完整自我：完整线索提升自我优先性

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.2631

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 自我相关信息对人类的生存与发展意义重大。当前研究通过两个实验, 采用知觉匹配范式考察了完整/残缺形状对自我加工的影响。实验1的行为结果表明, 在匹配条件下, 与自我残缺关联和陌生人完整关联相比, 自我完整关联的反应时更快、正确率更高、响应标准更宽松; 且自我完整关联具有更快的信息摄取率和更短的非决策时间。ERP结果表明, 在匹配条件下, 与自我残缺关联和陌生人完整关联相比, 自我完整关联诱发了更小的N1、N2振幅以及更大的早期LPP振幅。实验2在排除关联规则切换的转换代价后, 自我完整关联仍表现出更快的反应时、更高的正确率、更高的知觉敏感性以及更宽松的响应标准。两个实验的结果提示, 在知觉决策过程中存在自我完整优势效应, 这为完整线索促进自我相关加工的优先性提供了实证依据, 拓宽了人们对自我优势效应边界条件的理解, 表明自我优势效应兼具稳定性与随自我相关刺激知觉特征调节的灵活性。

关键词: 完整线索, 自我优势效应, 漂移扩散模型, 事件相关电位

Abstract: Self-relevant information is crucial for human survival and development. Previous studies have shown that the congruence between the implicit meanings of stimuli and the self-concept can facilitate the processing of self-related information, suggesting that self-cognition may be shaped and activated through implicit associations within dynamic environmental contexts. In the Chinese cultural context, completeness is often associated with integrity, unity, and perfection, serving as a meaningful implicit backdrop for examining how concrete perceptual features are linked to abstract self-cognition. However, it remains unclear whether complete shapes, as concrete perceptual cues, can further enhance the processing advantage for self-related information through implicit associations. Therefore, the present study investigated whether shape completeness modulates self-prioritization in perceptual decision-making. We hypothesized that associations between self-referential labels and complete shapes would receive preferential processing, resulting in a self-complete association advantage.
The present study comprised two experiments. Experiment 1 employed a 2 (Shape Completeness: complete, incomplete) × 2 (Encoding: self-related, stranger-related) × 2 (Match Type: match, mismatch) within-subjects design, combining hierarchical drift diffusion modeling and event-related potential techniques to investigate the impact of shape completeness on self-related processing and its underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms. Participants completed a perceptual matching task involving two phases. During the associative phase, they learned associations between two geometric shapes (i.e., complete and incomplete shapes) and two identity labels (i.e., self and stranger). In the subsequent shape-label matching phase, participants judged whether each presented shape-label pair matched the previously learned associations. Thirty-five college students participated in Experiment 1, and valid data from 30 participants (22 females, 8 males) were retained for analysis. EEG data were recorded from 64 scalp sites according to the standard international 10-20 system. The ERP components N1, P2, N2, early LPP, and late LPP were analyzed as indices of different temporal stages underlying the influence of shape completeness on self-related processing. Experiment 2 utilized a 2 (Group: self-complete/stranger-incomplete rule, self-incomplete/stranger-complete rule) × 2 (Encoding: self, stranger) × 2 (Match Type: match, mismatch) mixed design. Sixty college students (18 males, 42 females) were recruited and randomly assigned to two groups of 30 each. In this non-reversal design, each participant was assigned only one fixed identity-shape association, thereby excluding potential confounding effects from rule switching.
The behavioral results of Experiment 1 revealed a stable self-prioritization effect: compared with stranger-related associations, self-related associations yielded shorter response times, higher accuracy, greater perceptual sensitivity, and lower response criteria. In addition, a completeness advantage was observed, such that complete-shape associations were processed more efficiently than incomplete-shape associations. More importantly, on match trials, self-complete associations exhibited shorter response times, higher accuracy, and lower response criteria than both stranger-complete and self-incomplete associations, indicating a specific processing advantage for self-complete associations. The hierarchical drift diffusion modeling results further indicated that this self-complete association advantage was supported by a faster evidence accumulation rate and shorter non-decision times. The ERP results showed that, compared with self-incomplete and stranger-complete associations, self-complete associations elicited reduced N1 amplitudes in the 80-130 ms time window, attenuated N2 amplitudes at 250-350 ms, and larger early LPP amplitudes at 450-650 ms. Given that the N1 effect may be jointly modulated by block-level mapping rules and condition-related factors, the N1 finding was interpreted cautiously as an early processing difference specific to self-complete associations. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the self-complete association advantage persisted without rule reversal, indicating that this effect was not attributable to switching costs arising from rule changes.
Taken together, these results demonstrate that self-prioritization is not only reflected in the baseline preferential processing of self-related stimuli but is also modulated by the congruence between perceptual features and the self-concept. Complete-shape cues enhanced the processing priority for self-related associations, indicating that complete shapes may facilitate self-related processing by increasing the compatibility between perceptual completeness and the self-concept. This conclusion is corroborated by behavioral, diffusion-modeling, and ERP evidence, revealing that the self-complete association advantage involves faster evidence accumulation, shorter non-decision times, early processing differences, and enhanced late-stage attentional integration.

Key words: completeness cue, self-prioritization effect, drift diffusion model, ERPs

中图分类号:

夏瑞雪, 张乃文, 蒋云鹤, 周爱保. (2026). 完整自我：完整线索提升自我优先性. 心理学报, 58(12), 2631-2652.

XIA Ruixue, ZHANG Naiwen, JIANG Yunhe, ZHOU Aibao. (2026). The complete self: Shape completeness enhances self-prioritization. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 58(12), 2631-2652.

参考文献

[1] Auerbach R. P., Bondy E., Stanton C. H., Webb C. A., Shankman S. A., & Pizzagalli D. A. (2016). Self-referential processing in adolescents: Stability of behavioral and ERP markers.Psychophysiology, 53(9), 1398-1406.
[2] Bai Y., Nakao T., Xu J., Qin P., Chaves P., Heinzel A., … Northoff G. (2016). Resting state glutamate predicts elevated pre-stimulus alpha during self-relatedness: A combined EEG-MRS study on “rest-self overlap”.Social Neuroscience, 11(3), 249-263.
[3] Bang, J. W., & Rahnev, D. (2017). Stimulus expectation alters decision criterion but not sensory signal in perceptual decision making. Scientific Reports, 7(1), Article 17072.
[4] Bao H., Xie M., Huang Y., Liu Y., Lan C., Lin Z., Wang Y., & Qin P. (2023). Specificity in the processing of a subject's own name. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 18(1), Article nsad066.
[5] Bar, M. (2007). The proactive brain: Using analogies and associations to generate predictions.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(7), 280-289.
[6] Beck A. T., Steer R. A., & Brown G. K. (1996). Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory-II. The Psychological Corporation.
[7] Bompas A., Sumner P., & Hedge C. (2025). Non-decision time: The Higgs boson of decision.Psychological Review, 132(2), 330-363.
[8] Carretié L., Ruiz-Padial E., López-Martín S., & Albert J. (2011). Decomposing unpleasantness: Differential exogenous attention to disgusting and fearful stimuli.Biological Psychology, 86(3), 247-253.
[9] Chen J., Yuan J., Feng T., Chen A., Gu B., & Li H. (2011). Temporal features of the degree effect in self-relevance: Neural correlates.Biological Psychology, 87(2), 290-295.
[10] Chen J., Zhang Y., Zhong J., Hu L., & Li H. (2013). The primacy of the individual versus the collective self: Evidence from an event-related potential study.Neuroscience Letters, 535, 30-34.
[11] Chen, L. (1982). Topological structure in visual perception.Science, 218(4573), 699-700.
[12] Chen, L. (2005). The topological approach to perceptual organization.Visual Cognition, 12(4), 553-637.
[13] Chu X. L., Wang Y. H., & Wang Y. P. (2007). Visual completion processing in human face perception.Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 38(1), 49-54.
[14] Cohen, D., & Leung, A. K. Y. (2009). The hard embodiment of culture.European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(7), 1278-1289.
[15] Constable M. D., Becker M. L., Oh Y. I., & Knoblich G. (2021). Affective compatibility with the self modulates the self-prioritisation effect.Cognition and Emotion, 35(2), 291-304.
[16] Crowley, K. E., & Colrain, I. M. (2004). A review of the evidence for P2 being an independent component process: Age, sleep and modality.Clinical Neurophysiology, 115(4), 732-744.
[17] De Cesarei, A., & Codispoti, M. (2006). When does size not matter? Effects of stimulus size on affective modulation. Psychophysiology, 43(2), 207-215.
[18] Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9-21.
[19] Fields, E. C., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2012). It's all about you: An ERP study of emotion and self-relevance in discourse.NeuroImage, 62(1), 562-574.
[20] Fields, E. C., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2016). Dynamic effects of self-relevance and task on the neural processing of emotional words in context. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 2003.
[21] Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2008). Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review.Psychophysiology, 45(1), 152-170.
[22] Gable, P. A., & Adams, D. L. (2013). Nonaffective motivation modulates the sustained LPP (1, 000-2, 000 ms).Psychophysiology, 50(12), 1251-1254.
[23] Gao T., Zhou Y., Pan X., Li W., & Han S. (2025). Cognitive and neural underpinnings of friend-prioritization in a perceptual matching task. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 20(1), Article nsaf009.
[24] Garner, W. R., & Sutliff, D. (1974). The effect of goodness on encoding time in visual pattern discrimination.Perception & Psychophysics, 16(3), 426-430.
[25] Golubickis M., Falbén J. K., Ho N. S., Sui J., Cunningham W. A., & Macrae C. N. (2020). Parts of me: Identity-relevance moderates self-prioritization.Consciousness and Cognition, 77, 102848.
[26] Golubickis M., Falbén J. K., Sahraie A., Visokomogilski A., Cunningham W. A., Sui J., & Macrae C. N. (2017). Self-prioritization and perceptual matching: The effects of temporal construal.Memory & Cognition, 45(7), 1223-1239.
[27] Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Wiley.
[28] Grill-Spector K., Kourtzi Z., & Kanwisher N. (2001). The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition.Vision Research, 41(10-11), 1409-1422.
[29] Hillyard, S. A., & Anllo-Vento, L. (1998). Event-related brain potentials in the study of visual selective attention.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95(3), 781-787.
[30] Hobbs C., Sui J., Kessler D., Munafò M. R., & Button K. S. (2023). Self-processing in relation to emotion and reward processing in depression.Psychological Medicine, 53(5), 1924-1936.
[31] Hu C. P., Di X., Eickhoff S. B., Zhang M., Peng K., Guo H., & Sui J. (2016). Distinct and common aspects of physical and psychological self-representation in the brain: A meta-analysis of self-bias in facial and self-referential judgements.Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 61, 197-207.
[32] Hu C. P., Lan Y., Macrae N., & Sui J. (2020). Good me bad me: Prioritization of the good-self during perceptual decision-making. Collabra: Psychology, 6(1), Article 20.
[33] Keil J., Barutchu A., Desebrock C., & Spence C. (2023). More of me: Self-prioritization of numeric stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 49(12), 1518-1533.
[34] Kotlewska, I., & Nowicka, A. (2016). Present‐self, past‐self and the close‐other: Neural correlates of assigning trait adjectives to oneself and others.European Journal of Neuroscience, 44(4), 2064-2071.
[35] Lakoff G.,& Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
[36] Leng J., Ma B., & Guo Q. (2025). Brief mindfulness practice influences the self-reference effect by caring for others. Scientific Reports, 15, Article 43468.
[37] Li Z., Wang J., Chen Y., Li Q., Yin S., & Chen A. (2024). Attenuated conflict self-referential information facilitating conflict resolution. NPJ Science of Learning, 9(1), Article 47.
[38] Liu S., Schwieter J. W., Wang F., & Liu H. (2023). An event- related potential study of self‐positivity bias in native and foreign language contexts. Psychophysiology, 60(1), Article e14145.
[39] Liu, Y. K., & Hu, C. P. (2024). Behavioral and cognitive neuroscience findings regarding assumptions of the evidence accumulation model.Chinese Science Bulletin, 69(8), 1068-1081.
[刘逸康, 胡传鹏. (2024). 证据积累模型的行为与认知神经证据.科学通报, 69(8), 1068-1081.]
[40] Liu Z., Hu M., Zheng Y., Sui J., & Hu C. P. (2025). A multiverse assessment of the reliability of the self-matching task as a measurement of the self-prioritization effect. Behavior Research Methods, 57(1), Article 37.
[41] Longenecker J. M., Pokorny V. J., Kang S. S., Olman C. A., & Sponheim S. R. (2021). Self-reported perceptual aberrations in psychosis map to event-related potentials and semantic appraisals of objects.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 130(7), 785-796.
[42] Luck, S. J., & Gaspelin, N. (2017). How to get statistically significant effects in any ERP experiment (and why you shouldn’t).Psychophysiology, 54(1), 146-157.
[43] Luna F. G., Aguirre M. J., Martín‐Arévalo E., Ibáñez A., Lupiáñez J., & Barttfeld P. (2023). Event‐related potentials associated with attentional networks evidence changes in executive and arousal vigilance. Psychophysiology, 60(8), Article e14272.
[44] Ma, Y., & Han, S. (2010). Why we respond faster to the self than to others? An implicit positive association theory of self-advantage during implicit face recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(3), 619-633.
[45] Malach R., Reppas J. B., Benson R. R., Kwong K. K., Jiang H., Kennedy W. A., … Tootell, R. B. H. (1995). Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 92(18), 8135-8139.
[46] Mangun, G. R. (1995). Neural mechanisms of visual selective attention.Psychophysiology, 32(1), 4-18.
[47] Mead G. H.(1934). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
[48] Melloni L., Schwiedrzik C. M., Müller N., Rodriguez E., & Singer W. (2011). Expectations change the signatures and timing of electrophysiological correlates of perceptual awareness.Journal of Neuroscience, 31(4), 1386-1396.
[49] Mu, Y., & Han, S. (2010). Neural oscillations involved in self-referential processing. NeuroImage, 53(2), 757-768.
[50] Muñoz F., Casado P., Hernández-Gutiérrez D., Jiménez-Ortega L., Fondevila S., Espuny J., Sánchez-García J., & Martín-Loeches M. (2020). Neural dynamics in the processing of personal objects as an index of the brain representation of the self.Brain Topography, 33(1), 86-100.
[51] Murovec B., Berti S., Yahya S., Spaniol J., & Keshavarz B. (2025). Early cortical processing of coherent vs. non-coherent motion stimuli in younger and older adults: An event-related potential (ERP) study investigating visually induced vection. Neuropsychologia, 212, Article 109140.
[52] Northoff, G. (2016). Is the self a higher-order or fundamental function of the brain? The “basis model of self-specificity” and its encoding by the brain’s spontaneous activity.Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(1-4), 203-222.
[53] Northoff, G., & Bermpohl, F. (2004). Cortical midline structures and the self.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 102-107.
[54] O’Connell R. G., Dockree P. M., & Kelly S. P. (2012). A supramodal accumulation-to-bound signal that determines perceptual decisions in humans.Nature Neuroscience, 15(12), 1729-1735.
[55] Pan W., Geng H., Zhang L., Fengler A., Frank M. J., Zhang R. Y., & Hu C. P. (2025). dockerHDDM: A user-friendly environment for Bayesian hierarchical drift-diffusion modeling. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 8(1), Article 25152459241298700.
[56] Pan, W. K., & Hu, C. P. (2025). Neural simulation-based inference: A neural network and simulation-based inference approach to cognitive modelling.Journal of Psychological Science, 48(4), 826-835.
[潘晚坷, 胡传鹏. (2025). 神经模拟推断: 基于神经网络和模拟推断的认知建模方法.心理科学, 48(4), 826-835.]
[57] Paulmann S., Bleichner M., & Kotz S. A. (2013). Valence, arousal, and task effects in emotional prosody processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 345.
[58] Raichle M. E., MacLeod A. M., Snyder A. Z., Powers W. J., Gusnard D. A., & Shulman G. L. (2001). A default mode of brain function.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 676-682.
[59] Ratcliff, R., & Rouder, J. N. (1998). Modeling response times for two-choice decisions.Psychological Science, 9(5), 347-356.
[60] Ratcliff R., Smith P. L., Brown S. D., & McKoon G. (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(4), 260-281.
[61] Reber R., Schwarz N., & Winkielman P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364-382.
[62] Rogers T. B., Kuiper N. A., & Kirker W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 677-688.
[63] Scheller M., Fang H., & Sui J. (2024). Self as a prior: The malleability of Bayesian multisensory integration to social salience. British Journal of Psychology, 115(2), 185-205.
[64] Scheller, M., & Sui, J. (2022). The power of the self: Anchoring information processing across contexts.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 48(9), 1001-1021.
[65] Schubert T. M., Waldzus S., & Giessner S. R. (2009). Control over the association of power and size.Social Cognition, 27(1), 1-19.
[66] Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). The psychology of self‐defense: Self‐affirmation theory.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 183-242.
[67] Shi H., Li M., Shangguan C., & Lu J. (2022). Collective self-referential processing evoked by different national symbols: An event-related potential study. Neuroscience Letters, 773, Article 136496.
[68] Song S., Park J., Park Y. M., Kim I. Y., & Jang D. P. (2022). The influence of object-location binding mental load effects on the visual N1 and N2 event-related potentials. BMC Research Notes, 15(1), Article 217.
[69] Steele C. M.(1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology: Vol. 21: Social psychological studies of the self: Perspectives and programs (pp. 261-302). Academic Press.
[70] Sui J., He X., Golubickis M., Svensson S. L., & Macrae C. N. (2023). Electrophysiological correlates of self-prioritization. Consciousness and Cognition, 108, Article 103475.
[71] Sui J., He X., & Humphreys G. W. (2012). Perceptual effects of social salience: Evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(5), 1105-1117.
[72] Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015a). The integrative self: How self-reference integrates perception and memory.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(12), 719-728.
[73] Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015b). Super-size me: Self biases increase to larger stimuli.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(2), 550-558.
[74] Sui J., Liu C., & Han S. (2009). Cultural difference in neural mechanisms of self-recognition.Social Neuroscience, 4(5), 402-411.
[75] Sui J., Liu M., Mevorach C., & Humphreys G. W. (2015). The salient self: The left intraparietal sulcus responds to social as well as perceptual-salience after self-association. Cerebral Cortex, 25(4), 1060-1068.
[76] Sui J., Rotshtein P., & Humphreys G. W. (2013). Coupling social attention to the self forms a network for personal significance.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(19), 7607-7612.
[77] Symons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 371-394.
[78] Tan Q., Yin Y. Y., Liu Y., Han S. F., Xu Q., & Zhang L. (2018). The processing advantage of self-positive expression: Evidence from an ERPs study.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(10), 1120-1130.
[谭群, 尹月阳, 刘燊, 韩尚锋, 徐强, 张林. (2018). 自我积极表情加工优势效应: 来自ERPs的证据.心理学报, 50(10), 1120-1130.]
[79] Thorpe S., Fize D., & Marlot C. (1996). Speed of processing in the human visual system.Nature, 381(6582), 520-522.
[80] Vandekerckhove J., Tuerlinckx F., & Lee M. D. (2011). Hierarchical diffusion models for two-choice response times.Psychological Methods, 16(1), 44-62.
[81] Vicovaro M., Dalmaso M., & Bertamini M. (2022). Towards the boundaries of self-prioritization: Associating the self with asymmetric shapes disrupts the self-prioritization effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 48(9), 972-986.
[82] Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (2000). The visual N1 component as an index of a discrimination process.Psychophysiology, 37(2), 190-203.
[83] Voss A., Nagler M., & Lerche V. (2013). Diffusion models in experimental psychology: A practical introduction.Experimental Psychology, 60(6), 385-402.
[84] Wagemans J., Elder J. H., Kubovy M., Palmer S. E., Peterson M. A., Singh M., & Von der Heydt, R. (2012). A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1172-1217.
[85] Wagemans J., Feldman J., Gepshtein S., Kimchi R., Pomerantz J. R., Van der Helm, P. A., & Van Leeuwen C. (2012). A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: II. Conceptual and theoretical foundations.Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1218-1252.
[86] Wang C., Oyserman D., Liu Q., Li H., & Han S. (2013). Accessible cultural mind-set modulates default mode activity: Evidence for the culturally situated brain.Social Neuroscience, 8(3), 203-216.
[87] Wang H., Humphreys G., & Sui J. (2016). Expanding and retracting from the self: Gains and costs in switching self-associations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(2), 247-256.
[88] Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt, II.Psychologische Forschung, 4(1), 301-350.
[89] Wiecki T. V., Sofer I., & Frank M. J. (2013). HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the drift-diffusion model in Python. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 7, Article 14.
[90] Williams R. S., Biel A. L., Wegier P., Lapp L. K., Dyson B. J., & Spaniol J. (2016). Age differences in the attention network test: Evidence from behavior and event-related potentials.Brain and Cognition, 102, 65-79.
[91] Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 989-1000.
[92] Xia R., Shao H., Cui L., Zhang P., Xue J., Zhou A., & Li S. (2021). Evidence for self-positivity bias in a subliminal self-cue: An event-related potential study. Neuroscience Letters, 744, Article 135625.
[93] Xia R., Zhou A., Li S., Xu K., Ren D., & Zhu J. (2014). The moderating effect of perspective taking in implicit emotional processing.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 46(8), 1094-1102.
[夏瑞雪, 周爱保, 李世峰, 徐科朋, 任德云, 朱婧. (2014). 观点采择在内隐情绪加工中的调节作用.心理学报, 46(8), 1094-1102.]
[94] Xu K., Li S., Ren D., Xia R., Xue H., Zhou A., & Xu Y. (2017). Importance modulates the temporal features of self-referential processing: An event-related potential study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, Article 470.
[95] Zhang Y., Sun Y., Wang H., Pan W., Wang F., & Sui J. (2026). Neural compensation in medial prefrontal cortex preserves self-prioritization in aging: A computational approach. Journal of Neuroscience, 46(1), Article e0487252025.
[96] Zhang Y., Wang F., & Sui J. (2023). Decoding individual differences in self-prioritization from the resting-state functional connectome. NeuroImage, 276, Article 120205.
[97] Zhong Y. P., Wang X. A., Fan W., Qi G. W., & Du F. (2014). Self-reference effect in occupation selection conditions: Evidences from behavior and ERPs.Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 22(2), 218-222.
[钟毅平, 王锡爱, 范伟, 戚光威, 杜芬. (2014). 职业选择情境中的自我参照效应: 行为和ERPs的证据.中国临床心理学杂志, 22(2), 218-222.]
[98] Zhou A., Xie P., Pan C., Tian Z., Xie J., & Liu J. (2020). Looking for the lost self: Self-face recognition in schizophrenics.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(2), 184-196.
[周爱保, 谢珮, 潘超超, 田喆, 谢君伟, 刘炯. (2020). 寻找丢失的自我—精神分裂症患者的自我面孔识别.心理学报, 52(2), 184-196.]
[99] Zhou H., Guo J., Ma X., Zhang M., Liu L., Feng L., … Zhong N. (2017). Self‐reference emerges earlier than emotion during an implicit self-referential emotion processing task: Event-related potential evidence. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, Article 451.