retweet willingness and behavior, even when the context or cause of the events is unclear to individuals. Specifically, participants exhibited heightened negative emotions and perceived less morality associated with negative information compared to neutral content, leading to a higher inclination to retweet negative information. Notably, when exposed to negative information, participants in the Reappraisal group showed lower levels of negative emotions, more lenient moral judgments, and significantly fewer retweet behaviors compared to those in the Observation group. This suggests that engaging in positive cognitive reappraisal diminishes the negative emotional experience, relaxes moral judgment criteria, and reduces retweet behavior regarding information with unknown contexts. (2) Electroencephalographic findings revealed that positive cognitive reappraisal altered the amplitude of the early posterior negativity (EPN) component in the occipito-temporal region during the processing of information. More precisely, when confronted with negative information, participants in the Reappraisal group exhibited significantly lower EPN amplitudes than their counterparts in the Observation group. Mediation analysis further illuminated that positive cognitive reappraisal reduced participants' retweet willingness and behavior by decreasing the amplitude of the EPN.

This research pioneers an examination of personal retweet behavior, exploring the influence of emotion regulation strategies on the diffusion of information with unknown contexts. By integrating event-related potential technology, it analytically addressed the neurophysiological characteristics of this effect, filling a theoretical gap in current information transmission research. Moreover, the study offers fresh insights into tackling the spread of false information by providing a novel approach grounded in emotion regulation theory.

Key words: information dissemination, positive cognitive reappraisal, negative emotion, EPN

中图分类号:

B842

肖程元, 赵世瑞, 袁加锦. (2024). 积极认知重评对负性信息传播的调控及多维证据. 心理学报, 56(11), 1471-1487.

XIAO Chengyuan, ZHAO Shirui, YUAN Jiajin. (2024). Multi-dimensional evidence for the regulation of negative information dissemination by positive cognitive reappraisal. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(11), 1471-1487.

图/表 10

表1 情绪事件图片在效价、唤醒度和吸引度上的描述性统计

材料	属性	负性条件	中性条件	t(df)	p	Cohen’s d
事件	效价M (SD)	1.63(0.25)	4.23(0.17)	57.09(86)	< 0.001	12.17
事件	唤醒度M (SD)	5.31(0.49)	1.71(0.14)	−46.5(86)	< 0.001	−9.91
面孔	效价M (SD)	3.55(0.24)	3.57(0.21)	0.39(86)	0.696	0.08
	唤醒度M (SD)	2.35(0.19)	2.37(0.23)	0.44(86)	0.662	0.09
	吸引程度M (SD)	3.21(0.47)	3.19(0.42)	−0.28(86)	0.781	−0.06
	性别构成(男/女)	23/21	23/21	−	−	−

图1 实验1流程图注：蓝色粗框图为积极认知重评的检查记录屏, 实验中每隔5个试次出现该记录屏, 被试需在纸上写下两条事件发生的正向原因。彩图见电子版

图2 信息类型及调节策略2×2重复测量方差分析结果。注：图中(A)为情绪评分, (B)为道德判断, (C)为转发意愿, (D)为转发行为。误差线表示标准误SE, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01。

图3 面对负性信息时, 个体情绪体验同道德判断(A)、转发行为(B)、转发意愿(C), 以及道德判断同转发意愿(D)的散点图

图4 实验2流程图。注：Session 1为积极认知重评, 对面孔呈现、情绪评分、道德判断、转发意愿、转发行为屏记录脑电数据; Session 2为重评有效性检验, 被试需在纸上写下在Session 1中考虑到的事件正向原因。

图5 信息类型及情绪调节策略2×2重复测量方差分析结果。注：图中(A)为情绪评分, (B)为道德判断, (C)为转发意愿, (D)为转发行为。误差线表示标准误SE, *** p < 0.001, * p < 0.05。

图6 面孔呈现阶段两组被试枕颞区EPN、中央顶区LPP波幅和地形图。EPN (160~240 ms)的波幅是电极点PO7, PO8, PO3, PO4的平均值; LPP (400~800 ms)的波幅是电极点CPz, POz, Pz, P3, P4的平均值。ERP波形图中, X轴起始于刺激呈现前200 ms (基线), 结束于刺激呈现后1000 ms。彩图见电子版。

表2 情绪调节策略、情绪评分、道德判断、转发意愿、转发行为、枕颞区ERP两两相关

变量	调节策略	情绪体验	道德判断	转发意愿	转发行为	面孔呈现屏EPN	情绪评分屏EPN
调节策略	1
情绪体验	0.473^**	1
道德判断	0.542^**	0.93^**	1
转发意愿	−0.32^*	−0.559^**	−0.426^**	1
转发行为	−0.324^*	−0.355^*	−0.222	0.751^**	1
面孔呈现屏EPN	0.337^*	0.194	0.089	−0.46^**	−0.313^*	1
情绪评分屏EPN	0.42^**	0.255	0.235	−0.177	−0.096	0.721^**	1

表3 积极认知重评对转发意愿(模型一)及转发行为(模型二)的影响, EPN的中介

模型	效应	路径	效应量	SE	95% bootstrap
模型一	总效应		−0.788	0.29	[−1.339, −0.204]
	直接效应	积极认知重评→转发意愿	−0.496	0.317	[−1.14, 0.148]
	间接效应	积极认知重评→EPN→转发意愿	−0.293	0.175	[−0.682, −0.003]
模型二	总效应		−0.694	0.288	[−1.279, −0.148]
	直接效应	积极认知重评→转发行为	−0.35	0.336	[−1.032, 0.331]
	间接效应	积极认知重评→EPN→转发行为	−0.344	0.19	[−0.755, −0.008]

图7 枕颞区EPN波幅(160~240 ms)在积极认知重评影响转发意愿(A)与转发行为(B)中发挥中介作用。注：** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05

参考文献 55

[1]	Baum, J., & Abdel Rahman, R. (2021). Emotional news affects social judgments independent of perceived media credibility. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 16(3), 280-291. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa164
[2]	Baum, J., Rabovsky, M., Rose, S. B., & Abdel Rahman, R. (2020). Clear judgments based on unclear evidence: Person evaluation is strongly influenced by untrustworthy gossip. Emotion, 20(2), 248-260. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000545 doi: 10.1037/emo0000545 URL pmid: 30589302
[3]	Beligiannis, N., Hermus, M., Gootjes, L., & Van Strien, J. W. (2022). Both low and high spatial frequencies drive the early posterior negativity in response to snake stimuli. Neuropsychologia, 177, 108403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2022.108403
[4]	Berchio, C., Cambi, S., Pappaianni, E., & Micali, N. (2022). EEG biomarkers in children and adolescents with feeding and eating disorders: Current evidence and future directions. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 882358. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.882358
[5]	Berger, J. (2014). Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and directions for future research. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(4), 586-607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.05.002
[6]	Bollen, J., Mao, H., & Zeng, X. (2011). Twitter mood predicts the stock market. Journal of Computational Science, 2(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocs.2010.12.007
[7]	Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017). Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(28), 7313-7318. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618923114
[8]	Butler, E. A., Egloff, B., Wlhelm, F. H., Smith, N. C., Erickson, E. A., & Gross, J. J. (2003). The social consequences of expressive suppression. Emotion, 3(1), 48-67. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.3.1.48 URL pmid: 12899316
[9]	Celsi, R., & Olson, J. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 210-224. https://doi.org/10.1086/209158
[10]	Chen, J., Liu, Y., & Zou, M. (2017). User emotion for modeling retweeting behaviors. Neural Networks, 96, 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2017.08.006 doi: S0893-6080(17)30187-9 URL pmid: 28946003
[11]	Chen, Y. H., & Zhang, X. Q. (2018). Research on netizen group emotion contagion model and the simulation under network group emergencies. Information Science, 36(3), 151-156. https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2018.03.025
	[陈业华, 张晓倩. (2018). 网络突发群体事件网民群体情绪传播模型及仿真研究. 情报科学, 36(3), 151-156. https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2018.03.025 ]
[12]	Cheng, L., Yuan, J. J., He, Y. Y., & Li, H. (2009). Emotion regulation strategies: Cognitive reappraisal is more effective than expressive suppression. Advances in Psychological Science, 17(4), 730-735.
	[程利, 袁加锦, 何媛媛, 李红. (2009). 情绪调节策略: 认知重评优于表达抑制. 心理科学进展, 17(4), 730-735.]
[13]	Cuthbert, B. N., Schupp, H. T., Bradley, M. M., Birbaumer, N., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Brain potentials in affective picture processing: Covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report. Biological Psychology, 52(2), 95-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-0511(99)00044-7
[14]	Ding, H., Liu, Q., Qi, J. L., & Hu, G. W. (2023). Early rumor identification based on internet public health emergencies ——Taking the new crown epidemic rumor as an example. Information Science, 41(4), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2023.04.019
	[丁浩, 刘清, 齐江蕾, 胡广伟. (2023). 基于网络突发公共卫生事件早期谣言识别研究——以新冠疫情谣言为例. 情报科学, 41(4), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2023.04.019 ]
[15]	Erk, S., Mikschl, A., Stier, S., Ciaramidaro, A., Gapp, V., Weber, B., & Walter, H. (2010). Acute and sustained effects of cognitive emotion regulation in major depression. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30(47), 15726-15734. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.1856-10.2010
[16]	Flykt, A., & Caldara, R. (2006). Tracking fear in snake and spider fearful participants during visual search: A multi- response domain study. Cognition and Emotion, 20(8), 1075-1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930500381405
[17]	Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39(3), 281-291. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0048577201393198 doi: 10.1017/s0048577201393198 URL pmid: 12212647
[18]	Hofmann, S., Beverungen, D., Räckers, M., & Becker, J. (2013). What makes local governments' online communications successful? Insights from a multi-method analysis of Facebook. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 387-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.013
[19]	Hou, J., Huang, Z., Li, H., Liu, M., Zhang, W., Ma, N.,... Zhang, X. (2014). Is the excessive use of microblogs an Internet addiction? Developing a scale for assessing the excessive use of microblogs in Chinese college students. PloS One, 9(11), e110960. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0110960
[20]	Huang, L., Yang, T. Z., & Ji, Z. M. (2003). Applicability of the Positive and Negative Affect Scale in Chinese. Chinese Mental Health Journal, (1), 54-56.
	[黄丽, 杨廷忠, 季忠民. (2003). 正性负性情绪量表的中国人群适用性研究. 中国心理卫生杂志, (1), 54-56.]
[21]	Huang, Y., Zhang, Q., Shang, C., & Cui, L. (2023). How do fundamental emotion beliefs affect the rapid emotional processing? An ERP study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 191, 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.06.010 doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.06.010 URL pmid: 37414220
[22]	Karl, C., Hewig, J., & Osinsky, R. (2015). Passing faces: Sequence-dependent variations in the perceptual processing of emotional faces. Social Neuroscience, 11(5), 531-544. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2015.1115776
[23]	Koivisto, M., & Revonsuo, A. (2010). Event-related brain potential correlates of visual awareness. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 34(6), 922-934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.12.002 doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.12.002 URL pmid: 20005249
[24]	LeDoux, J. (2012). Rethinking the emotional brain. Neuron, 73(4), 653-676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.02.004 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.02.004 URL pmid: 22365542
[25]	Liu, D. J., Cui, J., Pan, Z., Zhang, H. K., Cao, J. T., & Kong, W. Z. (2024). Machine to brain: Facial expression recognition using brain machine generative adversarial networks. Cognitive Neurodynamics, 18(3), 863-875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11571-023-09946-y doi: 10.1007/s11571-023-09946-y URL pmid: 38826642
[26]	Ma, J., Gao, W., Mitra, P., Kwon, S., Jansen, J., Wong, K. -F., & Cha, M. (2016, January). Detecting rumors from microblogs with recurrent neural networks. Paper presented at the meeting of the IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, New York, USA.
[27]	Mao, T. T., Jiang, G. W., Li, Y., Zhao, R., & Gao, K. (2019). Emotion communication characteristics of network hot events in the new media age. Information Science, 37(4), 29-35 +96.https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2019.04.005
	[毛太田, 蒋冠文, 李勇, 赵蓉, 高凯. (2019). 新媒体时代下网络热点事件情感传播特征研究. 情报科学, 37(4), 29-35 +96.https://doi.org/10.13833/j.issn.1007-7634.2019.04.005 ]
[28]	Mccroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1982). Communication apprehension and shyness: Conceptual and operational distinctions. Communication Studies, 33, 458-468. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510978209388452
[29]	Meng, J., Peng, W., Tan, P. -N., Liu, W., Cheng, Y., & Bae, A. (2018). Diffusion size and structural virality: The effects of message and network features on spreading health information on twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 111-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.039 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.039 URL pmid: 32288177
[30]	Mesoudi, A., & Thornton, A. (2018). What is cumulative cultural evolution? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1880), 20180712. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0712
[31]	Ochsner, K. N., Ray, R. D., Cooper, J. C., Robertson, E. R., Chopra, S., Gabrieli, J. D. E., & Gross, J. J. (2004). For better or for worse: Neural systems supporting the cognitive down- and up-regulation of negative emotion. NeuroImage, 23(2), 483-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.06.030 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.06.030 URL pmid: 15488398
[32]	Olofsson, J. K., Nordin, S., Sequeira, H., & Polich, J. (2008). Affective picture processing: An integrative review of ERP findings. Biological Psychology, 77(3), 247-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.11.006 doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.11.006 URL pmid: 18164800
[33]	Picton, T. W., Bentin, S., Berg, P., Donchin, E., Hillyard, S. A., Johnson, R.,... Taylor, M. J. (2003). Guidelines for using human event-related potentials to study cognition: Recording standards and publication criteria. Psychophysiology, 37(2), 127-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8986.3720127
[34]	Puce, A., & Hämäläinen, M. (2017). A review of issues related to data acquisition and analysis in EEG/MEG studies. Brain Sciences, 7(6), 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci7060058
[35]	Rosenbaum, D., Leehr, E. J., Kroczek, A., Rubel, J. A., Int-Veen, I., Deutsch, K.,... Ehlis, A. C. (2020). Neuronal correlates of spider phobia in a combined fNIRS-EEG study. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 12597. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69127-3 doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69127-3 URL pmid: 32724128
[36]	Schachter, S., & Singer, J. E. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review, 69(5), 379-399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046234
[37]	Schupp, H. T., Flaisch, T., Stockburger, J., & Junghöfer, M. (2006). Emotion and attention: Event-related brain potential studies. Progress in Brain Research, 156, 31-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(06)56002-9 URL pmid: 17015073
[38]	Shi, K. W., & Liu, K. (2021). Weibo rumor identification in public health emergencies. Library and Information Service, 65(13), 87-95. https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.13.009 doi: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.13.009 URL
	[石锴文, 刘勘. (2021). 突发公共卫生事件中微博谣言的识别. 图书情报工作, 65(13), 87-95. https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.13.009 ] doi: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.13.009 URL
[39]	Song, L. B., & Zhang, H. C. (2002). Developmental patterns of visual imagery of mentally disabled. Chinese Journal of Special Education, (3), 57-63.
	[宋丽波, 张厚粲. (2002). 弱智学生视觉表象清晰度发展趋势研究. 中国特殊教育, (3), 57-63.]
[40]	Suess, F., Rabovsky, M., & Abdel Rahman, R. (2015). Perceiving emotions in neutral faces: Expression processing is biased by affective person knowledge. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(4), 531-536. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsu088 doi: 10.1093/scan/nsu088 URL pmid: 24948155
[41]	Wang, L., Liu, H. C., Li, Z. Q., & Du, W. (2007). Reliability and validity of emotion regulation questionnaire Chinese revised version. China Journal of Health Psychology, 15(6), 503-505. https://doi.org/10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2007.06.012
	[王力, 柳恒超, 李中权, 杜卫. (2007). 情绪调节问卷中文版的信效度研究. 中国健康心理学杂志, 15(6), 503-505. https://doi.org/10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2007.06.012 ]
[42]	Wang, L. L., & Zhang, L. L. (2023). Rumor spreading model in strong-ties social networks during public emergencies based on SAT model. Journal of Intelligence, 42(5), 112-118+136. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/61.1167.G3.20230216.0847.002
	[王丽丽, 张玲玲. (2023). 突发公共事件中强关系社交网络谣言扩散机制研究——基于情景意识理论. 情报杂志, 42(5), 112-118+136. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/61.1167.G3.20230216.0847.002 ]
[43]	Wang, N., Li, H. R., & Tan, S. R. (2022). Predicting public opinion reversal based on evolution analysis of events and improved KE-SMOTE algorithm. Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery, 6(2/3), 396-407. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/10.1478.G2.20220221.1442.023
	[王楠, 李海荣, 谭舒孺. (2022). 基于舆情事件演化分析及改进KE-SMOTE算法的舆情反转预测研究. 数据分析与知识发现, 6(2/3), 396-407. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/10.1478.G2.20220221.1442.023 ]
[44]	Wang, Z. W. (2021). Study on the differences between user attention and platform governance of microblog network rumor. Information Research, 1(9), 26-32.
	[王著维. (2021). 微博网络谣言的用户关注与平台治理差异研究. 情报探索, 1(9), 26-32.]
[45]	Webb, T. L., Miles, E., & Sheeran, P. (2012). Dealing with feeling: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 775-808. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027600 doi: 10.1037/a0027600 URL pmid: 22582737
[46]	Wieser, M. J., Klupp, E., Weyers, P., Pauli, P., Weise, D., Zeller, D.,... Mühlberger, A. (2012). Reduced early visual emotion discrimination as an index of diminished emotion processing in Parkinson’s disease? - Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cortex, 48(9), 1207-1217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.06.006
[47]	Xie, X. X. (2012). The research of the relation among perceived social justice, anti-rich prejudice, interpersonal trust and justice sensitivity (Unpublished master’s thesis). Guangzhou University, China.
	[谢雪贤. (2012). 大学生社会公正感、对富人的偏见及相关变量的关系研究 (硕士学位论文). 广州大学.]
[48]	Yan, X. Y. (2021). Motivation impacts emotion regulation choice: Underlying cognitive mechanism and ERP characteristics (Unpublished master’s thesis). Southwest University, Chongqing, China. https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.27684/d.cnki.gxndx.2021.001826
	[颜心雨. (2021). 动机影响情绪调节策略选择的认知机制和ERP特征 (硕士学位论文). 西南大学, 重庆. https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.27684/d.cnki.gxndx.2021.001826 ]
[49]	Yang, J., & Counts, S. (2010, January). Predicting the speed, scale, and range of information diffusion in Twitter. Paper presented at the meeting of the Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Washington, DC.
[50]	Yoder, K. J., & Decety, J. (2014). Spatiotemporal neural dynamics of moral judgment: A high-density ERP study. Neuropsychologia, 60, 39-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.05.022 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.05.022 URL pmid: 24905282
[51]	Yokoyama, H. M., & Tateno, S. (2013). Public anxiety, trust, and the role of mediators in communicating risk of exposure to low dose radiation after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant explosion. Journal of Science Communication, 12(2), A03. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.12020203
[52]	Yoon, S., Shim, M., Kim, H. S., & Lee, S. -H. (2015). Enhanced early posterior negativity to fearful faces in patients with anxiety disorder. Brain Topography, 29(2), 262-272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-015-0456-0
[53]	Yuan, J., Ding, N., Liu, Y., & Yang, J. (2015). Unconscious emotion regulation: Nonconscious reappraisal decreases emotion-related physiological reactivity during frustration. Cognition and Emotion, 29(6), 1042-1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2014.965663
[54]	Zhang, M., Ding, S. H., Liu, G. F., Xu, Y. Z., Fu, X. Y., Zhang, W., & Xin, Z. Q. (2021). Negativity bias in emergent online events: Occurrence and manifestation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(12), 1361-1375. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1911.B.20211026.0954.010 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.01361 URL
	[张梅, 丁书恒, 刘国芳, 徐亚珍, 傅鑫媛, 张巍, 辛自强. (2021). 网络突发事件中的负性偏向:产生与表现. 心理学报, 53(12), 1361-1375. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1911.B.20211026.0954.010 ] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.01361 URL
[55]	Zhu, Y. Z., Mao, W. B., & Wang, R. (2014). The Neural Mechanism of Negative Bias. Advances in Psychological Science, 22(9), 1393-1403. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.01393
	[朱永泽, 毛伟宾, 王蕊. (2014). 负性偏向的神经机制. 心理科学进展, 22(9), 1393-1403.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.01393